|
Korg Forums A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world. Moderated Independently. Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
SeedyLee Platinum Member
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 1367 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poseidon wrote: | SeedyLee wrote: |
I think it came up in the forums here that the UI is driven by the separate onboard ARM core.. |
That's interesting. Kronos CPU have 400MHz build-in processor graphics. So it looks like it is not used. |
That’s correct, the Intel integrated graphics aren’t used. _________________ Current Equipment:
Korg Kronos 2 88, Reface CS, Roland JV-1080, TE OP1, Moog Subsequent 37, Korg ARP Odyssey, Allen & Heath Zed 18, Adam F5, MOTU MIDI Express XT, Lexicon MX200 & MPX1, Yamaha QY700, Yamaha AW16G, Tascam DP008ex, Zoom H6, Organelle, Roland J6 & JU06A
Previous: Triton LE 61/Sampling/64MB/4GB SCSI, MS2000BR, Kronos 1 61, Monotribe, NanoKontrol, NanoKeys, Kaossilator II, Casio HT3000, Roland VP-03, Reface DX, Novation Mininova, MPC One |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mikelees Junior Member
Joined: 21 Mar 2012 Posts: 94 Location: Chelmsford, UK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have observed that there seem to be 2 different kinds of note-stealing on the Kronos. The first is the "normal" note stealing, which is managed by the note-stealing algorithm, and is generally pretty good - not audible, except in extreme situations where there are many voices with long release, which seems to result in notes being audibly truncated.
The other kind of note stealing I have observed is when the effects CPU is overloaded - this is a much nastier kind, and is very audible. I encountered this when I was building some Combis with 2 layered pianos and 3 or 4 synth pads - to make things easily interchangeable, I thought I would give each Prog in the Combi its own O-Verb as an IFX, which meant that the Combis had 4 or 5 O-Verbs running simultaneously. When switching between 2 such combis, I was getting really nasty note stealing, where piano notes would cut off as soon as they were played with a loud click. On investigation, I found that each Combi was running the effects CPU around 80-90% (O-Verb seems to be an effects CPU resource-hog!), so when I switched between 2 Combis, the effects CPU would get overloaded while SST is active, resulting in nasty note truncation.
My rule of thumb (learned the hard way!) is not to let the effects CPU go above about 40% in any Combi or Prog - that way, it doesn't get overloaded when SST is active, and keep the number of O-Verbs to a minimum. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SeedyLee Platinum Member
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 1367 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mikelees wrote: | I have observed that there seem to be 2 different kinds of note-stealing on the Kronos. The first is the "normal" note stealing, which is managed by the note-stealing algorithm, and is generally pretty good - not audible, except in extreme situations where there are many voices with long release, which seems to result in notes being audibly truncated.
The other kind of note stealing I have observed is when the effects CPU is overloaded - this is a much nastier kind, and is very audible. I encountered this when I was building some Combis with 2 layered pianos and 3 or 4 synth pads - to make things easily interchangeable, I thought I would give each Prog in the Combi its own O-Verb as an IFX, which meant that the Combis had 4 or 5 O-Verbs running simultaneously. When switching between 2 such combis, I was getting really nasty note stealing, where piano notes would cut off as soon as they were played with a loud click. On investigation, I found that each Combi was running the effects CPU around 80-90% (O-Verb seems to be an effects CPU resource-hog!), so when I switched between 2 Combis, the effects CPU would get overloaded while SST is active, resulting in nasty note truncation.
My rule of thumb (learned the hard way!) is not to let the effects CPU go above about 40% in any Combi or Prog - that way, it doesn't get overloaded when SST is active, and keep the number of O-Verbs to a minimum. |
Good points Mike. Of course, you only need to allow sufficient resources for SST if you have SST enabled and are using it. _________________ Current Equipment:
Korg Kronos 2 88, Reface CS, Roland JV-1080, TE OP1, Moog Subsequent 37, Korg ARP Odyssey, Allen & Heath Zed 18, Adam F5, MOTU MIDI Express XT, Lexicon MX200 & MPX1, Yamaha QY700, Yamaha AW16G, Tascam DP008ex, Zoom H6, Organelle, Roland J6 & JU06A
Previous: Triton LE 61/Sampling/64MB/4GB SCSI, MS2000BR, Kronos 1 61, Monotribe, NanoKontrol, NanoKeys, Kaossilator II, Casio HT3000, Roland VP-03, Reface DX, Novation Mininova, MPC One |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gunnar Full Member
Joined: 27 Jan 2016 Posts: 185 Location: Norway
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mikelees wrote: | (O-Verb seems to be an effects CPU resource-hog!) |
Yeah, reverbs generally are CPU-hogs, and it gets worse the longer the tail
O-verb is a really nice reverb though..
