Why not just increase the number of partitions? 16 is very low. I used to use 256 but that was a few years ago with a 3.2Ghz P4. I now use an i7 4.2Ghz which would likely handle around double that. Based on the 150ms your system is showing a 256 partition would be 16 times quicker or around 10ms and a 512 partition would be under 5ms.
Also I read this on Voxengo's website regarding pristine space:
The "Zero Latency" setting enables a true zero-latency processing mode. Please note that this mode has its own limitations. It will work only with audiocard block sizes (latencies) which are a power of 2, in between 32 and 16384 samples. For example, if the current audiocard block size is 5512 samples, Pristine Space will be silent given that the "Zero Latency" mode is enabled. Another limitation this mode imposes is the stability of the CPU load: you may experience CPU spikes and overloads, especially if you are using more than two instances of Pristine Space. This mode can be useful for tracking sessions, when you don't need many plug-in instances, but where zero latency operation is useful.
Its pretty clear to me that Voxengo is using the same partition approach as Convolver because of the need to keep the audio card latency as a power of 2.
Unless there is a hack for convolverVST the GUI will only let me set it to 16 partitions maximum. I had a really old version of convolverVST, I updated it before I took those measurements. I am using the latest version (4.4). I remember why convolver didn't last long on my PC. It's clunky and needs refining, not much has changed with it since I last used it.
Its been awhile since I used it but the version I used had a user defined value with no limit that I can remember:
Convolver also had a config file setup option where you could specify the number of partitions amongst other things.

Convolver also had a config file setup option where you could specify the number of partitions amongst other things.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.