September 20, 2014, 08:07:07 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email
News: Arturia's webmaster is glad to offer you these brand new forums ! Have fun using it and feel free to email any encountered problem at webmaster@arturia.com.

Arturia Forums



Author Topic: Useful implementations for Arturia products  (Read 5078 times)

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« on: April 13, 2005, 11:42:24 am »
1. Multi-processor usage support

2. 64-bit ready

3. New , more high resolution communication standard support
Max

a CS-80Vist

FabP

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Karma: 0
Re: Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2005, 08:16:19 am »
Quote from: "omissis"

3. New , more high resolution communication standard support



What do you mean exactly ??
Fabrice PAUMIER
ARTURIA Marketing Manager

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2005, 09:57:54 am »
Quote
What do you mean exactly ??  
 


Hi Fab
What I mean is to give the Classics the full and smooth control they deserve....by overkilling the deathly sad condition of a pre-digital-early 80s-8bit limited communication standard ( for short: MIDI )...by creating a dedicated hi-res knob array or by trying to agree with other manifacturers for a new com protocol.....MIDI has to be buried :evil:  :evil: !
Max

a CS-80Vist

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2005, 10:20:00 am »
Sthg to add:

 Support for SSE-3DNow instructions ( means less cpu load !!! ) !
Max

a CS-80Vist

poropat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
  • Karma: 2
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2005, 10:39:48 am »
yes! Need less CPU! More TAE is improved, more
CPU is stressed, of course we could buy a quicker one, but
there is a limit, then we need to buy a Cray. :twisted:

I don't know what compiler Arturia use, but seems with
Intel Compiler C++ 8.1, code could be 20% quicker.
MoogModularV,CS80V,MinimoogV,Arp2600V,
prophetV, Jupiter8V, SEMV

Man-Machine

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #5 on: April 20, 2005, 04:15:22 pm »
Quote from: "omissis"
Quote
What do you mean exactly ??  
 


Hi Fab
What I mean is to give the Classics the full and smooth control they deserve....by overkilling the deathly sad condition of a pre-digital-early 80s-8bit limited communication standard ( for short: MIDI )...by creating a dedicated hi-res knob array or by trying to agree with other manifacturers for a new com protocol.....MIDI has to be buried :evil:  :evil: !


He, he, dream on this one. It takes a LOT more than Arturia to change something like MIDI protocol. An international commitee with representatives from all major manufacturers of software and hardware (a lot more today than back early 80s) need to be created and they ALL need to agree on all kinds of things. That's been tried a while back and it was fiasco. And then you have companies trying to force their own MIDI implementations like Yamaha and Roland extended MIDI incarnations. Of course, others didn't agree so it didn't catch on...
L8er Osci8ers

Man-Machine

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2005, 04:29:55 pm »
Quote from: "poropat"
yes! Need less CPU! More TAE is improved, more
CPU is stressed, of course we could buy a quicker one, but
there is a limit, then we need to buy a Cray. :twisted:

I don't know what compiler Arturia use, but seems with
Intel Compiler C++ 8.1, code could be 20% quicker.


Well, that's the price to pay for better sounding software. Code can only be improved to a certain point. I don't know Arturia's developing tools are but just changing compilers is not an easy task and sometimes is impossible and cost innefective.
L8er Osci8ers

poropat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
  • Karma: 2
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #7 on: April 20, 2005, 06:52:42 pm »
Quote from: "Man-Machine"

Well, that's the price to pay for better sounding software. Code can only be improved to a certain point. I don't know Arturia's developing tools are but just changing compilers is not an easy task and sometimes is impossible and cost innefective.


Yes but the problem, now we could buy a pentium 4 3.8Ghz, then
if still not enough, how to do? :roll:
MoogModularV,CS80V,MinimoogV,Arp2600V,
prophetV, Jupiter8V, SEMV

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #8 on: April 20, 2005, 10:54:44 pm »
with a multi processor support......buy another 3.8 GHz processor!
 8)  8)  8)
Max

a CS-80Vist

poropat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
  • Karma: 2
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #9 on: April 21, 2005, 05:22:06 am »
Quote from: "omissis"
with a multi processor support......buy another 3.8 GHz processor!
 8)  8)  8)


I'm not sure it's so efficient.
Adding a secont CPU doesn't give a quicker computer.
It gives a computer more difficult to slow.
At the same time I don't know if Microsoft OS are so
efficient in sharing CPU as is Linux for exemple.

By the way I assume Arturia did their maximum yet, to optimize
their algorithms. At a moment they reach a point where if they
save some resources, they loose sound quality.
MoogModularV,CS80V,MinimoogV,Arp2600V,
prophetV, Jupiter8V, SEMV

Man-Machine

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: 1
Useful implementations for Arturia products
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2005, 09:37:48 pm »
Yep, that should be the draw line. Sound quality shouldn't be affected at all by performance enhancements...
L8er Osci8ers

 

Carbonate design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.2 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines