Logic 10.8.1 inefficient use of cores?

[luckyal]

I've had a few instances where I needed to record about 32 tracks of real time audio at 96/24 into Logic, while using Logic's Software Monitoring. After several bouts of system overload messages, I gave up and moved onto using Pro Tools - URGH!  I noticed that Pro Tools (FRIGGIN PRO TOOLS) does a much better job at distributing processing amongst all of the cores, whereas Logic front loads most of the processing onto the first core. Is it possible that with the arrival of the M1 chips, Apple is optimizing its apps to work exclusively with M1 while sabotaging intel performance?

[luckyal]

For comparison, here's that same project on an 14" M1 Max Macbook Pro.

[des99]

10 minutes ago, luckyal said:

Is it possible that with the arrival of the M1 chips, Apple is optimizing its apps to work exclusively with M1 while sabotaging intel performance?

No, I've rarely found any mileage is the various Apple conspiracy theories of people thinking Apple are deliberately sabotaging old devices to help convince you to buy new ones.

Are you running these record-enabled tracks through plugins, or just recording them?

[luckyal]

7 minutes ago, des99 said:

Are you running these record-enabled tracks through plugins, or just recording them?

In ALL cases, Logic on Intel, Pro Tools on Intel, and Logic on M1 they are all record enabled and input monitoring is enabled.

[des99]

15 minutes ago, luckyal said:

In ALL cases, Logic on Intel, Pro Tools on Intel, and Logic on M1 they are all record enabled and input monitoring is enabled.

Thanks, I understand that, but it doesn't answer my question - are you running tracks through plugins? You've got a pretty high CPU load in your first Logic performance meter screenshot, presumably indicating you've got a lot of plugin activity going on, and likely a lot of that plugin activity gets shifted into live mode, which is why you see higher loads on single cores, particularly the last one, and if your computer is limited in terms of single-threaded core performance, you can overload that last core in these cases.

Try to make sure none of the record-enabled tracks are selected, and disable some plugins, and see whether you get better performance.

[luckyal]

13 minutes ago, des99 said:

Thanks, I understand that, but it doesn't answer my question - are you running tracks through plugins? You've got a pretty high CPU load in your first Logic performance meter screenshot, presumably indicating you've got a lot of plugin activity going on, and likely a lot of that plugin activity gets shifted into live mode, which is why you see higher loads on single cores, particularly the last one, and if your computer is limited in terms of single-threaded core performance, you can overload that last core in these cases.

Try to make sure none of the record-enabled tracks are selected, and disable some plugins, and see whether you get better performance.

Yes, I am using lots of plugins in realtime monitoring/software monitoring mode. It's a specific requirement that I have. In the case of Pro Tools, I'm relying heavily on 3rd party plugins, whereas with Logic, I'm using a lot of stock plugins. Essentially I had to recreate the session in Pro Tools using 3rd party plugins where I used Logic's plugins. E.g. Logic's plug-ins are supposedly optimized for Logic/Apple and yet...

As for your comment regarding record enabled tracks - that's a nonstarter for me. As I am recording/monitoring, I am also using a control surface to adjust volume as needed.  This is done in both DAWs. Pro tools is steady with evenly distributed processing among all available cores. Logo, not so much. 

I would much rather prefer to work in Logic because I have about 32 tracks condensed to Summing/Routing folders. In Logic, I can collapse those folders and expand them as much as I want without input monitoring being disabled, whereas in Pro Tools, it automatically disables Recording/Input monitoring for the "hidden" tracks. In PT, this is by design apparently.

[JakobP]

Are you monitoring the same input on multiple tracks ? I've noticed that Logic seems to process all those tracks on the same "thread" or "core" in Logics performance meter...

EDIT Also, in most use cases the input monitoring button isn't needed, all record armed tracks have input monitoring enabled automatically when software monitoring is enabled. This will also make you avoid having the same input monitored double by mistake...

Edited January 8 by JakobP

[luckyal]

I have 32 inputs coming into Logic. All are separate channels. I have input as well as software monitoring enabled for ALL of my tracks. I have to hear the adjustments I'm making in my EQ's, Compressors, etc. 

[blinkofani]

Are you using the Playback+Live Tracks setting in the Audio Prefs or just the default Playback setting?

[sunbrother]

Since it uses Stock Plugins would you mind posting a link to the project? I’d love to compare on my system.

[luckyal]

41 minutes ago, sunbrother said:

Since it uses Stock Plugins would you mind posting a link to the project? I’d love to compare on my system.

Not sure if you have all the plugins I do, but go ahead and drop your own audio files into the tracks, enable software monitoring, input monitoring and record enable.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-lQ4_Fos79hToHCoiVs-9l0iikFZ80ff/view?usp=sharing

[luckyal]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:39 AM, sunbrother said:

Since it uses Stock Plugins would you mind posting a link to the project? I’d love to compare on my system.

Wondering if you had a chance to test?

[sunbrother]

3 hours ago, luckyal said:

Wondering if you had a chance to test?

Yes. Luckily I had the oeksound, Fabfilter, Waves, and IK plugins you were using. The project fills up about 7 of my cores and runs very poorly in Rosetta. With the way Logic works, the way your routing is set up, and your plugin choice (especially 4x oversampling and ultra resolution on the soothe2 instances), I don't know of a way to get this to perform well.

