Logic Pro X is out.

[realtrance]

It is a conservative upgrade, given the time, for sure.

Perhaps the main focus was on getting stable 64-bit development, that's not trivial.

Anyways, I'm fine with it as a traditional DAW for Apple-based computers (like SONAR X2 is for Windows PCs).

I don't think, though, that either will ever compete with either Ableton or Native Instruments for real-time, performance-oriented editing, that's for sure; totally different beasts, despite all the included content and gestures in that direction.

I still wish Emagic would update Sounddiver.......

[Machinesworking]

A review done by a user who isn't paid from a media.
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 06#5420806

Good read thanks.

Theo has changed his mind now. Because he's not a paid media spokesman or a bitter PC user he's allowed to do that!

The sluggishness has been fixed. I am really digging it now, I've warmed to it very much.

[dazzer]

A review done by a user who isn't paid from a media.
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 06#5420806

Good read thanks.

Theo has changed his mind now. Because he's not a paid media spokesman or a bitter PC user he's allowed to do that!

The sluggishness has been fixed. I am really digging it now, I've warmed to it very much.

Theo changed his mind? That's a first no?

[timothyallan]

Since I regularly get to the end of a project in Live and get sputtering audio because of CPU usage, this is the biggest reason I use Logic:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... 426&type=1#

I've done a CPU stress test between Logic X and Live 9.05 and posted the results.

[Adonis]

BIte the bullet - not a bad update

[beats me]

BIte the bullet - not a bad update

Just wanted to say I was having a Logic problem earlier and the Google search brought up a Logic forum thread you were in. (obviously from an older version)

[puzzlefactory]

Since I regularly get to the end of a project in Live and get sputtering audio because of CPU usage, this is the biggest reason I use Logic:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... 426&type=1#

I've done a CPU stress test between Logic X and Live 9.05 and posted the results.

WOW! I think this post alone has just convinced me to get Logic X.

[kenporter]

Since I regularly get to the end of a project in Live and get sputtering audio because of CPU usage, this is the biggest reason I use Logic:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... 426&type=1#

I've done a CPU stress test between Logic X and Live 9.05 and posted the results.

Live craps out much sooner than a lot of other DAWs. I get pops and clicks around 60% or so in Live compared to Logic for example. This being said, I don't think your test was fair to Live since Logic switches its playback latency, i.e. I think it switches to 1024 samples or something like that while Live runs at 128 samples. I would be curious to know how they would both compare at 1024 samples. I still think you'll be able to run more in Logic since it craps out at a higher CPU, but I don't think you would see that drastic of a difference.

Btw, what synth were you running that only gave you 8 instances on a 12 core MacPro? That's insane!

Ken

[timothyallan]

Since I regularly get to the end of a project in Live and get sputtering audio because of CPU usage, this is the biggest reason I use Logic:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... 426&type=1#

I've done a CPU stress test between Logic X and Live 9.05 and posted the results.

Live craps out much sooner than a lot of other DAWs. I get pops and clicks around 60% or so in Live compared to Logic for example. This being said, I don't think your test was fair to Live since Logic switches its playback latency, i.e. I think it switches to 1024 samples or something like that while Live runs at 128 samples. I would be curious to know how they would both compare at 1024 samples. I still think you'll be able to run more in Logic since it craps out at a higher CPU, but I don't think you would see that drastic of a difference.

Btw, what synth were you running that only gave you 8 instances on a 12 core MacPro? That's insane!

Ken

Nope, Logic was set at 128, and stays at 128 AFAIK. I've been using Logic for years and have never read anything like that? Any latency switching would bugger up plugins and cause reloads, especially with my UAD ones which need a set buffer. Where did you read that it switches buffers for playback?

I'll do the 1024 ASAP. I think it'll be just as bad



Edit: Just did it at 1024: Interesting!! 23 instances in Live and 36 in Logic. So Logic still outperforms Live by 36%... which is substantial. It's a lot less than the 74% gain you get when working at a 128 buffer though. The main issue with big buffer sizes is that there's not a lot of latency when playing live or recording midi in at 128, where there is way too much at 1024. Depends how you work I guess.

