Computer Resources

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Computer Resources

John M
This post has NOT been accepted by the mailing list yet.
First things first: the more I use jOrgan the more impressed I am at how well designed it is. It's easy enough to learn to use it quickly.  Yet it's deep enough that the more one digs into it the more it will do.

I use an i3 PC with 12 gig of memory running Windows 10 and an external soundcard with 18 channels.  

I notice that with a large instrument and a large registration, it's possible to overload the processor. (I'm sure it's the processor and not a lack of memory and not buffers set too small.)

My question is this: What part of the program demands the most from the processor?  Would removing reverb decrease demands?  When it overloads notes "hang" until the processor catches up. Would changing the processor to an i7 solve the problem?

Thank you for any advice you can offer.

John M
John Maher
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Computer Resources

John Reimer
Administrator
John M wrote
> I notice that with a large instrument and a large registration, it's
> possible to overload the processor. (I'm sure it's the processor and not a
> lack of memory and not buffers set too small.)
>
> My question is this: What part of the program demands the most from the
> processor?  Would removing reverb decrease demands?  When it overloads
> notes "hang" until the processor catches up. Would changing the processor
> to an i7 solve the problem?

This post did receive answers from three people: Aaron Laws, Graham Goode
and Marc-Paul, but the answers failed to make it into the Nabble Archive
because of the troubles we were experiencing at the time. If those three are
agreeable, I am happy to make up a composite answer and post it to this
thread.

I haven't noticed any further post from John M. John, did you send one?

John Reimer




--
Sent from: http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/jOrgan-User-f999863.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Computer Resources

jOrgan - User mailing list
Happy to help any way I can...
Cheers
Marc-Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: John Reimer [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 12:26 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [jOrgan-user] Computer Resources

John M wrote
> I notice that with a large instrument and a large registration, it's
> possible to overload the processor. (I'm sure it's the processor and not a
> lack of memory and not buffers set too small.)
>
> My question is this: What part of the program demands the most from the
> processor?  Would removing reverb decrease demands?  When it overloads
> notes "hang" until the processor catches up. Would changing the processor
> to an i7 solve the problem?

This post did receive answers from three people: Aaron Laws, Graham Goode
and Marc-Paul, but the answers failed to make it into the Nabble Archive
because of the troubles we were experiencing at the time. If those three are
agreeable, I am happy to make up a composite answer and post it to this
thread.

I haven't noticed any further post from John M. John, did you send one?

John Reimer




--
Sent from: http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/jOrgan-User-f999863.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Computer Resources

John Reimer
Administrator
In reply to this post by John M
John M wrote
> Thank you for any advice you can offer.

My recent reply to this post obviously made it into the mailing list, but
not into the Nabble archive, judging by Marc-Paul's post above. I think in
this case it was due to a SourceForge outage of quite some hours about
midweek. Three replies were sent to this post, but failed to get into the
Nabble archive because of the problems at the time. Here is the text of
those replies:

From Aaron Laws:
"I would expect that the first thing to overload the processor would be
fluidsynth and sound processing (and any resampling that needs done). But
you're saying the notes hang (continue to sound) until the program catches
up. Presumably "the program catches up" means that it gets around to sending
note off events which I would think is the "easy" part. How many cores do
you have and how busy are they when you put load on the application?

Yes, a better processor would almost certainly help.

In Christ,
Aaron Laws”

From Graham Goode:
"Hi John,

Yes, Fluidsynth Reverb and Chorus are CPU heavy. However, there are a couple
of things to check in addition to disabling the reverb...

What audio driver are you using? If Dsound then you're going through the
Windows sound layer (which adds cpu cycles). Using the PortAudio WASAPI /
WDM-KS or ASIO drivers would eliminate those.

What is the polyphony setting of the Fluidsynth element in question?
Increasing that could help as well....

Have you checked on your CPU usage using Task Manager while playing and
running into this issue to double check that is in CPU and not another
bottleneck?

Kind regards,
GrahamG”

From Marc-Paul:
"The i3 is two cores and two virtual cores = 4 showing.  The i5 is 4 cores.
The i7 is 4 cores and 4 virtual cores.

I would examine the usb interface (I am assuming external = usb) and how it
is configured.  If it's firewire get a pcie firewire interface if the 1394
is not part of the motherboard interface... we are talking about the speed
of the interface.

Use the gadget "All cpu meter" to look at the cpu during load.

This is how I would begin to troubleshoot an issue like this.

