Heh, no worries, but yes, that is of course what I did, otherwise I wouldn't have known at what point the crackles appear (which after all is the word I used)Machinesworking wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2019 4:16 amOK so please take this as healthy criticism, to failure is the coin of phrase, but what you want to do is take the CPU to failure and reduce plug ins until you get no crackles or other audio artifacts in your signal at all!
Still, what this established is that the difference isn't that huge. I'm seeing 4-5% when using a conservative buffer, and 10-11% when using a short(ish) buffer. (And indeed what also follows from this is, having pushed any real-world project to a "crackles appear here" point in an earlier version, just loading that same project in Live 10 snaps crackles and pops markedly much more, off the bat, and it needs to be scaled down somewhat.)
Again, no worries. It is what it is, and it isn't terrible. Progress is progress and all that, so naturally it would still be great if a new version of Live implemented techniques that actually brought CPU use down in a comparable production situation, not up (a dedicated "production mode" with buffering schemes under the hood that specifically target production/studio use, and so on; a mode that [jur] also mentioned as his personal wish for the future back there.)