food4thought
09-23-2000, 10:26 AM
Regarding Gigastudio polyphony we need to set some things straight. First of all, your CPU will be the main factor determining polyphony. No matter how fast your Hard Disk is, or how much memory you have available, Gigastudio will use the CPU to mix the samples together into the stereo output(s) which you finally hear from your speakers. In order to have a chance to reach the claimed \'160 voices\' mark, you will definitely need a 700-800MHz processor.
As a reference, a measurement done on a Celeron 450MHz (overclocked, was 300MHz originally), Gigastudio reports approximately 1% CPU usage per voice. So, with 50 voices it consumes app. 50% of the CPU just to mix the voices together into a single stereo output. Assuming that an 800MHz system has exactly double the processing power, you should -in theory- be able to reach 100 voices with 50% CPU usage. This is all just theoretical since there are many other factors which come into play and may severely affect performance.
Reccomendations: Aim at anything above 700MHz if you want to make good use of Gigastudio\'s permittable polyphony. If you plan to use Gigastudio alongside software effects/sequencers and still want high polyphony and minimum performance problems, aim at nothing less than a 900MHz system. I would recommend higher figures but I also understand that CPU prices are unreasonably higher beyond these levels. For those more technically minded, opt for fast 133MHz (PC133) RAM. Do avoid the current crop of Celeron CPUs if you can, since they work at a 66MHz Front Side Bus (FSB) speed (i.e. the speed that the CPU communicates with the motherboard). The result is decreased performance no matter how good the rest of your system is. Technologically speaking, the best performers out there are the new AMD processors, namely the Duron (low-end) and the Thunderbird (high-end). They are unbelievably cheap and happily outperform their Intel counterparts. Make sure your software/hardware has been confirmed to work flawlessly with the AMD CPUs *and* their available motherboards since these are different from the Intel ones. Alternatively, wait until the end of November. New CPUs, motherboards and memory technologies are about to be introduced very soon. Not that you need to jump on the new stuff as soon as it comes out, but do expect to see significant price drops in the existing parts.
Aside from the CPU, real-world polyphony also greatly depends on the type of instruments used. And this is why we sometime see posts of users with less powerful systems claiming higher polyphonies than users with better systems. There are two main scenarios:
1) The instrument has very long samples. This is the case with the BIG piano libraries (among others) out there where each sample is long & unlooped so as to capture the natural decay of the real instrument. The samples are too big to fit in RAM so they have to be streamed from the Hard Disk on demand. Polyphony is heavily dependent on the Hard Disk *sustained transfer rate*. In other words, how many Megabytes per second your Hard Disk can reliably and constantly fetch from the disk heads to the main memory. High polyphony is hardest to be achieved under this scenario.
2)The instrument has short samples, possibly looped. Samples can fit in memory (i.e. cached) and need not be called from the HD every time you hit a new note. Assuming the CPU power is abundant, Gigastudio can quickly use the samples from memory and reach the \'160 voices\' mark with no sweat!
I hope this somewhat explains the claimed polyphony mayhem happening in the forum. In addition to all the above, there is a huge number of technical issues and system configuration options that affect Gigastudio performance. The way a given system is set up and configured plays an important role in the \"juice\" you get out of it.
And this brings to my mind the hot issue surrounding Nemesys and their products. Frankly, I do not understand the insistence of some users of the forum in defending Nemesys. To my eyes, Nemesys came up with a great concept but built upon it with very poor skills both in development and support. Gigastudio has been released with a trully substandard quality factor. As another user has already mentioned, it should have been still in the alpha stage (i.e. premature internal testing phase). The v2.01 patch is still labelled BETA which essentially means two things:
* The current *official* release of Gigastudio is the one you originally bought, with NO patches applied. Yes, this is what Nemesys sell as their latest Gigastudio version. Just count the bugs.
* The v2.01 patch being in development for so long means that Gigastudio is so full of problems that the Nemesys workforce is incapable of addressing even now. In other words, you bought an ALPHA-quality piece of software which is now in BETA phaze.
On top of that, Nemesys are now working on Windows 2000 support! This is a complex and demanding procedure taking in mind the low-levelness of Gigastudio and the different architecture of Win2k. This means that Nemesys are dedicating resources (i.e. time + money) working for the Win2k compliant version, resources which could have been used in producing a SOLID Windows 95/98/Me release!
Needless to say that Win2k is still far from an ideal platform for audio, considering the current software/driver support from other vendors. It will become one eventually, but give it another year at least.
And of course, let\'s not forget Nemesys\' commitment for Gigasampler support! They took all the Gigasampler users\' ideas & comments and implemented them in a new & expensive product with a different name, leaving Gigasampler behind. I wonder when, if ever, Nemesys are going to keep their promise and find the resources needed for providing updates for Gigasampler owners.
Nemesys obviously have limited/weak development & testing departments, and hearing all these promises, I strongly believe they\'re trying to fit too many apples in the basket. I won\'t even go on to talk about their user/software support. I believe users in this forum have given a clear view on that already.
Closing this very long post, I want to advise you guys to gain a little more self-respect. If you shell out your hard earned money on a product of this quality from a company with this kind of support & understanding... and simply tolerate this, then you are only calling for more! And of course you would fully deserve it.