I think it would be helpful to know what the sound card is.
Cheers
Marc-Paul”  

John M,

I don’t recall seeing any response from you. Did you send one?

John Reimer




--
Sent from: http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/jOrgan-User-f999863.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Computer Resources

John M
Thank you all for your concern at my lack of reply.  I have been away for
several weeks, and the answers told me to be sure that it was my processor
that was overloading.  

Perhaps all of my initial post didn't make it onto the forum, where I stated
I was sure it was my processor.  I *have* a meter that tells me how much
memory is used and how much of the processor is used.

The external USB sound card I use is a Cymatic Audio LP-16.  It gives 16
channels of output (18 when using the headphone jack).  I divide the sound
fonts into pieces and am satisfied that the realism increases significantly.
I use a PC laptop with an i3 processor and 12 Gig of RAM.  The computer will
accept an i7 processor, so I was considering buying a new chip.  I won't
have to purchase an entirely new machine.  

Anyway, the processor overloads on only the largest registrations with sub
and super couplers, so I don't use those sorts of things in public.  

I don't use the reverb because it's already a public place, and that doesn't
sound natural to me.  That was why I considered removing the reverb
altogether.  

I have also removed the transposer.  While it can be useful on many
occasions, I very much prefer to play what I don't see (transpose in my
head), than to hear what I'm not playing (play a C and hear an E).  It's
probably just one of my quirks.  No, I don't have perfect pitch.  

All of this is to say that I'm SURE it's my processor that overloads; what
part(s) of the program can I remove to reduce demands on the processor?  It
can idle at 5% or so until I load an organ and it jumps to between 70% and
90% usage.  I don't examine the meter while I'm playing unless it's a
practice session and the sound gets stuck playing.  I wouldn't exactly call
it a cipher, but it resembles that more than anything else.

Thank you for your kind replies.

Regards,


John M





-----
John Maher

--
Sent from: http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/jOrgan-User-f999863.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user
John Maher
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Computer Resources

John Reimer
Administrator
This post was updated on .
John M wrote
> what part(s) of the program can I remove to reduce demands on the
> processor?  It
> can idle at 5% or so until I load an organ and it jumps to between 70% and
> 90% usage.

John M,

Does it happen with each and every disposition you load?
Does it happen when you try it without the soundcard but with a standard
disposition/soundfont?

Also, GrahamG suggested that the Fluidsynth reverb can be fairly CPU
intensive. I haven't noticed this, but I suspect that if it is, then the
Fluidsynth reverb elements should probably be removed rather than merely set
the level to "0". I assume that you have 8 instances of Fluidsynth (or
certainly quite a number). In this case the reverb elements could well be
making a significant difference.

John Reimer




--
Sent from: http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/jOrgan-User-f999863.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
jOrgan-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Computer Resources

John M
John Reimer,

Thank you for the logical suggestion to load other dispositions.  I
typically use one I've assembled from various sound fonts, including Organ
Toolkit.  I also "doctor" them up by separating each rank into its own sound
font.
 
That allows some flexibility that is not otherwise available if I extend the
ranges, remove some of the attenuation (though doing it evenly), sometimes
normalizing the volume of the samples, and rarely, but occasionally
adjusting attack and release if the sounds need to be adjusted IMHO.  Since
I have an array of amplifiers and speakers that are not uniform, I tend to
get better results by adjusting levels by rank volume or gain on the sound
font.

So, to load another disposition that already had separate sound fonts, I
tried using the theater organ that was set up that way.  I also used one of
the French instruments that was in stereo, sending each of the six instances
of Fluidsynth to separate outputs.  Neither of these instruments used as
much processor power as the disposition I use, but neither are they quite as
large.  However, since loading them "my" disposition is using less of the
processor.  Maybe I just had had too many things running in the background.  

By the way, I use the ds driver and the (Fluidsynth?) audio back end.  It is
easy to adjust and is compatible with my sound "card" device.  

If you tell me that a different audio back end sounds better and is likely
to be compatible with my sound card, I'll change it.  IF it's convenient,
I'd like a link to how to make those changes.  I've tried it a few years ago
with multiple sound cards and it didn't work, so I forgot about it.  I've
not tried it with this single device that has multiple outputs.  

I appreciate your interest and help.  I'm not desperate for answers for a
service tomorrow or next week, but if this is an adjustment that will
improve the results, I'll dig into it.

Thank you for your consistently kind and patient notes.

Best regards,


John M



-----
John Maher

--
Sent from: http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/jOrgan-User-f999863.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
jOrgan-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-user
John Maher