You see the same thing in DAWs. Reaper has a built in Perftracker as well, and having reverb on each track separately kills performance. So you ease off the pressure by using a shared reverb track and send to it. In a mix I typically have one or two virtual rooms, and this is very common to do. On the Kronos, I tend to have delay and reverb on the MFX in COMBIs for the same reason, plus its easy to then tweak the send per track using the knobs. _________________ Gear: Korg Kronos 2 73, Arturia Microbrute & MiniBrute 2, Moog Mother-32, Ibanez RG320DXFM Guitar, ESP Viper 254FM Bass, Blackstar HT-1
Software: Reaper, EZ Drummer
Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/gunnarsletta |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Poseidon Senior Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018 Posts: 373
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SeedyLee wrote: |
If you want to have a discussion about the exact architectural issues you believe make the i3 and i5 processors broadly unsuitable for media work, I’m happy to have that discussion. I’ll do so with my official hard copy Intel instruction set/architecture reference handy.
|
I remember that only one model i5 supports Hyper-Threading.
Without Hyper-Threading CPU is not much use for media ( poor trancoding etc ....)
i3 and i5 incorporates some design budgetary shortcuts when come to CPU -> Cache path.
There was a good article (tomshardware?) explaining i3/i5 CPU family. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SeedyLee Platinum Member
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 1367 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poseidon wrote: | SeedyLee wrote: |
If you want to have a discussion about the exact architectural issues you believe make the i3 and i5 processors broadly unsuitable for media work, I’m happy to have that discussion. I’ll do so with my official hard copy Intel instruction set/architecture reference handy.
|
I remember that only one model i5 supports Hyper-Threading.
Without Hyper-Threading CPU is not much use for media ( poor trancoding etc ....)
i3 and i5 incorporates some design budgetary shortcuts when come to CPU -> Cache path.
There was a good article (tomshardware?) explaining i3/i5 CPU family. |
Yes, there are architectural differences. That doesn’t necessarily make them deficient.
For example, an i5 will actually outperform Xeon machines at many video encoding and decoding tasks because the i5 has a dedicated hardware video encoding instruction set which QuickTime based applications can natively take advantage of.
Coming back to my earlier point about the Kronos having lower latency than my i5, again, this has nothing to do with the CPU architecture and everything to do with the software stack and the fact the Kronos’ sound engine runs in Kernel space. How else would an Intel Atom outperform an i5? Or are you saying the i5 is even inferior to the Atom? _________________ Current Equipment:
Korg Kronos 2 88, Reface CS, Roland JV-1080, TE OP1, Moog Subsequent 37, Korg ARP Odyssey, Allen & Heath Zed 18, Adam F5, MOTU MIDI Express XT, Lexicon MX200 & MPX1, Yamaha QY700, Yamaha AW16G, Tascam DP008ex, Zoom H6, Organelle, Roland J6 & JU06A
Previous: Triton LE 61/Sampling/64MB/4GB SCSI, MS2000BR, Kronos 1 61, Monotribe, NanoKontrol, NanoKeys, Kaossilator II, Casio HT3000, Roland VP-03, Reface DX, Novation Mininova, MPC One |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Poseidon Senior Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018 Posts: 373
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SeedyLee wrote: | Coming back to my earlier point about the Kronos having lower latency than my i5, again, this has nothing to do with the CPU architecture and everything to do with the software stack and the fact the Kronos’ sound engine runs in Kernel space. How else would an Intel Atom outperform an i5? Or are you saying the i5 is even inferior to the Atom? |
I totally agree with you. each case is different ( CPU, OS, Software, interface, cabling etc … ), the latency issue is not just CPU. However having faster computer is the first priority. I have old 8-core Mac Pro 2010, and I can say that have no latency issues at all ( in Logic Pro X).
I add, that you should not compare Kronos latency to i5 Mac.
Kronos is dedicated to do one task only, i5 Mac - thousands.
Last edited by Poseidon on Mon Jan 07, 2019 1:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Poseidon Senior Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018 Posts: 373
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2019 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SeedyLee wrote: | For example, an i5 will actually outperform Xeon machines at many video encoding and decoding tasks because the i5 has a dedicated hardware video encoding instruction set which QuickTime based applications can natively take advantage of. |
Interesting too, can you point me to some benchmarks. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|