Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic computer speed

Joe,

You've pretty accurately figured out some of the issues already. And, unlike going to a store, buying a rack synth or kbd synth and then... that's it, you work with it, this other world is fluid and will always be changing.

{you wrote...}
>So, what is a "decent" computer speed for softsynths?? My present >computer is only 350mhz, which I take it is "way behind the curve..."

I think so. At every point (I'm only talking PCs) along the way there are a variety of speeds of CPUs available, the slowest costing the least, the fastest costing the most. And if you spend some time or - better yet - make friends with someone who is 'into computers' for real, you can find the break point between cost and speed. Usually you will see a little ledge in price, where it starts to jump up.

All I can say, when you are using a computer for cpu- and/or ram-intensive use: get as much as you can afford, get as fast as you can afford. There is no other way to say it.

When I started looking at all this soft stuff last year, I figured "hell, what a bunch of crap - latency so bad I could make a recording of my fingernails hitting the keys and then you would hear the synth *after* the clicking" and a host of other problems. Since having a beefier box, almost all those problems went away.

The other thing is: if you want to get into this area you need to accept the fluidity of the situation and you have to be comfortable tweaking and getting 'under the hood' a bit, in understanding some of the hardware/software interactions. You don't have to be a total tech-head, but I really don't look at this as different from the centuries of composers studying what instruments could, and could not, do and knowing that this orchestration would work and this one would fail. Studying the instruments and the players was 'tech' in those days.

>Composer Patrick Grant sent me a softsynth called the FM7 that had some >nice FM sounds, but it didn't install *drivers* so there was no way to run >it from my sequencer...

All I know at this point is your computer, which is probably not going to give you much satisfaction in softsynth areas; what I *don't* know about is your audio hardware - the sound card that you reproduce this on. I mention this because all the newer audio cards are the ones that support the methodology and drivers necessary for fast audio creation/reproduction: most notably is the form known as ASIO, and there are also WDM drivers (we don't need to get into detail on this).

Just as people who build dedicating gaming computers know, you identify the areas on the computer that are critical to key functions (for them it is cpu, ram, and the *video* card, for us the first two and the *audio* card) and maximise them.

I'm going to start telling people that unless they have current hardware them might as well look at other solutions for making music, because trying to run softsynths on old hardware will only frustrate, and no one needs more frustration in life.

>I had better success with Peter Frazier's *Midicode* synth, which *can* be >run through drivers on different channels from my sequencer.

But that is not the kind of synth that will take your music to the next level. It is a good thing, indeed, and I've reserve my old computer, which will soon have all the junk taken off the hard drive, reformatted, and then will be a test bed for microtonal solutions *specifically* for those people who can't or won't get a faster box. I would like to have at least a couple of scenarios to recommend to those folks, and Midicode will probably be one of them.

>The only problem is that when I do that the sound "breaks up..."

That could be the cpu, but it is most likely the audio card. See above. Older cards, with older drivers (the little software pieces that communicate between the cpu, the application, and the hardware device - in this case, the audio card) can't cut multiple streams of audio.

>I take it one needs quite a fast machine to do all this softsynth stuff >since the
>poor machine is *both* sequencing and making the sounds.

*Bingo*. Sorry, but that is true.

>So, again, what is an *optimal* speed for softsynth stuff??

The fastest, biggest you can afford.

>I guess the newest computers are running from 2-3 GIGAhz.

My current system has a 2.53 cpu. I'd probably call that around the minimum, but it is almost exactly what I was looking for, as described in the price-break above, to build a new system. I just happened to luckily find someone on eBay selling a system that was virtually *identical* to the individual components I had been shopping for. Saved me a lot of time and a few dollars as well. I am shopping to increase ram from 512mb to 1Gig, but I'm watching ram prices to see a good time to get it.

