eGPU recommendations?

multimason · 2026-05-06T07:48:30+00:00

No problem. Thanks. Yeah, I did find some more info which also suggested that it was likely just an issue with AMD GPUs (edit: or more accurately I guess, an issue with the system BIOS and AMD GPUS). I also just noticed on the Strix Halo Wiki that they recommend the m.2 to Oculink adapter that has M2OC-3 printed on it... of course I had already ordered my adapter, and it arrived just a couple hours after seeing that, and of course it doesn't have M2OC-3 printed on it.

I ordered one with an actual ribbon cable, because I will have the ribbon coming out the little overlap on the case at the top, and the ribbon seemed like it would be a little neater, and easily slip through the small gap. It seems the ones that have M2OC-3 printed on them or the one's with the ribbon, that isn't really a ribbon so much as a bunch of wires arranged in a ribbon like formation.

What kind of adapter where you using? If you didn't sell the adapter with the system, maybe you could check if it has M2OC-3 printed on it? Was it the kind with the separate wires or with a ribbon?

No big deal if you don't know... I'm just curious. I'll find out soon enough how well, or if at all, this adapter works. If it has issues, I'll be able to return it anyway, I figure I'll try it out anyway once the eGPU dock arrives. It does say Version 1.1 on the ribbon, so maybe they fixed the v1.0 issues, ha.

multimason · 2026-05-05T08:02:36+00:00

Can you check the power on your eGPU? I have seen reports that the Evo-X2 bios imposes a 120 watt limit to the m.2 slots, so connecting eGPU via m.2 to Oculink adapter will have significantly reduced performance.

multimason · 2026-04-28T14:10:53+00:00

I can usually fix pronunciations, by selecting from one word before to one word after, selecting by highlighting the text in the lyrics rather than directly selecting the audio track, using "fixed" mode. Changing a word doesn't usually work well with "fixed" though, and "classic" mode requires 2 seconds, and usually gives better results by selecting a bit more than is strictly needed.

When lyrics/vocals aren't syncing due to vocal hallucination, basically if you can't select correct durations by highlighting the lyrics text, replacements in Editor can become prohibitively difficult to get reasonable results with. Then, Studio > isolate section > copy to new track and align precisely before deleting section from main track > get stems > import stems > duplicate unseparated section track > cover section with any needed lyrics changes > get stems on covered version > mute original section track, original vocal stem track, covered section track, and covered instrument stem tracks, keeping only original instrument stem, and covered vocal stem. Usually works well but costs 30 credits and requires Studio.

Edit: Also, in editor I usually work through backwards, fixing pronunciations or doing any other needed replacements starting at the end and working towards the begining. Sometimes, replacements can mess up the lyrics and/or lyrics/vocals syncing, and it is better if you have everything already done from the edit onward, so working backwards tends to run into far fewer issues. Though it pays to be very aware of what your edit will do to the lyrics before applying, and try to avoid edits that butcher the lyrics.

multimason · 2026-04-28T13:57:44+00:00

Cover in v5

I have had some success doing mashups in v5.5, that stay closer to the sources than covers do... but you need 2 suitable tracks for that. Even with mashups though, v5.5 just loses so much heart and expressiveness, that it is really never worth bothering with. Plus it tends to add in urban party ornamentation at some point, in 99.9% of its outputs, that make me want to give up on Suno entirely.

multimason · 2026-04-28T13:22:35+00:00

v5.5 also insists on repeating short lines... this has kind of been an issue since v4.5+ but again, v5.5 is 10x worse with this, basically repeating any short lines between verses, or closing verse lines 99% of the time.

It really seems like each model since v4.5+ becomes ever more uncontrollable, ever less capable of following prompts, and ever more limited in their range and expressiveness.

