STW P-100 Reverb question/problem

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:48 pm

Hello!

I ve just bought this wonderful reverb plug-in but I am experiencing a problem. It doesnt work in 96KHz and returns me a not enough DSP resources message. Which is not true, since I have 12DSPs and the load is only 60%.
But even in all other samplerates, it doesnt let me load more than 4 instances or so. What is common in all situations is that the load is slightly or a lot more than 50% (a single 6-DSP card).
It seems that it cannot adjust itself on to more than one DSP card. It fools itself into thinking that there is no more DSPs!

Has anyone come across this problem? Warp69, are you aware of it?

PS. BTW, I DO recommend to everybody to buy this plugin. It rocks!
PS2. When is Ambience coming out?

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 1:51 pm

Are you shure it is not PCI band with you are running out of? Warp69 said it would be heavy on DSP resources.

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 6:32 pm

I never had a PCI overflow message. I can load LOTS of Masterverbs, maxing my DSPs, with not any error message...

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:53 am

Is that the Sonic Timeworks one?

If it's anything like as hungry as their Reverb-X then I'm not massively surprised. OK, Reverb-X is a VST instrument (CPU processing) as opposed to using the DSPs on the SFP hardware, but each instance will swallow a substantial chunk of your PCI bandwidth, for sure.

Here's the thread on the Reverb-X:

http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... forum=1&18

It might be worth asking Timeworks about it - they were pretty forthcoming with information about my problem.

Royston

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:39 am

EDIT:
bullshit reply - I messed up the names of the devices. Reverb-x is NOT a scope device. 4080 is a scope device. Sorry

On 2004-04-28 03:53, Counterparts wrote:
OK, Reverb-X is a VST instrument (CPU processing) as opposed to using the DSPs on the SFP hardware, but each instance will swallow a substantial chunk of your PCI bandwidth, for sure.

My reverb-X is not a VST. Please note, that Reverb-x comes both in a native and a Scope version. And regarding the trouble in the other thread about using presets in Reverb-X. I have no problem at all loading any preset I want with my 1@1.3GHz celeron based PC.

So, now that this misunderstanding is cleared, I suggest we keep the Reverb-X discussion in the other thread (just trying to get in in advance of our usual tendency to go off-topic

).

_________________
Don't bitch to us about what cwa doesn't do well, we can't help you. Problem solving may be another thing though.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Immanuel on 2004-04-29 08:56 ]</font>

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:55 am

My reverb-X is not a VST

Well, fine, but I wasn't talking about yours (didn't even know you had one - so what's the misunderstanding?) In fact, I wasn't even talking about Reverb-X - I was making the point that STW's reverb units tend to be resource-heavy, from those which I have demo-ed.

Native ones will soak up CPU power whereas a DSP-based one will most soak up PCI bandwidth, which is what seems to be happening here.

That's it. I think STW is the right place to go for more information, which is why I made that suggestion - they were very helpful to me.

Royston

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 5:23 am

EDIT:
more bullshit - I still messed up the names

Well, your wording fooled me then

"OK, Reverb-X is a VST instrument ..."

- looks as a definite statement about reverb-x in my eyes. But ... I am just a Dane.

_________________
Don't bitch to us about what cwa doesn't do well, we can't help you. Problem solving may be another thing though.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Immanuel on 2004-04-29 08:56 ]</font>

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 5:56 am

Ok, maybe is better then to contact STW or better to contact Warp69, who programmed it in the first place.

I always thought that not enough PCI bandwidth leads to a "PCI Overflow" message... I didnt know that a "not enough DSPs" message could be related to the PCI bus...

Oh well, as I get older I discover that there are more and more things that I dont know!

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 5:59 am

I am not shure Rodos. I am not used to seeing many PCI/DSP messages on my own PC.

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 7:13 am

me neither!

(keep fingers crossed!)

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 7:58 am

I guess it's an issue of timing precision once the dsp code 'crosses' board boundary.
Recently had a similiar thing with a patch containing Flexor Modules.
DSP capacity reached, but the meter showed roughly 60%.

So I assume it's a wanted feature, not a bug.
At least at Adern they set precision on top of the list, once phase accuracy isn't guaranteed anymore the device is 'stopped'.

And this reverb must be very precise from what I've demoed...

my 2 cents, Tom

Warp69 · Post by **Warp69** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 3:14 pm

Hey,

Astroman is correct. If SFP splits an algorithm on different dsp's, there will be a latency of 2 samples between the dsp's. So to keep the reverb as sample accurate as possible I forced some modules to load on one dsp - but whose modules wont fit on a single chip in 96KHz.

I could change this in an update, since it's not that important with a latency of 2 samples in a reverb with millions of echo's.

Kind regards

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:43 pm

Thanks for the replies!

Wow, Astroman you were right once again!