Lastly: I hope you and others on the list will let me (and others) know if we get too far into tech-talk. I don't want people leaving or falling asleep because it has all veered too far from music; that would be no different than endlessly posting tuning tables or something. I think some of this is necessary to get over the hurdle of making our kind of music in a new way, but I really do want feedback if I or anyone else is just simply getting in too deep!

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Rick Taylor <ricktaylor@...>

"Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@...> wrote:
> Joe,

> >I guess the newest computers are running from 2-3 GIGAhz.
>
> My current system has a 2.53 cpu. I'd probably call that around the
> minimum, but it is almost exactly what I was looking for, as described in

Which is where you need to be. It's what folk are writing on and for.

> the price-break above, to build a new system. I just happened to luckily
> find someone on eBay selling a system that was virtually *identical* to the
> individual components I had been shopping for. Saved me a lot of time and a
> few dollars as well. I am shopping to increase ram from 512mb to 1Gig, but
> I'm watching ram prices to see a good time to get it.

http://www.pricewatch.com/

I managed a gig of 400x DDR ram for slightly less than $200 {Which is what I
paid for 512 megs a year ago.} You can do better. {It's already obvious I'm
going to need more on that machine.}

My pricing for a decent machine would go thusly:

Motherboard - ~125.oo
Memory ~100.oo
Processor {Athlon} - ~100.oo
Processor {Intel} - ~200.oo

You can go better but the above figures keep you in the running. It's the
pricepoint I shop at unless I've got a lot of cash. Go for the largest bus
and highest speed memory you can afford. Your motherboard has to keep up.

It does you well to research the basic stuff that's not going to change from
system to system and maybe spend a bit extra for that sort of thing.

For me that's video card, sound card and case. {power pack}

My recommendation for case. {Best bit I've bought}

http://silverpcs.zoovy.com/product/PC60B

Rock solid, beautifully engineered, holds many drives and doesn't make a sound.

I have a large server case for drives as well.

http://www.mwave.com/mwave/doc/8950.html ...also a rock...

Graphics card: My Matrox 45o is stable as hell, has great color, etc. My next
upgrade will be to a 3dlabs Wildcat or Oxygen. I have several fast and fancy
cards... none as plain usable as the matrox.

Sound... :} go with compatible and stay away from stuff that depends on any sort of software.

Power pack... get the best you can afford. It's a massively important link in your chain.

🔗Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_5392.html#5394

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> You've pretty accurately figured out some of the issues already.
And, unlike going to a store, buying a rack synth or kbd synth and
then... that's it, you work with it, this other world is fluid and
will always be changing.
>

***Right. And that seems like, to me anyway, some of the
*excitement* of it, and probably why it's more *flexible* in many
technical areas, such as tuning...

> All I can say, when you are using a computer for cpu- and/or ram-
intensive use: get as much as you can afford, get as fast as you can
afford. There is no other way to say it.
>

***Right, and there is *much* faster stuff out there than my box, so
I'll have to upgrade to get serious about this direction...

> When I started looking at all this soft stuff last year, I
figured "hell, what a bunch of crap - latency so bad I could make a
recording of my fingernails hitting the keys and then you would hear
the synth *after* the clicking" and a host of other problems. Since
having a beefier box, almost all those problems went away.
>

***Got it.

> The other thing is: if you want to get into this area you need to
accept the fluidity of the situation and you have to be comfortable
tweaking and getting 'under the hood' a bit, in understanding some of
the hardware/software interactions. You don't have to be a total tech-
head, but I really don't look at this as different from the centuries
of composers studying what instruments could, and could not, do and
knowing that this orchestration would work and this one would fail.
Studying the instruments and the players was 'tech' in those days.
>

***Makes sense. So far, the people, especially, on this list have
been *very* helpful. Such assistance would be necessary if I were to
get "stuck" on something...

