Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

183,470 users have contributed to 42,300 threads and 255,080 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 2 new thread(s), 8 new post(s) and 53 new user(s).

  • last edited
    last edited

    Here's what the Synchron Player's speed test reported back in the pre-iLok days when Synchron Strings was released; this screen shot is still included in the current Synchron Player User Guide. I defy anyone to match these results now for an iLok Synchron library (especially the amazing ratio between 64k and 4k results):-

    However if, as Ben noted above, the Preload software has been substantially revised since then, it's probably not sensible to try to make any meaningful deductions about the then-vs-now difference in terms of the burden added by iLok. So I won't.


  • last edited
    last edited

    I've found that manually adding to Preload Size in the Database does nothing significant in terms of relieving CPU workload on playback.

    My total RAM use is well within my machine's maximum (64GB).

    In my Synchron orchestra stress tests, the iMac's Activity Monitor shows no noticeable fetching of samples from storage during playback, either with or without my additions to Preload Size.

    Of course the hugely critical factor in CPU streaming workload is how many mix channels are switched on in the Synchron Players. To get an idea of how well or badly my system performs under various conditions, I've been experimenting with a Synchron basic symphony orchestra under various different levels of stress. This test build in Logic doesn't use VEP; there are no plugin Fx running in the Synchron Players or in Logic; and just 2 stereo audio routes between each Synchron Player and Logic.

    Stress testing the whole of this basic orchestra (27 Synchron Players) consists of running a looped 1 Bar chromatic scale of nearly 2 octaves for every Synchron Player, every note a 1/16, played as fast legato at various different BPMs and with various numbers of Synchron Player mix channels switched on.

    At my fastest sensible tempo of 110 BPM and with only 1 mix channel switched on in all players, I get this:-

    With 4 mix channels switched on in all players, at the same tempo, this:-

    No audio plop-outs and no CPU crunch-outs anywhere.

    Not too shabby for a 2017 iMac 7700K - helped along by recent addition of a couple of very fast Samsung SSDs via Thunderbolt 3.


  • last edited
    last edited

    I'm back-and-forth with VSL support helping me on some performance issues, but booting things up this morning and changing my Synchron Player preload size from 3072 to 8-thousand-whatever caused the Synchron+VEPro tab CPU meters to drop by ~50% literally.

    In fact, using VEPro, that problem session from the other thread (the locked one) now operates perfectly EXCEPT for the single-core Logic Pro thing when it's a buffer of <256 and a recording track is highlighted during a tutti passage.

    Anything at 256 buffer and above, a highlighted track remains playable live without pops.

    For reference, this is a tutti passage with Synchron Series instruments with 5+ microphone positions enabled, some VI series instruments in MIRpro 3D, totaling ~54 tracks with various FX plugins engaged. Machine is an M3 Max.


  • last edited
    last edited

    Stephen, very glad to hear you're now back in business with your new MBP. That's great news!

    It seems to me your 128GB RAM allows your system to cache a much larger amount of sample files in RAM during Preload, now that you've whacked your Preload Sizes up to 8192.

    When I reboot my system then launch my Synchron Orchestra Stress Test in Logic, I can see VSL's Preload cache files building up until they're using the maximum that my 64GB system RAM has to spare for caching - which turns out to be only just about sufficient for my test orchestra. And that's probably why, if I increase my test orchestra's Preload Sizes to 8192 then reboot and relaunch, I'm not seeing any increase in cache size, nor any reduction in CPU load. My maxed-out 64GB RAM just ain't big enough for any of that good stuff.

    I'm going to experiment further, e.g. adding VEPro, and using patch changes during my test runs, so that I have some sort of benchmark with which I can check for the performance impact of using various different libraries, of software updates, and of various different configurations and automation. I just wish I'd set up a benchmark test like this before all the iLok and Apple Silicon upheaval took place.


  • You will only see performce improvements if your CPU is the bottleneck and running at full load during playback.

    It will also depend on the drive. The slower the drive, the larger the noticable performance gain. Also you will notice them more with SATA drives compared to NVMe drives. It also hugely depends on the library and how you use it.

    A preload buffer size of 8192 will load exactly the same amount of data into RAM on a 128GB RAM system as on a 64 GB system.

    If you don't have any performance issues, then measuring/tweaking these settings is a waste of your time/life.


    Ben@VSL | IT & Product Specialist
  • Thanks Ben. Interesting perspective.

