live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
josquin2000
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:24 pm
Location: Deep in 'it'.

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by josquin2000 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:44 pm

> Why did everything work flawlessly in Live 8 then? My drivers didnt change. Neither did my equipment or my pc. Only Live did.

Yes,
see "it is a version X.01? the net-wisdom involving these is ancient and deep..."

yes, it is problem! a problem they did not encounter with their testing. The Horrors!
Never seen this before!!

But they are more likely to address such an issue if reported in a helpful way, with a full bug report during testing (they automated the process),
or at least with as much USEFUL information as possible, to help isolate and 'triage' the error.

Oh, and has anyone considered that this may be related to indexing on their system? if Live is busy in the background
trying to index your 300 gig collection of samplepacks ... this could explain loss of cycles, :)? just thinking...
so this may be related to the indexing of the new browser: if you can, try leaving Live open for a few days, ;-), does it 'speed up'?
did for me...seriously! (I have 450 gig of samples, only about 25 gig are used all the time)

Man people really can sound aggressive and grating when reporting of errors in new software:
I am sure no one wants such, but the issues of releasing software
in a world where you have n0 control on the environment make testing and verification so very difficult.
Not long ago , many software providers would choose one platform or the other to service, to lessen the size of these issues.

thus: beta programs.
oh, well, i am sure that these are issues for the dev staff. believe it or not.
g'luck,
J2K

PS: i like Live9 so far: and it is much more stable with Max4Live, so my greatest needs are met, so f***in ignore my happy A**!

Patso
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:08 pm

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by Patso » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:38 am

Live 9.0.1 64bit running like a dog comparing to Live 8.4 32bit on my MBP (OS X 10.8.3, 2.2GHz i7, 16GB RAM).

Checked with Live 8 projects with bridged (jBridgeM 0.76b) plugins as well as with 64bit plugins only (Dune, Massive, FM8, iZotope, Omnisphere, Voxengo). All plugins used in reasonable instance numbers, optimised sidechain (return) and returns, quality normal on 44100 and external interface.

Live 8 32bit still performs better than Live 9 64bit version on same device.

szeno
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:33 am

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by szeno » Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:26 am

I'm running Live 9 and notice my CPU is being used up much faster compared to Live 8.

Tried opening an older project I started on Live 8. Bam, CPU usage off the roof, above 200%, and not a sound. This never happened in my Live 8 before.

I've been scouring all morning looking for solutions to this!

tom.luft
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by tom.luft » Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:57 am

szeno wrote:I'm running Live 9 and notice my CPU is being used up much faster compared to Live 8.

Tried opening an older project I started on Live 8. Bam, CPU usage off the roof, above 200%, and not a sound. This never happened in my Live 8 before.

I've been scouring all morning looking for solutions to this!

Same here.
Live 9.1.7 64bit, NI Komplete 8 Ultimate, Addictive Drums 2
Scarlett 18i8
M-Audio Keystation 61es, Launchpad, Behringer BCF2000
AMD Phenom II X6, 8 GB RAM, Win 8.1 Pro 64bit
http://tomluft.at

monks
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2013 10:21 pm

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by monks » Mon Dec 23, 2013 8:39 pm

Live 9.1 is definitely more unstable than 8. Compare no crashes in 3 months with 8. 3 crashes in 4 days with 9.1 with absolutely no stress put on it- less than 10% cpu load. It crashed twice when I wasn't even at the computer and it was just sat there. And the irony is, my version 8 was a crack (sorry but I had to evaluate it). We're intending using it for live gigs....and now I'm over £400 lighter.
I'm not at all happy with the outcome. I'm not condoning it but this is often why people use cracks. Now, can we risk using this live??...or is this money down the drain?

I'm in the process of trying it out on my laptop which is the machine we'll be using in gigs. I hope it's more stable on that. We have high hopes for using Ableton in out Live set so forgive me if I seem angry!

System Win 7 64, Quad i7, 32 GB RAM.

monks
Last edited by monks on Mon Dec 23, 2013 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

re:dream
Posts: 4559
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:42 am
Location: Hoerikwaggo's sunset side...
Contact:

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by re:dream » Mon Dec 23, 2013 9:25 pm

monks wrote:sorry but I had to evaluate it
:lol: :roll:

monks
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2013 10:21 pm

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by monks » Mon Dec 23, 2013 9:47 pm

:oops: ...:-D
No way should live be bumming out like that on what is to all intents and purposes, a workstation. I only hope the laptop proves more stable. No way we're looking t**** on stage. We don't need Ableton to do that :lol:

monks

H20nly
Posts: 15844
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: The Wild West

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by H20nly » Mon Dec 23, 2013 10:41 pm

i installed Live 8.0 so that i could test and reply to this thread.

i found Live 9.1 to be much faster and much more stable.

hope this helps.
H

eyeknow
Posts: 5822
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:16 am

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by eyeknow » Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:45 am

:lol:

Actually, if it wasn't for the fact that it's "new" and "improved" I like 8 more. On this new computer it was just easier to install 9.1/packs and be done. Too complicated to do 8 + 9 and the different packs. 9.1 seems as on the old computer to run just fine (but they BORKED packs in 9! )

Khazul
Posts: 3185
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reading, UK

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by Khazul » Tue Dec 24, 2013 8:27 am

With the 32 bt version, I find L9 to be generlly much more stable. As for faster, Im not sure. It certainly desnt seem noticeably slower.

The 64 bit version however when using 32 bit plugin does seem to be more CPU heavy, but that is to be expected with the bridging. As for 64 bit L9 vs 32 bit L8 - no idea as I dont have a project to compared that can use all 64 bit plugins.

The biggest L9 improvement for me however is getting dual screen support at last.
Nothing to see here - move along!

Captain Johnson
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 12:03 am
Location: Liverpool
Contact:

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by Captain Johnson » Tue Dec 24, 2013 10:21 am

H20nly wrote:i installed Live 8.0 so that i could test and reply to this thread.

i found Live 9.1 to be much faster and much more stable.

hope this helps.
H
What system specs you got? 32-bit or 64-bit live?
Also wasn't live 8.0 a really screwed version? haha!

H20nly
Posts: 15844
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: The Wild West

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by H20nly » Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:29 pm

i have 20 GBs of RAM so i run 64 bit.

and yeah... i was kinda kidding about 8.0... kinda, because 9.1 kicks its fucking ass.

SpeedKing
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:51 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: live 9: speed and stability versus live 8

Post by SpeedKing » Thu Dec 26, 2013 11:30 pm

Since this thread got resurrected, I'll chime in. 9 and 9.1 are very stable. I've probably had 3 or 4 crashes in the last year with 9 / 9.1 versus 1 crash for ever 2 uses for Live 8. Projects take a lot longer to load in Live 9 than they ever did, but with my i7/16GB RAM new computer, it still only takes like 7-10 seconds max for new projects.

But yeah, everything else is faster, better and more stable.

Post Reply