> >Composer Patrick Grant sent me a softsynth called the FM7 that had
some nice FM sounds, but it didn't install *drivers* so there was no
way to run it from my sequencer...
>
> All I know at this point is your computer, which is probably not
going to give you much satisfaction in softsynth areas; what I
*don't* know about is your audio hardware - the sound card that you
reproduce this on. I mention this because all the newer audio cards
are the ones that support the methodology and drivers necessary for
fast audio creation/reproduction: most notably is the form known as
ASIO, and there are also WDM drivers (we don't need to get into
detail on this).
>

***Right. Well the soundcard is no great shakes, either. Just a
SoundBlaster 128 which is also 'way behind now. Works just fine with
Sibelius, though, since when I write *notated* music I don't really
need the finest of sounds. After all, I have a pretty good idea by
now of what an acoustic violin sounds like... :)

Regarding the FM7, it's pretty neat, and Patrick Grant got it to work
with Sonar by just giving it the instruction, "Insert a DXi
Instrument."

Patrick claims that "Digital Orchestrator Pro" can handle this as
well, but I don't think so. I don't see it in the manual. I believe
I would have to upgrade to Sonar. Maybe not such a bad idea anyway...

> I'm going to start telling people that unless they have current
hardware them might as well look at other solutions for making music,
because trying to run softsynths on old hardware will only frustrate,
and no one needs more frustration in life.
>

***Right. Actually, at the moment I'm pretty happy with my
ideosyncratic working methods. For example, for the current woodwind
quintet in Blackjack I use the *sequencer* to actually compose the
piece and then "translate" it manually to written 72-tET notation
(since, of course, the actual *playing* note names on my piano roll
keyboard are *not* the same as the "real" notated note names -- that
would be impossible since, in Blackjack, there are 21-notes per
octave, of course...)

After that, I use Sibelius to engrave the work. I don't even
*attempt* to have Sibelius play this stuff back. It's not up to the
task of doing this kind of microtonal project. At least that's *my*
impression.

> >I had better success with Peter Frazier's *Midicode* synth, which
*can* be run through drivers on different channels from my sequencer.
>
> But that is not the kind of synth that will take your music to the
next level.

***Yeah. Well the sounds aren't really all that good, which is one
reason I haven't "messed around" much with it...

It is a good thing, indeed, and I've reserve my old computer, which
> will soon have all the junk taken off the hard drive, reformatted,
and then will be a test bed for microtonal solutions *specifically*
for those people who can't or won't get a faster box. I would like to
have at least a couple of scenarios to recommend to those folks, and
Midicode will probably be one of them.
>

***That's really great, Jon. You and this forum are going to be
turning into a real laboratory for this kind of stuff... of course
it's already been that way. Bravo.

> >The only problem is that when I do that the sound "breaks up..."
>
> That could be the cpu, but it is most likely the audio card. See
above. Older cards, with older drivers (the little software pieces
that communicate between the cpu, the application, and the hardware
device - in this case, the audio card) can't cut multiple streams of
audio.
>

***got it. Of course it could also be *both* the cpu and the sound
card.... :)

> Lastly: I hope you and others on the list will let me (and others)
know if we get too far into tech-talk. I don't want people leaving or
falling asleep because it has all veered too far from music; that
would be no different than endlessly posting tuning tables or
something. I think some of this is necessary to get over the hurdle
of making our kind of music in a new way, but I really do want
feedback if I or anyone else is just simply getting in too deep!
>

***Sure. Well as long as people don't mind "backing up" a bit for
newbies in this, all is well...

Thanks again!

Joe

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Hi Joe,

Before the 'talking points', I wanted to address your situation, and I view it as a parable for everyone:

You are making microtonal music - already.

So, all this talk about softsyths, RAM, latency, etc... It just means that there are many ways to get the muse served. I don't think you have to jump on the bandwagon, and I don't necessarily think you should change or add to your methods. If nothing else, you are a good example of someone who found a way, and have stuck to it. Hell, you don't need softsynths - you've got humans to play it!

Hats off to you.

{you wrote...}
>***Right. And that seems like, to me anyway, some of the *excitement* of >it, and probably why it's more *flexible* in many technical areas, such as >tuning...

Yeah, though trying to figure out why a soundcard won't talk to a music application is not exactly exciting - damn frustrating sometimes!

>***Right. Well the soundcard is no great shakes, either. Just a >SoundBlaster 128 which is also 'way behind now.

Probably not enough for the newer (groundbreaking, microtonally) sound programs, but for playback from notation stuff, it is working fine. Audio cards, like all computer stuff, continue to fall in price, so there's certainly no rush on your part.

>Regarding the FM7, it's pretty neat, and Patrick Grant got it to work with >Sonar by just giving it the instruction, "Insert a DXi Instrument."

That is all it takes.

>Patrick claims that "Digital Orchestrator Pro" can handle this as well, >but I don't think so.

I'm leery of it, and there was a complete shift in programming/audio design that took place a couple of years ago. You simply cannot expect that the advances in music on the computer will continue to work in old applications. One of the difficulties of the scene (spoken as someone who *begged* his wife to upgrade from a Windows 3.1 notation program, because it wasn't 'really' working in XP on her new computer!).

>***Right. Actually, at the moment I'm pretty happy with my ideosyncratic >working methods.

I'm glad you detailed them. You may be in a minority these days, but Aaron's recent piece and explanation of how he made it happen shows that there are a lot of ways to get some of these pieces to work. I just want to keep a chronicle for those that want to start from scratch.

>After that, I use Sibelius to engrave the work.

And we're all cognizant of the 'antique' feel to the word "engrave"!

>***got it. Of course it could also be *both* the cpu and the sound card.... :)

Most likely. :(

>***Sure. Well as long as people don't mind "backing up" a bit for newbies >in this, all is well...

I'm not above telling someone to go find out on their own! :)

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_5392.html#5402

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> Before the 'talking points', I wanted to address your situation,
and I view
> it as a parable for everyone:
>
> You are making microtonal music - already.
>
> So, all this talk about softsyths, RAM, latency, etc... It just
means that
> there are many ways to get the muse served. I don't think you have
to jump
> on the bandwagon, and I don't necessarily think you should change
or add to
> your methods.

***Thanks, Jon. Actually, I think I'll sit "on the sideline" for a
bit, and before I begin will get 1) a faster computer 2) a state of
the art soundcard and 3) Sonar...

By that time, youse guys will have a better idea of what is working
for microtonality in the softsynth department, but it's crucial that
I follow the progress and opinions as they are happening (here in
MMM and elsewhere...)

> >***Sure. Well as long as people don't mind "backing up" a bit
for newbies
> >in this, all is well...
>
> I'm not above telling someone to go find out on their own! :)
>

***Sure... but so far you've been very helpful. You're check $ is
in the mail... :)

🔗Robert Walker <robertwalker@...>

Hi Joseph,

Caveat: I can't speak from my own experience, but I gather that installing
Asio drivers can make quite a difference with the soft synths on
older computers.

You can get a special Sound Blaster compatible installer for musicians for anyone who has
the SB Live, or Audigy etc (but not Extigy) from:

http://kxproject.lugosoft.com/index.php?skip=1

- its free.

(also installs other drivers too such as the ones needed by Giga
I think).

For Windows ME, 98 SE or NT / 2K / XP.
Not available for Windows 95 or the original
Windows 98.

Sample rate must be set to 48 Khz for the
Sound Blaster cards.
Also recommended to remove your existing sound card
drivers first before installing it. Then if it doesn't
work I suppose you just uninstall it and re-install
your sound card's standard drivers.

Maybe there are asio drivers etc for other sound cards too.
Anyway just suggesting this in case anyone maybe hasn't
come across this link yet and finds it useful.

Unfortunately I can't install it on my current setup
as it is, though, so unable to test it. Would be a dramatic
reduction in latency if it worked to maybe 10 ms for the FM7.
A reason to upgrade something or other at some point
here too, though it is only for my composing, works
fine enough for program debugging as it is which is
my main focus at present really.

Thanks,

Robert