Hopefully simple XTC issue

Discuss Scope XTC mode.
Post Reply
Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Wed Apr 17, 2013 11:22 pm

Hello guys!

I honestly tried to find my issue in previous topics, but I've failed, perhaps because it's too old and well-known problem described long time ago. So it would be great if you could help me with it :)

I have XITE-1, and recently I've decided to try XTC mode. I loaded XTCproject, closed Scope 5.1 and turned Cubase 5 on.
The issue is - using SonicCore plugins as VST after a while I get ASIO overload (I check it with F12 ASIO\CPU meter) and as a result - terrible latency and audio chaos (repeating the last sound piece). It's completely impossible to work further =(
I have to close project, and audio stream goes quiet.
Some of plugins make this 'ASIO overload' moment quicker (Optimaster, DAS Brickmaster, DAS Comp AI...) but it happens soon or later anyway with any S|C plugins.

Until this moment everything works fine.

My system:
CPU: i7 2600k
MBD:Asus sabbertooth z77
XITE-1
Windows 7 32 bit
Cubase 5.1
I tried in cset.ini the values: 64, 128, 256, 512

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:22 pm

Actually, I think I found the core of the problem :)

Apart from S|C I have PoCo and UAD cards, so using PowerCore plugins when XTC mode is active makes mixing process highly unstable ((
It's pity, there are lot of useful plugins. But using EqSat and ClassicVerb in 9 of 10 cases leads to ASIO overload, using other PoCo plugins - 5 of 10 cases. Without TC plugins everything work fine at least an hour (I had no time to check longer).
Using UAD and S|C plugins doesn't lead to ASIO overload.

User avatar
Bud Weiser
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:29 am

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Bud Weiser » Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:58 am

Sekator wrote:Actually, I think I found the core of the problem :)

Apart from S|C I have PoCo and UAD cards, so using PowerCore plugins when XTC mode is active makes mixing process highly unstable ((
It's pity, there are lot of useful plugins. But using EqSat and ClassicVerb in 9 of 10 cases leads to ASIO overload, using other PoCo plugins - 5 of 10 cases. Without TC plugins everything work fine at least an hour (I had no time to check longer).
Using UAD and S|C plugins doesn't lead to ASIO overload.
Your ASUS Sabertooth Z77 is a socket 1155 motherboard and your XITE is connected via PCIe right ?
XITE and SCOPE all work flawlessly when no PoCo and UAD cards are build in ?

Your PoCo and UAD cards are PCI,- are they ?

If XITE/SCOPE works flawlessly w/o any PoCo or UAD plugged in and PoCo and UAD are PCI cards,- you should think about all socket 1155 motherboards don´t have native PCI support, PCI > PCIe bridge instead,- and w/ all cards (PCIe and PCI) build in you might have bandwidth issues.

Just only my idea because I don´t use XTC/VSTIM at all w/ XITE-1 ...

Bud

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:16 am

Hello, Bud!
Your ASUS Sabertooth Z77 is a socket 1155 motherboard and your XITE is connected via PCIe right ?
Yes
XITE and SCOPE all work flawlessly when no PoCo and UAD cards are build in ?
Not quite. XITE normal mode and XTC mode work fine when both PoCo and UAD build in but when no PoCo plugin used in project with XTC S|C plugins.
Your PoCo and UAD cards are PCI,- are they ?
They aren't, both PCI-e x1

In normal mode there is no problem at all. In XTC mode ASIO overloads when I use in one project S|C, UAD and TC plugins.
When I remove TC plugins and reload I\Os in XTC control panel OR just close current project and start a new one without TC plugins - ASIO doesn't get overloaded.

UAD works fine with S|C in any cases...

User avatar
garyb
Posts: 21193
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by garyb » Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:57 am

rersources are not unlimited....

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Sat Apr 20, 2013 10:54 pm

Agree, garyb, but if I use UAD+S|C in XTC there are no any issues with ASIO\Latency...

As for resources, I found another sad thing :(
When I load several plugins (5-7) a limit DSP capacity screen appears every time.
I press "Yes" on suggestion to optimize project and it works, but when I close project and open it again another window appears, without suggestions (I've attached it here).

Every time I use more than 4-6 plugins this particulary window appears, I mean exactly about DSP11 and DSP5.
What can I do with it? Actually, I use less plugins than on my old Scope Pro 15DSP card :cry:

As for suggestions on this window:
- I have no S|C synths in project
- I use 44.1 sample rate
- I use simple light plugins (delay, fat inserts, C350, PsyQ, Polteq)
Attachments
DSP_issue_01.jpg
DSP_issue_01.jpg (47.81 KiB) Viewed 4006 times

User avatar
garyb
Posts: 21193
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by garyb » Sun Apr 21, 2013 10:36 pm

in Scope mode, you can assign devices to a specific dsp, if the autoload format doesn't work for your project.

again, i don't know what's happening in your computer. that message indicates that the way the plugins you are using have been allocated to the various dsps, that too many connections need to be made to one of the dsps, for the project to work. there are only so many connections to each dsp possible. this has been documented in some detail both here and on XITEd.org.

