![]() Increasing the buffer size is another good way to reduce the CPU, but the effects aren't as drastic to the CPU compared to how much latency that's added (the time it takes between pressing a key to hearing a sound). The new convolution reverb will be the most CPU intensive, but again is pretty minimal compared to the physical modeling. I would say effects are pretty minimal to the CPU activity. Reducing polyphony is another good way to to keep the CPU down, as it limits the number of simultaneous voices (though Pianoteq is a little more complicated than that, but it still reduces the computations because there's less to compute when you have a limit). Reducing the sample rate helps, of course (a higher sample rate helps with high frequency generation and lower latency at the cost of more processing power). So while it is good to have a dedicated audio processor (such as a sound card or an audio interface) to handle the audio itself, that's only a portion of load that Pianoteq generates. There's a ton of calculations going on inside of Pianoteq (no samples, all modeling) which is why it is very CPU intensive. However, Pianoteq is a bit more complicated than that. ![]() Often times audio interfaces and possibly some sound cards will have ASIO drivers which helps with all of the audio processing. ![]() ![]() What OS/device are you using? I'm not as familiar with Mac OSX, but for me using Windows the biggest difference for me was using an ASIO driver (such as asio4all) instead of built in audio. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |