Editor CPU Meter And Stability?

DJD100

Power User
Hi, I'm mocking up audio chains in the editor for live use with IA's and was wondering how high I can get the editor's CPU Meter and still expect stable performance?

I don't own an Axe yet to test, but the chains I'm mocking up so far have all the editor's CPU Meter LED's lit except the last red one.

Would this be stable in everyone's experience?

Thanks...
 
It's either going to work or it isn't in my experience. It's not like the Axe becomes unstable and crashes. Usually the performance gauging is pretty accurate, I've only had it a couple of times where the Axe didn't give me any warning about a CPU overload but I had some crackling weird noises and glitches and a very unresponsive interface. So I'd say you just keep working like you do and when it doesn't work for real you just alter the patches a little?
 
Thanks for the reply!

So, am I to understand that some patches will work sans audio artifacts with all the Ultra editor's CPU Meter's LED's lit up excepting one, and some won't etc depending on the various blocks instantiated?

If the Ultra's CPU meter is pegged, will that always signal an audio artifact problem, and by extension if two CPU meter LEDs are "not" lit then that patch's CPU hit will not trigger and unpleasant audio artifacts?

Sorry for tall the questions, but I'm attempting to see if the Axe Ultra will be capable of reliably doing my multi-tube amp rig (two preamps mixed into one power amp and cab(s), along with a couple of delays, a reverb, and other standard IA FX like Trem, Vibe, Pitch, Wah, OD's, Looper etc), by messing with the editor sans Axe Ultra?

Thanks...

Tymon said:
It's either going to work or it isn't in my experience. It's not like the Axe becomes unstable and crashes. Usually the performance gauging is pretty accurate, I've only had it a couple of times where the Axe didn't give me any warning about a CPU overload but I had some crackling weird noises and glitches and a very unresponsive interface. So I'd say you just keep working like you do and when it doesn't work for real you just alter the patches a little?
 
Well, I've only had my Ultra for a few days now so I'm no expert, but I believe the manual says it won't allow you to add effects if it would get over some percentage of CPU usage (90%, I think). This is based one worst case scenario (max effect processing). I also thought the editor did the same kind of limiting. It sounds like it still might go over some time, but I think you would have to have a lot going on. Some of the sample patches I've looked at have quite a bit of stuff in the grid and they sound just fine.

My guess is, if you can't do what you want with one ultra, you can't do what you want with one of anything (except maybe a PC).
 
Thanks for the reply!

I should probably post this question to the editor section, and I could of course use some pedals in front of the Axe to lessen it's CPU load if need be too?

Thanks...

kruzty said:
Well, I've only had my Ultra for a few days now so I'm no expert, but I believe the manual says it won't allow you to add effects if it would get over some percentage of CPU usage (90%, I think). This is based one worst case scenario (max effect processing). I also thought the editor did the same kind of limiting. It sounds like it still might go over some time, but I think you would have to have a lot going on. Some of the sample patches I've looked at have quite a bit of stuff in the grid and they sound just fine.

My guess is, if you can't do what you want with one ultra, you can't do what you want with one of anything (except maybe a PC).
 
Some weird behaviour start from 95-97%. Nasty clipping, slow display.

You could add block if the worst case scenario is under 100%... I think. I have a standard and use a single amp/cab emulation with lots of fx... I think an Ultra would work as desired. :cool:
 
Back
Top Bottom