Dyne Posted September 22, 2009 Share Posted September 22, 2009 I've been using FL Studio since version 7, and now at FL9, I'm kind of wondering if anyone has, since release, been able to optimize it so that it does not continuously experience underruns (Go to Options -> Audio settings -> ASIO properties section of the dialog box). I've been getting numerous underruns while using ASIO4ALL v2. So I'm not sure what to do. Here are my system specs: Intel Core2Duo E8400 3.0GHz 8GB DDR2 RAM Windows Vista x64 (going to upgrade to Win7 in October) Sapphire ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB 500GB Western Digital Hard Drive I think the system specs stand for themselves. So I would like to get ideas on how to optimize FL9 and then quite possible turn it into a guide, or have someone turn it into a guide. That's pretty much it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted September 22, 2009 Share Posted September 22, 2009 Pretty nice rig. What's your buffer currently set to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephyr Posted September 22, 2009 Share Posted September 22, 2009 It all comes down to audio buffer size like BGC is getting at. No setup needs to experience under-runs, it's just a result of trying to push their processing speed a bit too far. If you can't keep a low enough buffer for your liking with your setup, you may need to think about getting a new soundcard or improve your system's specs. Keep in mind that buffers only really affect recording from an external source such as a midi keyboard. If you're not doing any of that then just crank up the buffer a bit. If you are, then consider lowering the buffer while recording midi, then raising it back up again for mixing/mastering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salluz Posted September 22, 2009 Share Posted September 22, 2009 Another issue would be recording vocals. Usually 256 samples would do, but for me, because I do many things that sometimes requires speed that exceeds regular speeds (1/16 - 1/64), I would have to turn the buffer rate down for less latency. So, the math depends on how many instruments you're using * the energy they take individually and... oh great, I'll edit later. Time is a whore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyne Posted September 27, 2009 Author Share Posted September 27, 2009 My buffer is currently set to 512 samples (12ms). Also, there were 4 underruns just starting it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephyr Posted September 28, 2009 Share Posted September 28, 2009 12 milliseconds aren't too bad, Definitely workable for most people, although it would be unmanageable for some. Try just raising it to 18 or something, and lower it when recording. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.