Changing Reverb quality not affecting CPU?

[Karl Houseknecht]

When I change reverb quality it doesn’t seem to affect CPU. Anyone else confirm?

 

[chris]

yes. this has been mentioned in most threads and almost all videos about it. Reverb blocks run on a dedicated core, so there is little change in the CPU meter.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

So reverb quality doesn’t matter or it just isn’t registering correctly?

Apologies, a search for this before posting didn’t reveal anything.

 

[iaresee]

reverb quality doesn’t matter

This. Use whatever quality level you like. It doesn't impact your ability to do more or less in a preset on the FM9.

 

[chris]

So reverb quality doesn’t matter or it just isn’t registering correctly?

Apologies, a search for this before posting didn’t reveal anything.

it does matter the same as it did before. changing Reverb quality changes the quality of the Reverb.

it is registering correctly.

Reverb is on a dedicated CPU core, so it's not "reported" in the CPU number you see. just like the Amp and Delay blocks.

it is working correctly, as intended.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

So why have quality levels? Why not have it hard coded to the highest?

 

[chris]

So why have quality levels? Why not have it hard coded to the highest?

because people would complain.

also you'd have to code a new reverb block that takes out the Quality levels rather than just having the same thing.

 

[Dave Merrill]

It's this behavior unique to the FM9? I thought on the Axe 3, the amp blocks ran on a separate chip, not reverbs, and reverb quality did affect cpu usage.

Guess I'll go back and check, but that's what's in my head anyway.

 

[iaresee]

It's this behavior unique to the FM9?

Yes. It's unique that the FM9 dedicates a core to the reverb blocks.

 

[javajunkie]

Noticed that right away. The 2 delay blocks are similar. Same with Amps. The rest of the effects share a core.
On the III Reverb quality does change dsp usage %.

 

[Greg Ferguson]

So why have quality levels? Why not have it hard coded to the highest?

Because preset compatibility between different devices could be a thing.

 

[javajunkie]

Because preset compatibility between different devices could be a thing.

yep, porting over presets, it is probably much easier to keep them the same.

 

[axifist]

I hope it at least defaults to the highest quality setting. Does it?

 

[Greg Ferguson]

I hope it at least defaults to the highest quality setting. Does it?

Not that I’ve seen.

The FM3 doesn’t have the headroom to run at its highest quality in medium to complex layouts, so I think it defaults to normal, but, for most of us in a band/live situation its economical setting is very usable. I run my presets at economical and have no complaints.

I haven’t heard what the FM9 defaults to, but when sharing presets it helps to be conservative and let the end-user raise it to whatever their system can handle. If a shared preset pushes the FM3 beyond its limits it can slow to a crawl as it tries to load the preset.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

So why have quality levels? Why not have it hard coded to the highest?

The lower quality reverbs have their own sound, and sometimes that is the desired sound....

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

I hope it at least defaults to the highest quality setting. Does it?

It defaults to Normal

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

I thought on the Axe 3, the amp blocks ran on a separate chip, not reverbs, and reverb quality did affect cpu usage.

That is my recollection as well. And on the FM3, changing quality definitely affected the CPU utilization. That was the whole point of adding Economy mode.

This is good news, actually. I can run it in highest all the time.

 

[@danserrano]

When I change reverb quality it doesn’t seem to affect CPU. Anyone else confirm?

Ultra res your heart away lol. Don’t forget you can take the echo density to 8 as well. Barely goes up 1% it’s amazing

 

[OrganicZed]

My ears are not discerning enough to tell the difference between high and highest quality settings, but there's no penalty so I am going to run all reverbs at max quality.

 

[unix-guy]

Not that I’ve seen.

The FM3 doesn’t have the headroom to run at its highest quality in medium to complex layouts, so I think it defaults to normal, but, for most of us in a band/live situation its economical setting is very usable. I run my presets at economical and have no complaints.

I haven’t heard what the FM9 defaults to, but when sharing presets it helps to be conservative and let the end-user raise it to whatever their system can handle. If a shared preset pushes the FM3 beyond its limits it can slow to a crawl as it tries to load the preset.

When sharing presets you should get exactly what's in the preset. The default shouldn't really come into play here...