Hi,
I have a 400 Mghz G4 (that might be the reason) but I use 2 Live reverb effect , playing a total of 5 samples and the CPU gets into the 75s.
That's pretty scary. Or is Live Reverb plugin ressource intensive.
Will a TBook 800 Mghz solve the issue?
I read Live does not support AltiVec yet?
Wondering why?
Live 2.0 (OS X 10.2.6) CPU maxing out
i think a pc might solve your problems.
not trying to be funny. i have an 800mhz tibook... i'm planning on going to observe some thinkpad's tomorrow... just bought reaktor 4 today... can't load the most exciting ensemble in the bunch... processor overload!
sad to admit it, but i think for portable power, apple's lost it. i've only used macs, and will only use macs to design on. at home, all i want to do is play music. my processor just isn't living up to expectations.
not trying to be funny. i have an 800mhz tibook... i'm planning on going to observe some thinkpad's tomorrow... just bought reaktor 4 today... can't load the most exciting ensemble in the bunch... processor overload!
sad to admit it, but i think for portable power, apple's lost it. i've only used macs, and will only use macs to design on. at home, all i want to do is play music. my processor just isn't living up to expectations.
-
evs
ibook better than power book for ableton
i´ve tested ableton live on a ibook800 with 128(!)mb ram against my g4 733 with 1 gb ram and against a powerbook 12" an 15" 867, both with 256mb ram... and guess what, the ibook wins!
maybe ableton is g3 optimized?;-)
and theres another reason for this problem you got: live isn´t programmed very good for mac... there are other programms which shows that the mac isn´t so much slower than a pc.. look at logic.
maybe ableton is g3 optimized?;-)
and theres another reason for this problem you got: live isn´t programmed very good for mac... there are other programms which shows that the mac isn´t so much slower than a pc.. look at logic.
Yes the reverb is a CPU hog. But what's more alarming is that Live seems to be less CPU hungry under MacOs 9.2 than with OSX 10.2.5 !! OsX was supposed to be the killer system for audio apps but it seems there's still a long way to go. Please Ableton, give us more consistent results as I can't buy a PC just to run Live !!!! 
-
Guest
Os X was touted as the "future killer platform for audio", but not because it would allow you to run more plugins than ever before. We're finally getting into open water and there are a slew of major audio apps and plugins for Os X being released daily. Os X was touted as THE platform because of the architecture under the hood. See here for more: some Apple Os X audio developer notes.
Quickie answer why Os 9 seemed more powerful at times:
- when an Os 9 application was front-most, it would appropriate almost all of the resources of that machine. This was great for some things, really cr@ppy for other things. On the other hand, os X shares resources between all applications, including CPU and memory. This is great for some things and really cr@ppy for other things.
It's most noticable with real-time processes, for example, and people have been complaining about this fact since day one.
Overall, I believe we're all benefitting from the migration to Os X. However, old beliefs/work-styles/habits die hard and it will take some adjustment until everyone accepts this new platform. In my opinion, the benefits outweigh the negative consequences, but people have to change their attitudes before this fact fully sinks in.
My answer to this dilemma? Get craftier.
Maximize your efforts and work this stuff as you are able. You can still produce fantastic/crazy-mad/brilliant/booty-shaking/space-age/intimate/soulful/put-your-adjective-here music and sound.
Enjoy not crashing your entire system as often, enjoy running a web server to push your work out over the internet, enjoy burning a CD in the background while working with your audio application in the foreground, enjoy opening ALL the tools in your audio toolkit and bouncing between them seamlessly to work your audio.
Enjoy the platform and make you music heard!
Best,
Logicat
Quickie answer why Os 9 seemed more powerful at times:
- when an Os 9 application was front-most, it would appropriate almost all of the resources of that machine. This was great for some things, really cr@ppy for other things. On the other hand, os X shares resources between all applications, including CPU and memory. This is great for some things and really cr@ppy for other things.
It's most noticable with real-time processes, for example, and people have been complaining about this fact since day one.
Overall, I believe we're all benefitting from the migration to Os X. However, old beliefs/work-styles/habits die hard and it will take some adjustment until everyone accepts this new platform. In my opinion, the benefits outweigh the negative consequences, but people have to change their attitudes before this fact fully sinks in.
My answer to this dilemma? Get craftier.
Maximize your efforts and work this stuff as you are able. You can still produce fantastic/crazy-mad/brilliant/booty-shaking/space-age/intimate/soulful/put-your-adjective-here music and sound.
Enjoy not crashing your entire system as often, enjoy running a web server to push your work out over the internet, enjoy burning a CD in the background while working with your audio application in the foreground, enjoy opening ALL the tools in your audio toolkit and bouncing between them seamlessly to work your audio.
Enjoy the platform and make you music heard!
Best,
Logicat
so i use OS 9 and everything is fine.CPU Toilet
I don't think its OSX, although Aqua will feel sluggish at times on OSX, the actual OS itself runs circles around 9 for stability and speed.
Live is the only app in my audio collection that ever behaves like this. I can even have Cubase SX & Reason wired together and don't see the drain that crops up with Live alone.
iBook 900magahurts my 640ramajamma
Live is the only app in my audio collection that ever behaves like this. I can even have Cubase SX & Reason wired together and don't see the drain that crops up with Live alone.
iBook 900magahurts my 640ramajamma
-
Alex Reynolds
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2002 5:48 am
- Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Contact:
When you open the OS X supplied CPU monitor, you will see that Live is using a lot of CPU cycles when just idling. On my 800MHz iBook/10.2.6, Live 1.5.3 is around 40%-50% when doing nothing, and I can hardly use a single instance of reverb. In OS 9, it's a lot better. I can use multiple reverbs without any problems.
Since this also happens when chosing no output device, it can hardly be the overhead from CoreAudio. I suppose Live in OS X is doing something wrong in the idle/message loop, or it's using some Carbon functions that perform very very poorly in OS X. Maybe Version 2.0 is better, I haven't bought the upgrade yet.
For now, I'll stick with OS 9, especially since most of my other audio software doesn't exist for OS X either.
(Ableton, hire me and I'll do a profiling, along with adding support for AudioUnit plugins
)
Since this also happens when chosing no output device, it can hardly be the overhead from CoreAudio. I suppose Live in OS X is doing something wrong in the idle/message loop, or it's using some Carbon functions that perform very very poorly in OS X. Maybe Version 2.0 is better, I haven't bought the upgrade yet.
For now, I'll stick with OS 9, especially since most of my other audio software doesn't exist for OS X either.
(Ableton, hire me and I'll do a profiling, along with adding support for AudioUnit plugins
)