XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

The Sonic Core XITE hardware platform for Scope

Moderators: valis, garyb

User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

Bud Weiser wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:05 pm Looks great !
Was it essential not using iGPU graphics ?
I understand "GeForce" means Nvidia drivers,- no ?

In WinXP times, these were the best,- but nowadays, I read everywhere Nvidia drivers make problems in audio DAWs.
Was that "fake news" ?

:)

Bud
I had no problems with the Nvidia drivers so far, touch wood 😬
It did not end up using the integrated intel graphics because „only“ 3 displays are supported 😉
Last edited by katano on Sat Nov 14, 2020 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

valis wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 8:24 pm Gaming GPU's *can* do this, different driver versions and card combos will give you different results. Typically what happens is they set an extremely high priority to their driver/process to get a few more FPS for your games, and other tasks can suffer. Also each company has an awful lot of background tasks in this era, but that applies to Intel as well so there's no escape there.

You can do more minimalist drivers, but the best option is to opt for the Quadro/FireGL. The branding has changed for both of these lines from Nvidia/AMD both but it's the same basic concept which is: Workstation & "Clean" office installed computers with drivers that are vetted for work and not just play.

Since we have no need for the latest & greatest, finding a still supported Quadro that runs cool & low power (used or new) can give you similar gains with low cost and low thermals. The only real gotcha is that I'm finding more and more audio apps are using a lot of GPU calls for scalable interfaces, vector interfaces & the like. So getting something from a more recent generation may have more longterm advantages than in years past (going back 1-2 generations at most). It only saves you a lot of money if you go used now anyway, so no biggie if you get a last-gen card that runs under $300 and you're only doing audio stuff.
I also had a look at the quadro cards, but those supporting 4 displays were at least twice as expensive as the Geforce 1650, which I got for only 160$ 😉
User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

dante wrote: Sat Nov 14, 2020 11:07 am @Katano, great setup. Does Console 1 include any Sharc DSP inside it ? I cant find tech specs on that anywhere. Do you use discrete or tube mode ?
Nope, console1 does not come with Sharcs. It‘s basically „just“ a hardware controller for the plugin. So you have the console1 plugin on every channel in your daw and then you can control it like hardware, the mixing workflow is really nice! and the console1 fader is motorized, cool stuff. Inside Console1, you then have different emulations which work like a big hardware console. you can choose from many emulations, by default it‘s an SSL4000K, but you also can have a British Class A based on a classic 60ies/70ies console or the American Class A for a more modern sound. Every channel has high/low pass, eq, dynamics and also drive and character.
you can find plenty of stuff on youtube...

Cheers
User avatar
dante
Posts: 4475
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by dante »

That would work good w/- Harrison, but Id want double the faders of course in one unit 8)
User avatar
valis
Posts: 5862
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by valis »

katano wrote: Sat Nov 14, 2020 3:49 pm
valis wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 8:24 pm Gaming GPU's *can* do this, different driver versions and card combos will give you different results. Typically what happens is they set an extremely high priority to their driver/process to get a few more FPS for your games, and other tasks can suffer. Also each company has an awful lot of background tasks in this era, but that applies to Intel as well so there's no escape there.

You can do more minimalist drivers, but the best option is to opt for the Quadro/FireGL. The branding has changed for both of these lines from Nvidia/AMD both but it's the same basic concept which is: Workstation & "Clean" office installed computers with drivers that are vetted for work and not just play.

Since we have no need for the latest & greatest, finding a still supported Quadro that runs cool & low power (used or new) can give you similar gains with low cost and low thermals. The only real gotcha is that I'm finding more and more audio apps are using a lot of GPU calls for scalable interfaces, vector interfaces & the like. So getting something from a more recent generation may have more longterm advantages than in years past (going back 1-2 generations at most). It only saves you a lot of money if you go used now anyway, so no biggie if you get a last-gen card that runs under $300 and you're only doing audio stuff.
I also had a look at the quadro cards, but those supporting 4 displays were at least twice as expensive as the Geforce 1650, which I got for only 160$ 😉
This is only a guarantee, as quadros come with full support. With Geforce cards, what you'll find is that it can vary from driver to driver (and as your card ages, the driver branches tend to get a bit more...fiddly.) That doesn't mean you will encounter issues, and note out of the numerous cards I have here only about 25% are quadro or firegl.
User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

Yeah, I‘ll see how it works out in the long term. But hopes are high, at least mainboard and graphics are both from asus, maybe this will help...
User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

dante wrote: Sat Nov 14, 2020 9:33 pm That would work good w/- Harrison, but Id want double the faders of course in one unit 8)
yeah, more faders would be nice, but having 10 is not bad. not sure about the harrison comparibility, but according to gearsluts forum, there‘s some integration possible:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/harriso ... ixbus.html

Cheers
User avatar
dante
Posts: 4475
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by dante »

It says there’s a mapping overlay for Mixbux

https://max1mus.xyz/audio/control-harri ... console-1/

and an option in MixBus ‘enable feedback’ which fixes an issue

So it’s an option for the future for sure. With 10 faders I’d map the first 8 to each of the 8 sub mix busses in MixBus, one to the master bus and one left over for control room maybe.
User avatar
dante
Posts: 4475
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by dante »

Late breaking news - Harrison Mixbus32C now supports VST3 and -

'VST3 support includes extensions for Softube Console1 plugins and control surfaces'.

Console 1 Fader might be my next acquisition.
User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

Just the fader? I think you need both 😬
User avatar
dante
Posts: 4475
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by dante »

Hmm damn that get expensive I think 🤔
User avatar
katano
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Zurich, Switzerland

Re: XITE-1 PC CONFIGURATION REFERENCE

Post by katano »

yes, it does 😌
Post Reply