|
Post by indiehouse on Jun 19, 2022 16:27:57 GMT -6
I’m trying to track some VI’s through Kontakt, and I keep having this issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2022 17:12:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 19, 2022 17:17:09 GMT -6
128 is pretty taxing. Switch to 256.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Jun 20, 2022 7:15:34 GMT -6
128@96 is too little time for a VI buffer. There have started to be Kontakt instruments that REQUIRE 128@44–which equates to 512@96. Disk streaming samplers bottleneck is single core CPU speed and RANDOM seek disk access time. The message amount to “something prevented the buffer from being filled in time”. Id guess its disk since thats such an elderly VI….I kind of doubt they're doing heavy handed input scripting. We could troubleshoot it, but whats problematic with setting it to 256 or 512? I run my box at 512 pretty much full time-and i refuse to play VI keys north of hardware latency. If i set it lower, its for an amp sim. Granted, this is on an RME PCIe….so, its LITERALLY 512 samples….where CoreAudio+USB/TB will add time and make it “feel like more”-so your 256 might be closer to my 512 in actual latency….etc….anyway, even if for those reasons, it ends up too latent for you, that would be the first trouble shooting—does more linear time alleviate the issue?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jun 20, 2022 10:44:10 GMT -6
I will try 256 and report back! I was worried about latency, so I tried to keep it low. I guess I didn't account for the math involved when running at 96k.
|
|