    Aren't many if not most users apt to tweak or 'fettle' their systems now and then, always looking for improvements? I'm certainly one of those.


  • No, most users simply want stuff to work and don't bother with these things at all unless something doesn't work as expected.

    I guess @stephen limbaughalso started to look into it because he ran into a CPU bottleneck, and not because he loves tweaking system and sample player settings just for fun (@stephen limbaugh feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

    I also had looked into this topic years ago when my mid-class CPU could not keep up with my projects (clicks and drop-outs) and I did not had the budget to get a better one, I was able to get 30-40% more performance out of it by tweaking Bios, optimizing Overclocking settings, increasing preload buffer size, moving multi-mic libraries to my fastest SSDs, etc.
    Right now I don't bother as I'm currently not running into issues and optimizing now would get me an increase in performance of exactly 0%.


    Ben@VSL | IT & Product Specialist
  • last edited
    last edited
    This post is deleted!

  • @Ben haha... no I definitely couldn't give a damn about computer efficiency, I just want the thing to play back at low buffers 😅.

    I should also note that VSL support has zeroed in on an issue concerning the folder system of my drives. Crashes are happening because the system was scanning for the samples and getting hangs.

    Also, since removing the additional folder on the external drive, the read speeds in the Synchron Player are now measuring 556.2MB/s, an increase from 443.2MB/s.


  • last edited
    last edited

    Two kinds of computer system 'fettlers': those who love to fiddle around in very techie areas such as BIOS or the guts of the OS; and those - including me - who can't be arsed to wade into the deadly boring geeky detail (which is why I've always bought Apple), but who nevertheless like to know what it is we're dealing with and what can and can't be done with it.

    These days personal computing is nowhere near as straightforward as it was back in '77 when I first got into microcomputing. But no matter that computer and software companies nowadays are ever more determined to make customers believe they shouldn't worry their pretty little heads about what goes on under the hood, I'll never be the ideal consumer type. Lol.

    "OLD, NOT OBSOLETE" ~ me, imitating a famous Austrian Terminator, describing my ancient iMac. (2017 is really ancient, right?).

    I've pushed my stress-test Synchron orchestra harder, adding a Synchron D-274 track for live use. Now I can use an I/O Buffer Size as small as 32 samples, along with Medium Process Buffer Range, with all Synchron instruments playing back on just 1 audio Mix Channel each, while playing the D-274 live. (I'm not a pianist but that doesn't mean I can't knock out plenty of 2-handed chords at speed.)

    The result:- live piano latency is nice and short, AND with at least the bare bones of full orchestral accompaniment. Of course it's not as full-on as you're now getting with your M3 MBP, Stephen. But what it means for me is that I won't be contributing to Apple's revenue as early as I'd previously thought.

    Here's the evidence (One mix channel switched on in each Synchron player):-

    Strange thing now is - I'm getting less total RAM pressure than previously, even though in both cases I rebooted immediately before taking readings once the whole orchestra had fully completed its preloads. Whatever!

    Also, I've found that I can run all the orchestra players with 4 mix channels switched on and still at I/O Buffer 32, but in this case I need Large Process Buffer Range selected. Curiously, the total CPU load is in this case not far above what it is for the similar (4 audio channels each player) case at I/O Buffer 512.

    P.S.

    I forgot to say what recent major change I believe has helped hugely with my Synchron tasks.

    I now have all of my Synchron and Synchronized libraries in a new external SSD on its own Thunderbolt 3 port. That SSD is a Samsung 990 Pro 4TB M.2/NVMe/PCIe module (up to 7.5GB/s max speed) that I popped into an Acacis TBU405Pro M1 enclosure rated at Thunderbolt speed of 40Gb/sec max bidirectional transfer rate. In practice that means in sequential read and write tests, the Thunderbolt port maxes out at about 2.5 GB/s unidirectional (as normal). That's a downside (compared to internal SSD) only for clean installs and first-time app loading, etc; but certainly not a problem for the usual random reads during operation of the sample libraries. In the latter case, the ultra low latencies of the SSD and its enclosure still apply and provide market-leading speeds for random reads (as shown in an earlier thread).

    Yep, a somewhat expensive addition, and yep, I know the prices will fall. But I was indulging a bit of impatience and enthusiasm after I'd already replaced my Thunderbolt boot SSD with a 980Pro SSD (similar details as above) in an Acasis enclosure (same model as above), and noticed excellent results.