#Playbackpro alternative pc upgrade#
#Playbackpro alternative pc full#
#Playbackpro alternative pc pro#
#Playbackpro alternative pc code#

In the last year Logic did a release focused on performance and big instrument sets, so coincide with the new Mac Pro, so it’s performance is pretty flawless with about as many instruments as you want.ĭorico is using the same audio engine as Cubase, which makes sense, so there must be code in the upper Dorico layers that is causing the trouble. So I don’t know but I assume so, because a media composer working in a DAW couldn’t put it up with the rainbow wheels. I’ll be moving to Cubase at some point in the future probably, if Dorico includes Live Link integration I’d do it in a heartbeat.

#Playbackpro alternative pc pro#

Is Cubase also much faster than Dorico, do you know? I don’t have the Pro version and thus can’t load the template. Interesting that you see such a big difference between Dorico and a Logic. Yeah DAW’s are just fine with it so I suspect Dorico’s implementation.

I’m not sure to what extent these things are Dorico, never mind the playback template issues.

If I got the performance of HALLion I’d be happy, but the BBCSO is basically unusable in the present state, while it appears to be fairly steady now it’s constantly giving a rainbow wheel. When Dorico’s performance is unfavourably compared to the alternatives, the response from the team is, not unreasonably, that Dorico is doing far more in many situations. I’ve certainly been finding BBC Core fairly slow at times with operations but I’ve been testing with 45 mins plus symphonies so not the easiest test.

#Playbackpro alternative pc full#

Yeah, again Logic loads up the full set with all articulations and it’s just fine. I’ve no idea why the BBC libraries take so long to load compared to anything else I’ve ever used in relation to the loaded sample size.Unfortunate, DAW’s such as Logic have no problem with this Pro has tons more of mics, well all the mics, but I don’t think you get control of that in Dorico.ġ.waking from sleep causes intermittent hangs with all libraries in my experience so I always try to remember to close a project before going into sleep mode. It’s still eating CPU though.Īnyhow the Pro version supports a lot more instruments, you want a chunky machine to handle this, though the Spitfire plugin is parsimonious with memory it seems. The VST Audio Engine is now a subprocess of Dorico instead of being off on it’s own. The damn chipset and OS supports it, no idea with Apple would say it only 64, morons … Well I rebooted and it appears to be working better for now. Unless the OP has just discovered why Apple said the max was 64, of courseĪpple, meh, this is my last Mac, once it gets too old I’m moving all the music production to Windows after 30 years of Mac … anyhow no, 2013 Pro’s run 128GB just fine, OWC sells kits and support. I had no idea a Mac Pro from 2013 could run to 128Gb RAM.Īpple say the maximum is 64GB, (4 x 16Gb modules) but according to some websites, 128Gb works. There’s a thread about Core here if anyone is interested or on the fence about which, if any, version to go for. For me, Core was a better option as it was quite clear that I wouldn’t have the resources to run Pro nor any real need as I was looking for something complimentary to VSL SE, not a replacement. Look forward to hearing more of your experiences and those of any others who have bought the Pro version. I take it you’re using an SSD drive for the samples?

#Playbackpro alternative pc upgrade#

I have 16Gb which is adequate though an upgrade to 32 would be more comfortable. I had no idea a Mac Pro from 2013 could run to 128Gb RAM. However, with the Pro version if you use all or even several of the mic positions, you’re going to be under more pressure and I must say I find in general VSL seems more efficient with resource management. Over around 150 minutes of symphonic music converted to this library and just one or two busy full orchestra climaxes pushed the CPU for a few seconds to 85%. Interesting to hear that the Pro template is now up but I don’t suppose it is significantly different from the one for Core, other than supporting the extra instruments? I’ve had no significant performance issues using Core and that’s with a modest 4core CPU.