Is your Pro Tools setup using DSP like a Thunderbolt HDX or similar unit? If the plugins and their settings are truly identical and it isn't using DSP, it might be down to routing but I don't know Pro Tools' routing well enough to suggest why this is the case and if it can be approximated in Logic.

Edited January 10 by sunbrother

[sunbrother]

Oh, I forgot to mention - in Native mode it runs a bit better but ultimately overloads too often to be usable.

Edited January 10 by sunbrother

[luckyal]

Unless AAX Plugin versions are more efficient than their AU counterparts, there should (theoretically) be no difference. In fact, if anything, Logic, being an Apple product, should be optimized far better than Pro Tools for macOS. After all, in Logic, a lot of the plugins I'm using are native to Logic.

Also, I'm using the same Audio Interface in both cases. The only difference is the DAW.

Edited January 10 by luckyal

[sunbrother]

I’m going to assume you mean you’re not using Avid hardware like HDX, because that offloads some processing onto a DSP. The block size was the same? The routing is exactly the same?

It’s probably not a straightforward plug-in processing power issue (“Logic should be more optimized” AU vs AAX etc). From what I recall their dual buffer/live monitoring setups and buses work a little differently. But I’m not an expert on Pro Tools’ routing and CPU usage. All I can say is I could not find a way to get your project to not overload. If Pro Tools works, use it.

Edited January 11 by sunbrother

[blinkofani]

1 hour ago, luckyal said:

Unless AAX Plugin versions are more efficient than their AU counterparts, there should (theoretically) be no difference. In fact, if anything, Logic, being an Apple product, should be optimized far better than Pro Tools for macOS. After all, in Logic, a lot of the plugins I'm using are native to Logic.

Also, I'm using the same Audio Interface in both cases. The only difference is the DAW.

Did you try what I wrote a couple of days ago? Quoting myself: Are you using the Playback+Live Tracks setting in the Audio Prefs or just the default Playback setting?

[luckyal]

16 hours ago, blinkofani said:

Did you try what I wrote a couple of days ago? Quoting myself: Are you using the Playback+Live Tracks setting in the Audio Prefs or just the default Playback setting?

I did. No discernible difference.

[blinkofani]

23 minutes ago, luckyal said:

I did. No discernible difference.

That was worth a shot. IIRC, that mode was created for your exact use case(loads of input recording at once).

[rAC]

@luckyal BTW you might also be interested to know that Protools and Cubase currently both perform better on Apple Mseries computers than Logi. Kind of blows any conspiracy theory away.

[sunbrother]

5 hours ago, rAC said:

@luckyal BTW you might also be interested to know that Protools and Cubase currently both perform better on Apple Mseries computers than Logi. Kind of blows any conspiracy theory away.

I think it depends what you’re doing and how you’re doing it. Could have sworn I saw a few Cubase users on vi-control complaining that Logic performed better for some of their composition projects.

I might re-create this project in Pro Tools as a test sometime, but I think it is safe to say Logic might not be the best option for using the DAW as a live digital mixer like @luckal is doing here.

Edited January 12 by sunbrother

[rAC]

@sunbrother yeah over at VI-C there is a lot about how Logic isn’t using the efficiency cores at all while Cubase and Protools are. Which it is suggested explains their better performance. It’s far to technical for me to really understand though 😃.

[sunbrother]

1 hour ago, rAC said:

@sunbrother yeah over at VI-C there is a lot about how Logic isn’t using the efficiency cores at all while Cubase and Protools are. Which it is suggested explains their better performance. It’s far to technical for me to really understand though 😃.

Perhaps they’ll perform better in test cases because of that, but Logic does use the efficiency cores for lots of non-audio things and macOS uses the efficiency cores a lot. I get “better” performance from REAPER only when I’m not interacting with the DAW or OS at all. As soon as I’m actually using it things even out. That’s probably a discussion for a different thread though.

Edited January 13 by sunbrother

[blinkofani]

2 hours ago, rAC said:

@sunbrother yeah over at VI-C there is a lot about how Logic isn’t using the efficiency cores at all while Cubase and Protools are. Which it is suggested explains their better performance. It’s far to technical for me to really understand though 😃.

Pro Tools doesn’t use the efficiency cores on Mx machines. I have 8P and 2E on my M1 Pro and PT only sees 8 cores. And if you saw the same video as I did about different DAWs performance, the problem on that video is the user is using a 1024 buffer size like in the old days. But it’s been pretty much proven that Mx machines perform better on lower buffer sizes. Don’t ask me to explain it but that’s what I’m seeing also on my computer.

[luckyal]

On 1/12/2024 at 8:55 AM, sunbrother said:

I think it depends what you’re doing and how you’re doing it. Could have sworn I saw a few Cubase users on vi-control complaining that Logic performed better for some of their composition projects.

I might re-create this project in Pro Tools as a test sometime, but I think it is safe to say Logic might not be the best option for using the DAW as a live digital mixer like @luckal is doing here.

Actually it's used all the time. I was initially going to use Pro Tools, but after doing some extensive research, the supposed efficiency of Logic's built-in plugins, I was sold on the idea of going with Logic. I've been a logic user since 1999, so it's a DAW I am by far most comfortable with.