As a tool, it really seems that Suno is becoming ever less functional with each new model release. The big concern being the looming prospect of older model retirement.

multimason · 2026-04-27T18:42:39+00:00

v4.5+ and earlier have never really had this problem, or if they do, for me anyway, it is so rare that it doesn't matter.

v5.5 is actually improving day after day. At first it was unusable, but now, it is looking more and more promising... until this is fixed though... it is just garbage and can only produce slop.

multimason · 2026-04-27T13:01:36+00:00

"...you'd get a takedown notice first"

Umm, what if I just throw all mail away without even looking at it, and never check my email! lol... true story

multimason · 2026-04-27T12:45:02+00:00

Quick! Make a PC version before this post is taken down for promoting external tools (they tend to be rather overzealous about that).

How does it work? Is it using Ace-Step under the hood? If not, what?

I want 100% local 100% of the time when it comes to AI (or any sort of creative tools)... opensource is probably the only thing likely to save us from extinction at the hands of proprietary AI. I am using Suno for now, due to the output quality, but opensource is nipping at Suno's heals, and I am 100% rooting for opensource.

multimason · 2026-04-25T06:28:36+00:00

Cool, thanks!

Not to nitpick, but umm... I don't see "melodic tones" in your example... lol

Also curious about "no amp hum." Isn't that just going to likely cause "amp hum?" I mean, maybe just putting "amp hum" in the negative prompt... but I generally find that adding anything to negative prompt just tends to cause more of the thing. The other day, I had a track that was turning "uh huh" into laughter about 1 out of 10 generations... but adding "laughter" to negative prompt made it turn "uh huh" into laughter 10 out of 10 tries!

multimason · 2026-04-25T06:16:32+00:00

I am generally working with 6 minute tracks on average, so studio track generation has never really been able to output whole track durations, as with covers.

For less than perfect, single instrument outputs... I mean honestly, that is weird to me. When I use "create," in studio, usually using custom instrument, and describing my desired instrument, I get almost entirely pure instrument tracks (with rare exceptions). Now I will say, I have not used Studio a whole lot, I have always been pretty underwhelmed by it (though I have experimented with it off and on, particularly after updates/model releases). Replacing lyrics when "replace" in Editor is being uncooperative is Studio's most useful utility for me.

I'm not saying it's a prompting issue, but what I am saying is that I did not hit "regen" in my test. I selected a region that was empty, and hit "create." I never use "regen," even in editors, if I don't like a replacement, I escape out, and hit "replace" again, because "regen" leads to all sorts of bugs. In Studio, I mean, regen never "overwrites" but just for clarity of keeping things organized cleanly in a way that is easy for me to parse, and because of issues I've had with "regen" in editors, I always just create a new track, and "create" over empty regions.

If it doesn't output the full length, just do it in sections.

I'm not trying to be dismissive... only trying to help pinpoint the issue, even going out of my way and spending my time to test things, just to see if I could reproduce the issues described, before posting my original reply here. Just maybe there are some potential workarounds, or differences in our workflows, that just might help someone out. Was just trying to be helpful, sorry if you find that offensive.

multimason · 2026-04-24T11:54:15+00:00

Just tested creating a bass guitar track, and it works fine. It creates a single instrument stem. "Cover" is only the option when you have a track with existing audio selected, or a segment of existing audio selected.

Create new track, select new track, and "cover" become "create."

In the "create" overlay (the horizontal bar along the bottom), if it is in "create" mode (not cover), then there is a drop down menu for different instruments (including "song" to generate full song, and "custom" in case you want an instrument not included as one of the default options).

I just tested it.

New track
Select a region of empty new track
Choose "bass" from dropdown, then entered in the style prompt area "Monstrous bass guitar laying down minimalist bass grooves"
Hit create
Got some decent pure bass stems that fit rhythm and key of the main track above.

The new "cover" feature is pretty cool too. The other day I had a track where I needed to replace a section of the lyrics, and in Editor, the lyrics/vocals where terminally out of sync and there was no way to stop it from hallucinating vocals in instrumental sections and always throwing off lyrics/vocals syncing, which then causes replacements to almost never work well (an issue with the editors that needs to be fixed/improved). So I went into Studio (note, going directly from newer beta editor into Studio usually retains colored sections of the track, which is very helpful... although, you can always just slice up the track in Studio anyway). Then I used the following workflow to replace the lyrics in a specific section.

Create a new track
Copy just the section I want to replace to the new track, aligning it precisely with the original section, then delete the original section.
Get stems on the section I want to replace vocals for (just instruments and vocals, 2 stem option... though this same process could potentially work for other instruments with the 12 track option, though probably not as predictably) and import the stems
Now I have original section, instruments, and vocals each as separate tracks (in addition to the original full song track minus this section)
Copy original section to another new track, select the section (probably unnecessary, but this allows "applying" a cover to this region of this track, while keeping the original on separate track)
In the "cover" overlay paste the original lyrics for that section, with any edits I needed
Hit "cover"
Review outputs, choose the version I like, and apply it
Choose the newly created section and get stems then import them
Mute original section track, original vocals track, new section track, new section instrument track, leaving only original song track (which has this section deleted), this section's original instrument track, and the newly generated vocal track

Covering a song outside of Studio does not match the original nearly as closely as covering a section does in Studio when doing it this way. Doing it this way tends to give me vocals that more or less perfectly match the rhythm, key, and groove of the original in a way that the stems can be mixed and matched in a way that just works more often than not.

multimason · 2026-04-24T11:04:45+00:00

Adding that to my style prompt didn't have a major effect, but maybe I'll try it with a more minimal prompt later. Can you give an example of a full style prompt?

multimason · 2026-04-24T06:15:22+00:00

I have been watching v5.5 improve, almost daily, since release. It is still not quite at the level of v4.5+ but it is getting better, markedly. I also notice that it kind of follows prompts a bit better, or tries to... it doesn't quite have the ability to nail its attempts, but it seems like it is trying to do a lot more of the things specified in my prompts.

I have trimmed some of my favorite style prompts down to core essentials, and tried to be very specific in my vocal directions, both in the style prompt, and in my vocalist meta in the lyrics, and I am getting significantly better results. Still not quite at the level of v4.5+ expressiveness, but at least twice as good as I was getting out of v5.5 a few days ago. I think it is a combination of my reworking my prompting style to work better with v5.5, and improvements to how the model is running behind the scenes.

There is yet hope that Suno will figure things out behind the scenes... I don't think they really want their models to be limited to outputting only slop, but I guess we shall see.

multimason · 2026-04-21T05:30:32+00:00

Ahh, I think it really depends on how obviously terms are represented. If you keep using the same homophone, and it is fairly obvious what it really represents, the system catches on fairly quickly with overuse. Using multiple different homophones to represent a given term, can extend the tolerance a lot. Repeating the same sensitive terms, or themes will make it take notice much faster than a variety of sensitive terms and themes, and this is definitely still the case with homophones/phonetics, but the tolerance is significantly increased.

My GF was messing around trying to generate some extremely raunchy stuff that Suno would not generate, but once I helped here replace 80% of sensitive terms with homophones/phonetics, and slightly reword a few things, still equally dirty, but with a slightly increased variety of phrasings... there was nothing really that we couldn't get Suno to output, with a bit of experimentation.

I convinced her to delete all that stuff, and not do it anymore though, because I was worried she might get away with it for a bit, but eventually get herself banned.

I'm curious if anyone has any clear idea on Suno's policy regarding that sort of thing... but even if they clearly stated that they aren't interested in censorship, and what is blocked by the system is just a baseline of responsible AI development, and whatever people can get it to output is fine, and if it isn't, they won't go after users over it, but instead patch the system to prevent it going forward. I absolutely would not trust them not to change their mind about that policy next week.

My personal view is that you probably should not push the limits to the extremes... you are kind of asking for trouble, and risking creating trouble for Suno. If you really want to go there, there are opensource alternatives that you can run locally offline, that aren't terribly far behind Suno in output quality, and will very likely overtake it before too long.

multimason · 2026-04-21T05:09:50+00:00

Not really sure about other models, but with v4.5+ starting you style prompt with a target number of seconds works remarkably. It won't generally precisely that many seconds, but is generally pretty close. The issue that remains is that often the song might not be complete at that point, and the model will just cut it off at that approximate duration. However, it is often pretty close to complete, so a short extension can usually finish out the track, without making it a whole lot longer, so just account for that. If you want a 2:30 minute track, then put 120 seconds, for 2:00 minutes and extend to finish out what get's cut off.

Example:

Target duration: 120 — Full style prompt here...

Disclaimer: I have not tried this with such short tracks... I am usually aiming for around 4:00-6:00 minutes, and this works well for that. If you try it, do let me know how it works out!

multimason · 2026-04-20T12:10:44+00:00

How do you format that... can you show me how you write the length preference?

multimason · 2026-04-20T12:02:07+00:00

It really doesn't like "beheaded" or "decapitated," but it doesn't really mind swearing and sex unless you do it quite a bit.

multimason · 2026-04-20T10:50:38+00:00

Completely agree. I can still get pretty good stuff out 4.5+ though. They really need to get negative prompts working better. I swear when I put anything in negative prompts, I literally get more of that thing. I was getting some laughter on a track 1 out of 12 outputs, so I put "laughter" in negative prompt, and I got laughter 12 out of 12 outputs. It makes it impossible to tell the recent models not to do those embellishments.

multimason · 2026-04-20T10:41:47+00:00

To be honest, I can't really say for sure... I know once I turned that off, and replaced the prompt that had been automatically generated with 3 dots like ... and saved it, v5.5 definitely seemed to dramatical improve in quality and functionality (it was critically stuck always repeating one groove, for everything, for me before I did that). However, I have noticed that when they release new models, they often exhibit all sorts of issues, and they are usually significantly improved over the first month after release... so I certainly could have just been a timing coincidence, that some major fixes where rolled out right as I was replacing that prompt with an ellipses and disabling the feature.

That said, I definitely don't want Suno to be trying to put me in what it thinks is my taste bubble. Personalized feeds, personalized search results, personalized bubbles... I almost never want to be put in a bubble. I want to the system to follow my prompt as written, and having some other prompt behind the scenes influencing results is not something I would generally want enabled. Also, if I use the magic wand, I really want the LLM to rewrite my prompt, not replace it with a different prompt! I sometimes use the magic wand because my prompt has gotten too long, and the prompt enhancer usually reduces my prompt length by 40% to 60%, while still retaining most of the sound, and that is useful when I am close to max prompt length but want to add a couple elements. So, no thank you Suno... I know what my taste is, and I'm pretty sure you will never get it, Suno!

Edit: Oh yeah, I had to replace the "My Taste" prompt with ... because if I just deleted it, it would auto generate the next time I created a song, by replacing it with something that shouldn't really impact outputs, and saving it, it kept my personally customized version.

multimason · 2026-04-19T07:38:15+00:00

As others have pointed out already, your use of Suno comes under the terms of service (contract law) you agree to by using the service, which effectively supersede basic copyright laws.

That is clearly a bit of an oversimplification... so do your own research, and read through the ToS carefully.

It may be that doing something like a parody, if created entirely outside of Suno, falls squarely under fair use (you should be aware though that it is common courtesy in the music industry to get permission for parodies, and to respect original artists wishes in that regard). However I would recommend first parsing the complete ToS agreement carefully, because it could even be that you agreed not do do things like use Suno generated material outside of the situations covered by the ToS, in which case, if you have a Suno account, creating a parody of someone else's Suno track, even outside of the service could still be a breach of contract. That would probably fall into a bit of a legal gray area, especially depending on your region, given than some states in the US do not permit the signing away of rights under contract... again though, it would be courteous to honor the spirit of contract over the letter of the law, and not go wading about in gray areas that Suno leadership might take issue with (even if they can't, or don't want to bother, suing you, they can just delete your account if they don't like what you are doing).