XTC mode sacrifices much of what Scope is really good at for the convienience of a sequencer environment that most people are doing everything they can to improve. yes, you won't be able to use everything that you can use in Scope mode. if you insist on driving a Ferrari in rush hour traffic, it will never use 800hp.

anyway, my personal loathing of XTC mode aside, the XITE load routines are something that is always being tinkered with to improve. figuring out how a randomly selected plugin should be assingned to a dsp where it will live forever, or until there's a new project, the power is turned off, the device is removed, or a newly loaded plugin triggers the need for an optimistation(reshuffling) is an imperfect science. if the plugin loads in such a way that it make something else difficult to load, then it's a bad routine.

plugins need to be loaded on one dsp, or if there's not room on that dsp, two or more dsps can share the load. if the dsps that are both working on the same plugin are too far apart on the physical board, things won't work. if too much stuff is on too few dsps, then the amount of inter communication between those dsps can be troublesome. all this has to be considered before you even select something to use.

sometimes, a whole bunch of little nothing plugins can use a ton of resources, more than a few big plugins, just because of the types of connections between these plugins and the dsps that they run on require, and that's even if the collection of small stuff used way less dsps that the few big things. the next version will certainly improve things, but it woll not change the fundemental limitations inherent in the system itself.

jksuperstar
Posts: 1475
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:57 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by jksuperstar » Mon Apr 22, 2013 8:39 am

Also, what mixer are you using if any?

The STM1632 has shown to be a bit more difficult than the STM2448 when it comes to routing. I personally think the STM1632 gets placed on 1 DSP, and so routing to/from it and loading inserts puts MORE stress in the system, than using a STM2448, which is better optimized across multiple DSPs, and distributes inserts/load/routing better. Just a thought.

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Fri Apr 26, 2013 4:37 am

Thank you, garyb, for such detailed answer. I think I've got the point ))

It's pity XTC is a quasinormal mode, I really like Scope environment with its routing windows and mixers, but it appears I need XTC too...

As for dsp connections while using VST plugins, actually, do I really should know this difficult system if I can't even affect it clearly?
I mean I've tried to send ASIO and MIXERS in XTC project to DSP1 and\or DSP2, after closing Scope I have an 'error on board 0' message and XTC mode doesn't make a sound =((
The only way out I found is deattach ASIO, mixer and Dest blocks from any specific DSP and just press "Optimize project" several times during loading my Cubase project in XTC mode...

jksuperstar, I use 2448 in normal mode and MicroMixer in XTCProject.

User avatar
garyb
Posts: 21193
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by garyb » Fri Apr 26, 2013 3:42 pm

sure, optimize reshuffles the assignments. a few times can be what it takes to find a load order that works...

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Wed May 29, 2013 10:59 pm

Thanx for your help, guys, I've managed almost all my issues using XTC.
The only thing I'd like to clear is noise in Wave Dest in Win8 x64.

I've got Win8 x64 and first of all I couldn't start any DAW in XTC mode.
I've figured out it's because of x64 core engine of the DAW, so I tried DAW x86 and problem with XTC was solved.
But when I try to record something, or monitor Wave Dest (I use Pinguin Meter) or just use mic in Skype I faced with crackles and noise.

I've read somewhere here it's because of problem with wave driver in Win8 x64, so is it still unsolved?

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Fri Jul 05, 2013 4:12 am

By the way, why I'm able to load dozens of plugins in Scope mode and 5-7 different plugins in XTC mode before my XITE reached its DSP limit? What the difference between these effects in each mode? :-?

I mean reshuffling window appeared in XTC mode faster than in Scope mode and in half cases it doesn't work (reshuffling is unable to solve problem), but it's really hard to get that window in Scope mode. Why so?

User avatar
garyb
Posts: 21193
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by garyb » Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:25 am

XTC mode is something the computer itself really doesn't want to do. Scope is external hardware, as far as the computer is concerned. making XTC mode work is really kind of complicated. this is where the export problem comes in too. if you do an export in XTC mode, you cannot do an offline export. an offline export is calculated by the CPU and the CPU knows NOTHING about what is going on in the Scope card. to use the export function in XTC mode, you must do a realtime export.

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:47 am

Thanks, garyb
Actually, the things you wrote quite logical and clear :)

What about UAD or PowerCore cards with it's quite stable work on external DSP chips and using it as VST-plugins? Is there big difference in Scope philosophy? As far as I know UAD Apollo has been released as audio interface (not just DSP accelerator) with real-time processing and the same UAD plugins as in previous UAD cards.

And what about ProTools for example? It's external interface too with it's DSP cards and VST plugins that work quite stable in computer environment. Why XTC is so problematic for Scope?
Last edited by Sekator on Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
garyb
Posts: 21193
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by garyb » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:21 am

ProTools is a dedicated sequencer meant to run on ProTools dsp hardware. it's not a generic sequencer running the dsp hardware as a vst. it's true realtiome functions are limited.

UAD and PowerCore have no realtime functions. they are quite limited in operation, but they work well for their purpose. try Googling "UAD export problem" and see what happens. but, yes, they work differently.

bouncing is NOT faster than recording the Audio, although it seems so at first. when recording the audio, you listen to the mix as you are making the recording. if you forget something or if there are pops and clicks or other artifacts, you hear them right away. with a render or bounce, you are blind until the render is done and then you must listen to the file to be sure that it is ok....

User avatar
dante
Posts: 3702
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by dante » Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:22 pm

Sekator wrote: As for suggestions on this window:
- I have no S|C synths in project
- I use 44.1 sample rate
- I use simple light plugins (delay, fat inserts, C350, PsyQ, Polteq)
Instead of the C350 try the C350L - I can load 32 x C350L on the XITE-1D.

User avatar
garyb
Posts: 21193
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by garyb » Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:22 pm

...also, the psyq is not a light plugin...

Sekator
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by Sekator » Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:10 am

Instead of the C350 try the C350L - I can load 32 x C350L on the XITE-1D.
dante, are you sure you can load x32 plugins in XTC mode? I can't load even SoftClip, LowCut or Compressor more than 20-25 times in XTC :(

User avatar
dante
Posts: 3702
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: Hopefully simple XTC issue

Post by dante » Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:15 am

No - not in XTC mode (since I don't use XTC mode).

But I do know that the C350L is way more DSP efficient than C350 on XITE no matter what mode you use it in.

Post Reply