clicks and pops with EQ window open

Hey all;

I’m having some trouble with nTrack 4.0.4. While I’m playing back any tracks, the playback speed varies and I get clicks and pops if I open up the EQ (from the channel) window. As soon as I close it, the playback is back to normal.

Any ideas?

Thanks

The EQ spectrum display is very processor intensive. You can have the EQ but hide the display. There are options there somewhere. One thing is make the FFT “window” size smaller. That’ll save a few ticks.

D

So do others have the same problem?

That fixed it for me tho Dio - thanks for the help. I just clicked off the tuner and output frequency display and it’s working fine now.

THanks

here are a few things that stop you -

the make and speed of your processor -
the speed of the FSB (front serial bus) -
is DMA (direct memory saccess) set for hard drive(s)-
the RPM (speed) of the hard drive(s)-
type of soundcard and drivers used -

are you using a laptop ? then unless specialy prepared or costs over say
£800 then it will be limited -

if you are using an OFFICE SPEC PC then same -

examples -

PC - 792meg Celeron processor, with DMA on 7500rpm drives, 500meg fsb WIN ME = 3 tracks max -
PC - 932meg P111 processor dma on 7500rpm hard drives 800meg fsb WIN 2K = 8 tracks

PC - 2gig P111 DMA on 7500rpm drives 800meg fsb WIN 2K 24in 24out ADAT optical soundcard = 80 tracks and still CPU use to spare - ADAT card put no load o the PC at all -

ram is not important to N - but plugins eat up ram -

every plugin used is just the same as running another program while N is running - so every plugin eats away at your CPU use - less plugs faster N works -

Dr J

Quote: (DR Jackrabbit @ Sep. 04 2007, 1:31 PM)

if you are using an OFFICE SPEC PC then same -

examples -

PC - 792meg Celeron processor, with DMA on 7500rpm drives, 500meg fsb WIN ME = 3 tracks max -
PC - 932meg P111 processor dma on 7500rpm hard drives 800meg fsb WIN 2K = 8 tracks

PC - 2gig P111 DMA on 7500rpm drives 800meg fsb WIN 2K 24in 24out ADAT optical soundcard = 80 tracks and still CPU use to spare - ADAT card put no load o the PC at all -

Dr J makes a good point but I think the first two examples are a little pessimistic and I wouldn't want anyone to give up thinking that their PC is inadequate.

Of course it's dependent on the sampling rate and bit depth etc but I, like many others here I'm sure, have previously recorded and mixed many more tracks, with plugins, on machines with as tiny as PII 350Mhz CPUS. It's all about optimisation. My PII 350 was running 98 Lite with all sorts of optimisations but it worked!
Quote:

Of course it's dependent on the sampling rate and bit depth etc but I, like many others here I'm sure, have previously recorded and mixed many more tracks, with plugins, on machines with as tiny as PII 350Mhz CPUS.
It's all about optimisation.
My PII 350 was running 98 Lite with all sorts of optimisations but it worked!

You are absolutely right.
If you're unable to play back more than 3 tracks on a 800 MHz Celeron machine, something else must be very wrong.

I ran nTrack on old machine, Win 98SE Celeron 600, 15 tracks with plug-ins! The secret being to stop playback before making any adjustments, such as opening eq windows and other plugs. There used to be a link for optimizing your OS somewhere on the nTrack site.

Yaz
:)

Edit, heres the link for Win 9x.

http://www.ntrack.com/links.shtm

Ya, I wouldn’t think it should be a processor issue. I’m running an Athlon 1333 with 768M RAM. I’ve had well over 30 tracks with plugins running before without much trouble. This EQ thing has been a recent development, which is why I posted, but I bet I didn’t have the tuner or spectrum display on before.

You’re right about the 800MHz Celeron, too. I had a PII 250 before this and got way more than 3 tracks.
Thanks

I remember the old n-Track 3.3 days when I would pull 10-12 tracks of 24/44.1 .wav audio exported out of my Tascam 788 Portastudio and mix/master them on a PII 450. I used mostly freebie VST plugins and n’s built-in plugs but I could get it done. Having said that though, in the post .NET days, I can’t get much of anything going well in the latest version of n without freezing every other track to get rid of clicks and pops by freeing up resources. sigh

D

Quote:

Having said that though, in the post .NET days, I can't get much of anything going well in the latest version of n without freezing every other track to get rid of clicks and pops by freeing up resources.


That's why I'm still using v4 - pre .NET. I couldnt get anything after the .NET update to work with and reasonable amount of stability.

My Celeron PC ran much better with V3 on 98se - nut so good on V4 (pre and post .net) - and is now on V5 - so ? - its the 500meg FSB that makes ut so slow also it was not new when i aquired it, so it must be 8/9 yesrs old and WIN ME runs at 70% cpu on its own - theres nothing nasty going on inside - i was going to get a new drive and drop it back to 98SE but i think that i will stick with ME (it has a strange kind of charm like a Ford Edsell) as for upping it forget it, it would grind to a halt on Win 2K or XP without lashings of ram -

it is no good hiding the fact from anybody IF THEIR PC/LAPTOP ISNT UPTO IT then they should know - people walk away from recording blaming the software for being crap, that generally is not so its their equipment that is crap, thats how i see it -

feed your head (look above my avatar)

I wonder if it might be an IRQ assignment of hardware installed on the main board’s buss… ?? Some hardware can share IRQs while others can’t tolerate this… Especially Graphics cards and Audio cards… They can’t share IRQs…

It’s best to have all your RAM on one stick… Multi sticks of RAM behave differently and not as well, with audio… When operating plugs…

Streaming audio files from other hard drives is better than streaming audio files from the “C” Drive… AND even better … streaming audio files from another computer through a LAN…

Bill…

I just built a dual core pc with 3GB 667 RAM using Striped 10K Raptor drives for the audio and easily crapped out my system with 22 tracks and some plugins. I expected my PC to be able to handle a lot more but even with no plugins going I was running like 40% CPU. I have to look at it a bit and see what the heck is wrong. When I went to mixdown my track, my volume envelopes are all late too. Needless to say I’m a little frustrated.

Quote:

When I went to mixdown my track, my volume envelopes are all late too.

This is a bug that's been in n-Tracks for a really long time. Wave data and other stuff has compensation for plug-ins and whatever else needs compensation. Volume envelopes seem to be post compensation, so they are not compensated which throws them out of sync.

Of course there could be other reasons, but this was my observation a while back. I could cause the volume envelopes to be out of sync differently by placing a copy of SIR in any tracks insert.

On the same hand (well...it's NOT on the other hand) this is similar to and related to why SIR doesn't do very well when used in an AUX return. The returns don't port the necessary compensation back to the tracks. When things are just right it's possible to have the effect from SIR actually be audible before the tracks being sent to it. Can you say funky?

well that sucks. I don’t recall this being an issue but honestly it’s been a while since I mixed a song down. They’re almost right. I may have to go in and manually boost the volume in the spots where it was too quiet. Is Flavio aware of this trouble?

He was aware at one time, but that was a long time ago. I don’t know that he’s every looked at it, and it’s not THAT bad since there are easy, though frustrating, workarounds.

They wouldn’t be off by much unless there’s an effect in use that has a lot of latency, or a lot of effect so the latency adds up. I don’t usually notice it at all, but it became obvious when I was using an older version of SIR (16k sample fixed latency) and I was trying to manually gate something with the volume curve. The SIR in AUX thing was about the same time.