Either way, both DAW's compliment each other nicely, and it's still very easy to create fantastic music using either of them.

[kenporter]

Nope, Logic was set at 128, and stays at 128 AFAIK. I've been using Logic for years and have never read anything like that? Any latency switching would bugger up plugins and cause reloads, especially with my UAD ones which need a set buffer. Where did you read that it switches buffers for playback?

I'll do the 1024 ASAP. I think it'll be just as bad

Hmm, I may be wrong then, wouldn't be the first time.

That's what I was always told in regards to Logic and thought that was the difference between the I/O Buffer setting and the Process Buffer Range setting in Logic. I'd be very curious to see your results at 1024. If they both run at 128 samples during playback then yeah wow what a performance difference! What synth is this?

Ken

[timothyallan]

I edited my post above with the 1024 results... The Synth is the beta of Spire.


Edit: I'm off to check out the buffer switching rumor, Logic is def. doing something at lower buffer settings. However, if I change the buffer setting manually, Logic has to restart all of core audio, so I'm almost positive Logic wouldn't be switching buffer settings on playback... but it's doing something

[kenporter]

I edited my post above with the 1024 results... The Synth is the beta of Spire.

Yeah seeing those new test results is totally believable as to what I am seeing too. As mentioned my computer craps out at about 60% or so with Live where it can go to the high 80% with Logic, sometimes even a bit more.

This being said, seeing these results do make me think that Logic is playing back things at a different latency regardless of your I/O buffer setting. The UAD would work fine since Logic would still know the correct latency compensation, for all plugins. The I/O buffer setting would take effect for everything you monitor, I.e. you're playing a softsynth. All the other tracks that are playing back though would be at 1024 samples. I will need to see if I can find something about this, or better the difference between the I/O setting and the process buffer range setting in Logic.

Anyway, sounds like a beat of a synth.

I totally agree with you, both are awesome programs and whatever it takes to make good music or any music. I wish Live wasn't crashing so much on me though...different topic.

Ken

[timothyallan]

Yeah, like I said, it's doing 'something'! Can't find anything concrete except for general consumer Apple talk:

"The Process Buffer Range: setting determines how large a buffer Logic sets aside for its mixing engine. As with the I/O Buffer Size, smaller settings decrease latency, but increase CPU load. The default setting of Medium is usually fine, but if you experience frequent System Overloads, then try setting it to Large."

So there's a mixing buffer, and i/o buffer.

Well, if Apple won't give specifics... I'll find them out I have a neato utility which let's me see what my UAD plugins are running at as far as a buffer latency. If I use a 128 buffer in Logic, I can still see that the UAD plugs are running at 1088 samples. Changing the i/o buffer in logic has no effect on the plugins... however, changing the process buffer range does indeed change it. Setting it to large increases the buffer to a whopping 2112 samples.

So yes, Logic maintains a pseudo-hidden mixing buffer, but no, it doesn't change it on playback, it's always there.

Now we've all learned something today!

[fishmonkey]

Edit: Just did it at 1024: Interesting!! 23 instances in Live and 36 in Logic. So Logic still outperforms Live by 36%... which is substantial. It's a lot less than the 74% gain you get when working at a 128 buffer though. The main issue with big buffer sizes is that there's not a lot of latency when playing live or recording midi in at 128, where there is way too much at 1024. Depends how you work I guess.

which makes sense...

when you press play in Logic, it knows where to start from and what comes next, therefore it is free to calculate audio samples in advance, no matter how small the actual audio buffer is. if you change the start position or edit your audio in Logic, it can stop, pause while it pre-calculates audio in advance, and then start playback.

Live on the other hand is programmed to enable changes to your audio in real-time, without pausing playback. it can't reliably pre-calculate far off into the future because it doesn't know where the future will go.

[timothyallan]

Live 10 better know the future.