Traktor Pro 2.1 in beta

[djchriswoods.co.uk]

i hope the advanced effects are fixed!

[DJZILCH]

very likely, the multicore support is there since 2.0 was released, but can only be enabled through a hidden config parameter, known only by few tech savvy people.

Probably, all they'll do now, is to unveil it for the general public.

really? details please? has it been known to crash systems or render it unstable? just curious

[photojojo]

very likely, the multicore support is there since 2.0 was released, but can only be enabled through a hidden config parameter, known only by few tech savvy people.

This is killing me, I can't hold it in anymore. Screw the NDA!!!!!!

Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start.

[padi_04]

Fiddling with the Prefs tsi file I found something intresting

<Entry Name="Sync.OSC.LocalIP.OnOff" Type="0" Value="0"></Entry>
<Entry Name="Sync.OSC.ReceiveControls.OnOff" Type="0" Value="0"></Entry>
<Entry Name="Sync.OSC.SendControls.OnOff" Type="0" Value="0"></Entry>
<Entry Name="Sync.OSC.SendControlsTo" Type="3" Value=""></Entry>

[photojojo]

Osc

[padi_04]

Oh yeah. I shouldn't be happy, I bought OSCulator less than a week ago XD

[photojojo]

I got nothing I want to OSCulate with anyway.

[loop]

really? details please? has it been known to crash systems or render it unstable? just curious

dude, i'm not an insider and have no idea if that's even true or not. That statement just comes out of my common sense and is a pure speculation. Still, it seems very probable if you think about it.

Do know that there already is multi core support even in the current 2.0.X versions. For example, track analysis jobs, spread across both cores of my C2D 13" MBP. There are also other cases when both cores get loaded while working with Traktor - mainly, the library operations.

The area in which multicore is missing is the audio processing. That is the most complex area, since Traktor is a (close to) real time application and it's very tricky to synchronise many threads over multiple cpu cores. All these data(music) streams, if processed in parallel, have to be perfectly aligned to each other and to the master clock before they reach the final stage of the DA conversion (the output). The nasty part is that since the different cores are (assumably) unequally loaded some buffers will get processed faster than others and some streams would start playing ahead. To deal with this type of situations, you need special component which controls and dispatches the various fragments for processing and makes sure that all happens in time with no speed ups or delays.

I have experience with similar synchronizers/dispatchers in clustered/distributed enterprise systems and it usually takes years to implement a reliable real-time solution. Needless to say that most of the time it's all about testing how it really works in the variety of use cases, most of which are usually unknown to the developers until discovered on the fly. I'm not saying that the engineers and the architects are incompetent and that's why they can't design it properly - not at all, i'm sure they are brilliant professionals. It's just how the engineering process happens in practice.

Since they are disclosing it now, I'm 97% sure that the testing of multi core is running in the beta group for at least an year and probably even more with certain big-guns

[lethal_pizzle]

Hopefully they'll roll out multicore support to Maschine next

[loop]

Maybe the host audio stream itself may continue to operate on one core, but the VST/AU plugin hosting might get multicore support soon. That'd be a logical intermediate step and a beneficial too ...