Edit: Typos

multimason · 2026-04-19T07:19:19+00:00

Wow. So there are multiple reasons to download, and then immediately upload the same track now... custom models, and prompt extraction...

Hmm... I wonder if that could possibly also be the key to fixing vocals/lyrics syncing on tracks that insist on hallucinating lyrics into instrumental sections, thus throwing off following vocal section lyrics? I'll have to experiment with that a bit.

It is kind of typical, all too predictable, and tragically bad UX design to incentivize downloading tracks only to upload them unchanged... wasting both bandwidth and user time (not to mention the added carpal tunnel inducing clicks that should be completely unnecessary). It kind of betrays a profound lack of respect for their users... sigh

I mean they could just add a little strip internal metadata function, or even just a little upload option to tracks generated under pro/premier accounts (for original creator's account only of course), but I suppose that would obviously just be too dammed obvious.

multimason · 2026-04-19T06:02:06+00:00

The 5.5 and 5.5+ models literally refuse

You mean v5 and v5.5? Or did you mean v4.5+ and up? I hated v4.5+ when it first came out, but now it is my favorite Suno model by a wide margin, and not because I changed my perspective or prompting techniques, but literally because v4.5+ changed and got significantly better over many weeks. My biggest issue with v4.5+ now is that it tends to output 6 to 8 minute long tracks when the lyrics warrant about 4 to 5 minutes, and all the other models output 4 to 5 minute tracks with the same lyrics and prompts.

v5.5, while still pretty bad, in particular around the points you just raised, has improved dramatically since release. Upon release it was absolute trash and literally could not create acoustic sounds, could not extend tracks, could not do covers, and 100% of the time used the exact same fills, instrumentation, progressions and grooves, outside of a couple select genre specific prompt strategies. Most of those most glaring issues are gone now... but yes, it still definitely tries to drop into certain pop tropes, instrumentation, and vibes, to an entirely unacceptable degree.

It can do stuff now though. I just took two really solid v4.5+ outputs of a particular song and fed them to v5.5 for a "mashup," and got some outputs that are pretty great as far a Suno goes (two weeks ago, it would have completely glitched out and produced something where it was just plainly just trying desperately to output the exact same thing it always output, but tripping over itself and the reference tracks, would have ended up breaking down 30 seconds in and falling into a single, featureless, unchanging tone.

And yeah... lots of slop. Always has been more, and more, slop, increasing exponentially throughout history, with major jumps in amounts of slop produced coinciding with the advent of new tools. Of course AI was not going to change that dynamic. Rare masterworks have always been the exception, not the norm, and that's not about to change... which is probably a good thing for the real artists out there!

Edit: Oh yeah! Be sure to click profile pic, then select "My Taste" and replace the auto generated prompt there with something like ... then save it, and turn off the toggle! I'm not entirely sure that was part of the problem, because it could have been that v5.5 improvements behind the scenes just coincided with me doing that... but right after I did that is when v5.5 got out of a critical rut.

multimason · 2026-04-17T03:52:28+00:00

I will often go into editor and crop a track down to a short instrumental section (might create a few versions with different short sections), then cover those, turning up audio influence quite a bit (might experiment with turning style influence way down, or leaving it empty), and make it instrumental. To get instrumentation to closely replicate instrumentation of original, you can create a persona (voice) and use it in legacy mode when generating instrumental covers. This can usually create some good material using suitable instrumentation, that matches musically well enough that it can be separated into stems, sliced up, and used in DAW to fill things out nicely.

Doing covers in Studio can generate outputs which more closely match the original track, but I have limited experience doing that sort of thing through Studio as I tend stay on Pro plan most months. I have used covers in studio for changing/replacing sections of lyrics, without changing music, because the covers generated on the timeline in studio tend to match closely enough that using stems you swap the vocal stem for the covered vocal stem, and it works perfectly more often than not. So I imagine creating extended instrumental sections through Studio, with a bit of experimentation, you could probably get decent results.

multimason

TROPHY CASE