I am only saying this because I do not like one bit the way things have headed so far, and I do not plan to pretend I like it either. I keep my head high and I will bite the hand that slaps my face, you may as well turn the other cheek http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hope I have passed some messages through this post.
Regards
food4thought
As a reference, a measurement done on a Celeron 450MHz (overclocked, was 300MHz originally), Gigastudio reports approximately 1% CPU usage per voice. So, with 50 voices it consumes app. 50% of the CPU just to mix the voices together into a single stereo output. Assuming that an 800MHz system has exactly double the processing power, you should -in theory- be able to reach 100 voices with 50% CPU usage. This is all just theoretical since there are many other factors which come into play and may severely affect performance.
Reccomendations: Aim at anything above 700MHz if you want to make good use of Gigastudio\'s permittable polyphony. If you plan to use Gigastudio alongside software effects/sequencers and still want high polyphony and minimum performance problems, aim at nothing less than a 900MHz system. I would recommend higher figures but I also understand that CPU prices are unreasonably higher beyond these levels. For those more technically minded, opt for fast 133MHz (PC133) RAM. Do avoid the current crop of Celeron CPUs if you can, since they work at a 66MHz Front Side Bus (FSB) speed (i.e. the speed that the CPU communicates with the motherboard). The result is decreased performance no matter how good the rest of your system is. Technologically speaking, the best performers out there are the new AMD processors, namely the Duron (low-end) and the Thunderbird (high-end). They are unbelievably cheap and happily outperform their Intel counterparts. Make sure your software/hardware has been confirmed to work flawlessly with the AMD CPUs *and* their available motherboards since these are different from the Intel ones. Alternatively, wait until the end of November. New CPUs, motherboards and memory technologies are about to be introduced very soon. Not that you need to jump on the new stuff as soon as it comes out, but do expect to see significant price drops in the existing parts.
Aside from the CPU, real-world polyphony also greatly depends on the type of instruments used. And this is why we sometime see posts of users with less powerful systems claiming higher polyphonies than users with better systems. There are two main scenarios:
1) The instrument has very long samples. This is the case with the BIG piano libraries (among others) out there where each sample is long & unlooped so as to capture the natural decay of the real instrument. The samples are too big to fit in RAM so they have to be streamed from the Hard Disk on demand. Polyphony is heavily dependent on the Hard Disk *sustained transfer rate*. In other words, how many Megabytes per second your Hard Disk can reliably and constantly fetch from the disk heads to the main memory. High polyphony is hardest to be achieved under this scenario.
2)The instrument has short samples, possibly looped. Samples can fit in memory (i.e. cached) and need not be called from the HD every time you hit a new note. Assuming the CPU power is abundant, Gigastudio can quickly use the samples from memory and reach the \'160 voices\' mark with no sweat!
I hope this somewhat explains the claimed polyphony mayhem happening in the forum. In addition to all the above, there is a huge number of technical issues and system configuration options that affect Gigastudio performance. The way a given system is set up and configured plays an important role in the \"juice\" you get out of it.
And this brings to my mind the hot issue surrounding Nemesys and their products. Frankly, I do not understand the insistence of some users of the forum in defending Nemesys. To my eyes, Nemesys came up with a great concept but built upon it with very poor skills both in development and support. Gigastudio has been released with a trully substandard quality factor. As another user has already mentioned, it should have been still in the alpha stage (i.e. premature internal testing phase). The v2.01 patch is still labelled BETA which essentially means two things:
* The current *official* release of Gigastudio is the one you originally bought, with NO patches applied. Yes, this is what Nemesys sell as their latest Gigastudio version. Just count the bugs.
* The v2.01 patch being in development for so long means that Gigastudio is so full of problems that the Nemesys workforce is incapable of addressing even now. In other words, you bought an ALPHA-quality piece of software which is now in BETA phaze.
On top of that, Nemesys are now working on Windows 2000 support! This is a complex and demanding procedure taking in mind the low-levelness of Gigastudio and the different architecture of Win2k. This means that Nemesys are dedicating resources (i.e. time + money) working for the Win2k compliant version, resources which could have been used in producing a SOLID Windows 95/98/Me release!
Needless to say that Win2k is still far from an ideal platform for audio, considering the current software/driver support from other vendors. It will become one eventually, but give it another year at least.
And of course, let\'s not forget Nemesys\' commitment for Gigasampler support! They took all the Gigasampler users\' ideas & comments and implemented them in a new & expensive product with a different name, leaving Gigasampler behind. I wonder when, if ever, Nemesys are going to keep their promise and find the resources needed for providing updates for Gigasampler owners.
Nemesys obviously have limited/weak development & testing departments, and hearing all these promises, I strongly believe they\'re trying to fit too many apples in the basket. I won\'t even go on to talk about their user/software support. I believe users in this forum have given a clear view on that already.
Closing this very long post, I want to advise you guys to gain a little more self-respect. If you shell out your hard earned money on a product of this quality from a company with this kind of support & understanding... and simply tolerate this, then you are only calling for more! And of course you would fully deserve it.
I am only saying this because I do not like one bit the way things have headed so far, and I do not plan to pretend I like it either. I keep my head high and I will bite the hand that slaps my face, you may as well turn the other cheek http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hope I have passed some messages through this post.
Regards
food4thought