Memory

Welcome to the Pyramix MassCore discussion forum.
Forum rules
The Merging Technologies team cannot be held responsible for support queries logged on the public forums. If a support query is logged here and only here, it may not be found and dealt with by the appropriate team.
To ensure that your support issue or bug report is dealt with properly and in good time, please use the link to the tech support request form page on the Merging website.
Make sure to let us know what version you are using when you send your mail. THANKS!
Perfect Record
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 06:09
Location: St Paul, Minnesota USA
Contact:

Memory

Postby Perfect Record » Tue Jun 11, 2019 21:31

I think the saying is you can never be too thin or have enough memory...

I've been running on the Merging recommended 8 GB memory for years. Having problems with CPU overs on relatively few VST plugins.

Anyone have experience whether more memory will help? FWIW, I'm due to build a new machine soon anyway.

TIA
P

aomahana
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 21:21
Location: auckland. new zealand
Contact:

Re: Memory

Postby aomahana » Tue Jun 11, 2019 23:04

Hello there,

My system is Pyramix Native without the benefit of Masscore
Rather than memory, I think the main constraint regarding VST usage in Pyramix is the restriction to a single core.
Some VST are quite demanding, and won't even run in Pyramix (without Masscore).
Because of this, and other limitations within Pyramix, I have been using a second DAW to fill the gaps.

In my case, this is Reaper.
Reaper has a light and efficient footprint.
Reaper handles VST very well, and has many other useful attributes.
Like Pyramix, Reaper is very configurable, so takes a while to learn.

For my purposes, this combination is proving excellent.


All the best,
aomahana.

ljudatervinning
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 00:00
Location: Sweden

Re: Memory

Postby ljudatervinning » Thu Jun 13, 2019 08:42

I don’t see a future for Pyramix Native, unless it becomes multithreaded.
Features are great, but performance becomes limited too often. VST plugins tend to be more demanding, while processor speed is mainly increased by adding more processor cores.
Also, I need to run on laptop, not yet supported by masscore.
Pyramix Native 11.1.5 / Ravenna ASIO 11.1.5
win10 Pro 1803 / Nvidia GTX 670, 3 monitors
win10 Pro 1803 / Lenovo P50, 4K

Perfect Record
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 06:09
Location: St Paul, Minnesota USA
Contact:

Re: Memory

Postby Perfect Record » Thu Jun 13, 2019 20:10

ljudatervinning wrote:I don’t see a future for Pyramix Native, unless it becomes multithreaded...


What Pyramix does well, it does really well. Complex music editing. Mix Automation. Very complicated mixer architectures. Session recording.

But VST is here to stay. It's getting increasingly difficult to do pop, or even complicated classical mixing without good VST plugin power.

User avatar
fl
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 19:55
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Memory

Postby fl » Fri Jun 14, 2019 15:11

There does seem to be a benefit, in terms of processor load, to the use of VST3 over VST2, but this will vary from plug-in to plug-in.
Frank Lockwood, Toronto, ON, Canada
http://LockwoodARS.com
Native 11.1.5
Win7 Pro SP1 64
Bootcamp 5.1.5621
Mac Mini 6.2 (Quadcore i7)
RME Fireface 800, driver version 3.125

ljudatervinning
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 00:00
Location: Sweden

Re: Memory

Postby ljudatervinning » Sun Jun 23, 2019 14:21

Perfect Record wrote: What Pyramix does well, it does really well. Complex music editing. Mix Automation. Very complicated mixer architectures. Session recording.

But VST is here to stay. It's getting increasingly difficult to do pop, or even complicated classical mixing without good VST plugin power.


I agree with all above. Functionality is great, but performance in Native is beginning fall behind.
Pyramix Native 11.1.5 / Ravenna ASIO 11.1.5
win10 Pro 1803 / Nvidia GTX 670, 3 monitors
win10 Pro 1803 / Lenovo P50, 4K