15 DSP's enough?

Jan Nolte · Post by **Jan Nolte** » Wed May 07, 2003 6:32 am

Hi!

I want to buy a Powerpulsar with 15 DSP's and sell my Pulsar 1 . I also consider if I should sell my Pulsar 2 Card. What do you think? Are the 15 DSPs of the Powerpulsar enough to produce whole songs with the Software or should I keep the Pulsar 2 with the 6 DSPs? I do all with the software, I haven't any other hardware (no synth, no mixer), so I guess I need more memory. On the other side, even the Scope Card has only 15 DSP's. Maybe thats all we need ?

Bye,

Jan

FrancisHarmany · Post by **FrancisHarmany** » Wed May 07, 2003 6:53 am

Hi Jan,

I have 3 creamware cards, 14 DSPs. And I could use some more! :]

I think if you produce step by step, so you make projects for recording, mastering, synths & sequencing, then 15 is a pretty ok number! I would love more tho!

spoimala · Post by **spoimala** » Wed May 07, 2003 7:50 am

It depends fully on what you wanna do with the dsp. If you plan to make heavy use of modulars (and other hungry synths), and at the same time do intensive fx processing, even 30 wouldn't be too much

If you're mostly using SFP to mixing and mastering recorded wav tracks, 15will surely be more than enough.

Anyway, I would spare the other card and buy new one with different i/o option, I'd love to have both classic and Plus i/o in my system.

Jan Nolte · Post by **Jan Nolte** » Wed May 07, 2003 8:21 am

Hi!
Thanx for answering.

Well, I haven't used the synths so far, coz they needed too much memory.
At the moment, I use two STS3000 Sampler, six small mixer (who needs the big mixers??) and some plugins for pre-mastering (like Optimaster and PsyQ). But I want to use a third sampler and also some more effects per soundsample, so that I reached the capatity of my 10 DSPs now.
I'm a newbie in music producing, so I don't want to do it step by step in several projects, 'coz if I make a mistake in the first steps, it would be complicated to find the problem. All steps in one project is easier and I would learn the functions of all the devices faster.

So I guess, I will keep the Pulsar 2 ( I need more MONEY!

)

[ This Message was edited by: Jan Nolte on 2003-05-07 09:25 ]

spoimala · Post by **spoimala** » Wed May 07, 2003 9:24 am

Do you find operating six small mixers more comfortable than one big mixer??

Well, you can sell your pulsar II and leave pulsar I. You will get much more money, and 19dsp is a fine amount

[ This Message was edited by: spoimala on 2003-05-07 10:26 ]

darkrezin · Post by **darkrezin** » Wed May 07, 2003 9:40 am

But that way you lose the double STDM bus, which will make a lot of difference to performance, and avoids any pesky "no more STDM connections..." errors.

peace

Spy · Post by **Spy** » Wed May 07, 2003 9:40 am

Spoimala, you buddy
why don't i see you on ICQ anymore? did you quit using it?

i'm alive

Jan Nolte · Post by **Jan Nolte** » Wed May 07, 2003 10:17 am

Hi spoimala. As I said, I'm a newbie. I don't no how to use the big mixers exactly. I always make three subgroups (drums, sounds and basses). For every group I use some effects (trans. designer and reverbs) with different settings. To do this, I unite a group with a small mixer and route it through the effect devices. Then I take another mixer and unite the groups with it.
Is it easier or thriftier to do this with a big mixer?

I still considered if I leave pulsar 1, but besides of that what dArKr3zIn wrote, there are some other reasons to kick out the pulsar 1. For example the ULLI Settings. I want less then 13ms latency

Under Windows 2k the projects loaded very slow and often I got the message DSP overloaded although its very small. I think Pulsar 1 is responsible for that problem, or not? Under Win98 it works fine.

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Wed May 07, 2003 11:45 am

Using smaller mixers allows for more flexibility, once inside a larger mixer the routing is quite standard.

I work very confortable with Scope SRB and Pulsar2, while some people claim more cards is more phase problems. Also, more dsp allows larger projects, which don't always make it easy to keep oversight.
If you go track by track, a Pulsar2 could be enough to put out your fantasy. Much depends on how much you want to be done at realtime, and if it's worth the investment.

[Edit] Project loading speed much depends on cpu and memory performance.

[ This Message was edited by: at0mic on 2003-05-07 18:29 ]

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Wed May 07, 2003 1:04 pm

You get the ULLI-settings from the fastest card, so Powerpulsar + Pulsar1 = the same ULLI-settings as Powerpulsar + Pulsar2.

If your reason for not using synths is lack of memory?? - Maybe you need memory above all!

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Wed May 07, 2003 2:35 pm

I think he means DSP power...

mr swim · Post by **mr swim** » Wed May 07, 2003 6:01 pm

yeah, I don't think synths take up any central RAM do they ? Unless they were using wavetables, possibly. But hey, I have 6 chips and I still use at least one - sometimes three - synths in my projects (plus sts3000 and the 1632 mixer and reverb etc etc) so not sure where onboard 'memory' problems would come from . . .

Jan Nolte · Post by **Jan Nolte** » Wed May 07, 2003 6:29 pm

Yes, I mean DSP Power (isn't it also called memory in englisch?)

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Thu May 08, 2003 6:42 am

No

Memory can not process anything. It just holds information and gives faster acces to it, than getting data from the hard drive/disc all the time.