This is a difficult one to give you a definitive answer. It starts with the speed of your computer, which can be the limiting factor, but some time back I believe I saw a “spec sheet” on the player that stated the player was limited to 128 stereo voices. It was my understanding that this referred to the total number of voices being run from a single engine (.dll file). So, if you opened 4 instances of GPO from the same .dll file you would get a total of 128 stereo voices between the 4 instances.
Now, I just ran a test on my 2.4Ghz P4 and GPO seems to support approximately the same amount of polyphony as the full version of Kontakt on my machine. I was able to get 160 stereo voices (as read on the GPO polyphony meter) before the computer started to show signs of strain. Obviously this is more than the 128 stereo voice limit that I mentioned. So, as I said, this is a difficult one to answer. Either way it’s a generous amount of polyphony equal to at least a minimum of 256 mono voices, given a computer that is fast enough to handle it.
“I know instruments have individual limits.” Yes, but that is configurable by the user by either double clicking on the allocation number and typing in a new value [enter], or placing the cursor over the allocation number, left click [hold], and scrolling up or down to the desired number. An instrument can be set to whatever polyphony is required (up to the computer’s limit). For instance, the piano is set, by default, to 64 voices but the user could increase (or decrease) that if desired. All solo wind instruments have a polyphony setting of “1” so that the tongue/slur function is activated but it could be increased if the user didn’t mind sacrificing that function. The Ens. instruments are generally set to between “4” and “6.” If tongue/slur function is desired for these instruments the setting could be reduced to “1” and the function would be activated.
Seems strange that the question can\'t be answered definitively. Is there any advantage to limiting the max polyphony of an instrument? Would limiting decrease the strain on the cpu usage?
I ask this because I am running on a barton 3000+ (400mhz fsb) with pc3200 ddr400 ram (a gig of it) and when I hit full-sized orchestral parts in my sonar projects, the audio goes haywire. Crackles, pops, stutters, etc. Just wondering if I could decrease the cpu strain [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I appreciate the feedback! But, assuming the \'spec sheet\' is correct, is the maximum number of voices I can have n*P, where P = the number of voices allowed in a single player (128, according to the \'spec sheet\'), and n = the number of players?
Generally, I use lots of GPO players (so I can EQ them individually), but I was just wondering why the cpu lags so much!
I found that if I decrease the cpu quality in the ambience control panel and make the playback mostly on the dry side and then add an external reverb unit it helps to reduce the strain on the CPU. This is using a Mac G4 at. 1.4 gighz and 2 Gig ram.
Hey I\'ve often decreased the polyphony to decrease CPU usage. Specifically in the harp, timpani, and piano. Of course when you do this it starts stealing voices but I don\'t think it\'s that noticable. Man Gary, those harps can chew up some CPU\'s. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I would say that you could do this especially when you are just working on a song and bump the polyphony back up when you are ready to record. Just make sure you record each track seperately, or there goes the computer.
I just don\'t want to lose any voices. It\'s real hard trying to mix my stuff when I\'m not sure if voices are being dropped out. That was the main concern. We were all told to mix the entire piece, not sections... but.. if I can\'t get the voices... *sigh
And bouncing each gpo track to audio would be too time consuming. *Shrug, currently, my work around is to export the audio (or at least a section of it) so I can hear the whole thing. I\'ll pretty much know what i wanna do from there.