The use of VST3-plugins in SL is not as good as it is in, for instance, Wavelab.
In Wavelab, the plugins are running smoothly. In SL they are slow and crippled/choppy. Why?
It seems to me, that SL is not on priority list for Steinberg when it comes to quality control.
Please do not misunderstand this, SL is a phantastic program and I love it. But It is so buggy in so many places, that I am loosing confidence in using this with joy.
Often I find myself using Audacity, because it runs most of the time fast and flawless.
You meant fantastic and not phantastic -strange, weird, and supernatural.
No pun intended
I love Spectral Layers, because it comes very close to a dream I had about musicsoftware around 30 years ago. The concept of working in the spectrum is so natural, but needs lots of computationpower, which we have today. And it still seems to be just in its infants, when it comes to possibilities.
For me, Spectral Layers is for sound, what Mathematica (from Wolfram) is for applied mathematics.
@Marc_von_Bredow If you have issues, please report exactly what version of SL your using, on what platform, what VST3 plugin specifically has issues, and what kind of issue (how to repro step by step).
1 Like
Hi Robin,
All VST3-plugins seem to have a performance issue here. They are running choppy and are basically unusable.
In Wavelab and Audacity the same plugins are running very smoothly as expected.
Maybe there is some lag in SL to the plugins?
The computer should be fast enough, though.
Intel I7-13700K, 64 GB Ram, Nvidia RTX 4070 (12GB), SSD
With other programms, no issues, PC is running smoothly.
1 Like
@Marc_von_Bredow please list a couple plugins in particular, so I can try to repro. Because I haven’t seen any choppy plugin so far, on a similar configuration.
1 Like
Shaper Box3
all plugins from Kilohertz
ValhallaFrequencyEcho
in short -all plugins are reacting slow and choppy; only in Spectral Layers, not in Wavelab or Audacity.
Are there any parameters in SL to adjust, maybe?
Would some logfiles be helpful?
1 Like
Are you referring to a problem with the plug-in’s waveform rendering?
If so, I could see the same issues myself.
(I actually tried it with Shaper Box3 and Kilohearts plugin)
However, given that most other manufacturers’ plugins don’t have the problem, I can only assume that the problem is on the Shaper Box3 and Kilohearts side.
Nope, SL slows down and sound is distorted/choppy. All plugins.
It ius just in SL, not in other apps, like Wavelab or Audacity.
ok.
Can you capture a video?
1 Like
I can confirm this (especially when previewing)!
Here’s an example you can reproduce: Load Kilohearts frequency shifter and preview then try to move/shift the frequency.
It seems it’s only one developer as-oppossed-to a team(Steinberg) that is mostly working on Spectralayers. Thanks for voicing your concerns and hopefully the Steinberg company begins taking the necessary steps to correct it because now these problems/issues are starting to ruining the quality of Steinberg products, and if it continues will start ruining their reputation.
I agree 100%
Robin is a genius, concerning the product, no doubt about that!
But the inherent complexities of programming and quality of code are becoming just too much for one person to handle. Steinberg should take this issue seriously. ASAP!
I can only imagine, that the project “Spectral Layers” is totally messed up and may should be redesigned from ground up. But that’s surely an intern problem of Steinberg.
Agreed! @Robin_Lobel is a talented developer but I believe Steinberg should step in and offer to take the load off because this is too much work for one developer.
I believe the problem here is optimization. The TRUTH is that Spectralayers needs optimization (especially on the GUI end) and I believe the developer is well aware of these issues, however posting about these issues here is not the solution.
If you(@Marc_von_Bredow ) really want these types of issues resolved then my advice is to PUBLICLY post a video about it on youtube and title your video “VST’s does not work in spectralayers”. Yes! It’s a little “passive-aggressive” but once enough people see it and Steinberg gets ready to do another one of those yearly updates, then it gives them(Steinberg) no choice but to confront the issue. All it takes is for someone(like you @Marc_von_Bredow ) to give Steinberg bad publicity and then when they(Steinberg) are ready to do these yearly updates and advertise Spectralayers 12, people will see your video and say to themselves “well! If I can’t use my VST’s and it’s buggy and choppy and glitchy then I’m not going to update nor give Steinberg my money!”.
@Marc_von_Bredow @Joey_Kapish Please don’t assume anything, and stay focused on the issue you want solved.
I just tried to repro your issue here on a configuration similar to yours (Intel Core i7 12700K, 32 GB Ram, RTX 3090, SSD), with the plugin both @Marc_von_Bredow and @Joey_Kapish mentioned and I don’t see or hear an issue at all ? Here’s a video capture of it :
Please do a video capture (preferably with the exact same plugin) so I can see what issue you have on your side.
And again please, stop assuming things like “SpectraLayers is totally messed up and should be redesigned from the ground up.” I’m here everyday helping customers and fixing issues as soon as they’re reported back and reproduceable, but this is just insulting and really not helping. Only technical descriptions, steps by steps, and when needed video captures can help me help you.
5 Likes
“totally messed up” is not meant personally or bad in the sense, that the product is bad. It just seems to me, that the underlying code of SL has grown into a level of complexity, that it might(!) need a redesign on a higher level.
If it is not so, than fine - great!
But the errors seem to shine into that direction, which is not all to unusual, when a software grows in complexity.
People demand more and more features, that the underlying code was just not meant to support at all. Than developers start to work around it… like the tower of babel - it becomes unmanagable after a while.
So again, if that is not the case: Great! But the look and feel of the actual version of SL indicates just like that.
… still love Spectral Layers, though 
(best conceptual software of art since decades)
And I might also point to the numerical issues… which is another issue…
I’ll just add my 2cents…
What size FFT are you running? This is critical to snappy performance. For example, if I raise the FFT size above 4K and then back down below, the sluggish performance remains…I have to reboot SL11 to return to “normal” performance 
My advice would be not to argue and do what I suggested above. The most effective way to get results (from a situation like this) is to confront the issue/problem privately and then take it publicly. I do believe that there might be some “legacy code” involved (although other factors suggest otherwise and further suggest that the application has indeed been rewritten at some point from the ground up) but the I believe the overall main issue is optimization.
That’s exactly what’s happening here, too.
1 Like
Argue? I’m not arguing, we are sharing experiences regarding performance in the forum for the specific software, nothing more from my part.
Sure, I have ideas on things I might consider “improvements” and voice them here. Nothing more, I’m using SL11 daily; sharing experiences. I think SL is great…I learn more every day.
Yepp!
SL is a masterpiece, no doubt about that.
1 Like