If you're working on a track that's heavy on plug-ins or just causes a high CPU load/drop-outs, make sure the track display is scaled so that the whole track fits on screen. This takes a little load off the PC having to scroll the track and re-draw the display as it goes along.

This is something I'd always done because it just seemed logical but I'd never heard it mentioned until I saw it confirmed in an article in this months SOS. I don't know how effective it really is but it's always seemed to cause less drop-outs for me.

Maybe it's common practice to do this but I've never heard it mentioned. You could also close any piano roll windows etc as these probably scroll as the track plays which will cause more work for the CPU.

Excuse me if this is teaching grandma's to suck eggs but might be of help to some.

Another even bigger CPU helper is to do this.

At Mix down if you're happy with the sound of a track (e.g. Gutar 1) with it's effects plugs ect..... Create a new track and bounce this (Guitar 1) to the new track thus recording the effects with it. You can now disable the FX plugs on the said track because you just recorded them to the new track with the effect(s).

This goes for Soft Synths/Samplers also. When you're happy with the MIDI sequence you can bounce this to an Audio track and again disable the VST/DXi or RTAS instrument.

--------------------
Funk It

...well thanks for that, UNIT393.....

i'm sure it'll revolutionise my DAW use..

Excellent idea Unit393. I hadnt even thought of that [ duh??]. Now this begs the question...ahem...how?

Thanks

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

Quote:

---

Now this begs the question...ahem...how?

Thanks

---

solo the track you want to bounce, export mixdown including automation and effects, then import audio file.

sorted

Well of course...that's exactly how to do it.....

Cheers!

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

In Pro Tools LE, I use a Buss for the (original) tracks output (e.g. Buss 1-2) and then on the new track use Buss 1-2 as the input instead of the anologue Mic/Line 1 ect ect ect.... Record enable the new track hit play and your done.

--------------------
Funk It

It's kinda crazy really....I am running a P4 3.2GHz 2with 2GB of PC-3200 DDR, a couple dedicated Seagate Barracuda 200GB drives, a Delta 66 and I am still running out of resources in SX 2.2!!

I am running several "juicy" plugins [Guitar Rig, SIR 1008, Ambiance] that suck all the CPU I throw at it. It sure can be limiting even when only working with 8 Analog tracks.

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

I too use Guitar Rig (and Love It) and this is a CPU killer for sure. It's OK in standalone mode but my guitar tracks are always the first I bounce so that I can use another instance of GR or just plain free up some resources. The good thing about this is you've always got you're original un-processed guitar (the one that originally had GR plugged into) track still there ready to be re-amped if need be.

--------------------
Funk It

Totally cool Unit393! Now I am anxious to leave work and go play with my toys Do you know if Cubase SX 2.2 gives you the same Bus output option for "bouncing" that you described for Pro Tools LE?

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

Sorry not really sure as I'm not that familiar with Cubase SX. I'm sure there would have to be a way though. Try asking this in the PC Music Forum maybe......?

Basically what is being described here is the "freeze" functionality that everyone talks about. It actually "freezes" the state of the track at that point, and then allows you to disable the CPU-hogging virtual instrument or effects.

Unfortunately, Cubase SX 2.2 has only partially implemented the freeze functionality, it only works on virtual instruments (VSTi's).

The new version of SX (3.0) DOES now offer complete freeze functionality that includes insert effects, VSTi's, etc. and is much more useful imho.

Until you decide to upgrade however, you can freeze your VSTi's, and do the single track audio export/re-import trick that UNIT393 describes, which is how we have all been doing it for years!

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Thanks DH. The VSTis are not a problem in my case but rather it is the effect plugins on some of my tracks [most notably Guitar Rig and SIR1008].

Is the export/import option a sensible one?

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

damn, DH got there first. Just freeze the track - only problem is you cant go back and change settings. Samplitude has had a freeze function for going on 2 years now...

Re. the scrolling issue - I keep this switched off in the preferences.

Use hardware instead.

Sorry I don't mean to state the obvious by saying this but that seems like the best option sometimes regardless of how many cpu cycles you've got

But everyone knows that Samplitude's for girls. Go with Sonar - it'll put hairs on your chest.

Quote:

---

damn, DH got there first. Just freeze the track - only problem is you cant go back and change settings. Samplitude has had a freeze function for going on 2 years now...

---

Quote:

---

In Pro Tools LE, I use a Buss for the (original) tracks output (e.g. Buss 1-2) and then on the new track use Buss 1-2 as the input instead of the anologue Mic/Line 1 ect ect ect.... Record enable the new track hit play and your done.

---

wouldn't it be simpler to just bounce to disk?

Jim

AFAIK, this is in effect what's being described here... every sequencer has a slightly different way of doing it - some have dedicated functions to achieve this, and in some it has to be done manually.

It was one of the first things we were taught when studying AE... especially as at that point, a 700mHz CPU was considered blisteringly fast...

Mike

--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

In Pro Tools LE, I use a Buss for the (original) tracks output (e.g. Buss 1-2) and then on the new track use Buss 1-2 as the input instead of the anologue Mic/Line 1 ect ect ect.... Record enable the new track hit play and your done.

---

wouldn't it be simpler to just bounce to disk?

Jim

---

Do you mean bounce the track to disc then import to a new track?

I think this is a harder way of going about it if this is what you mean. When I route a channels output to the Buss and then use this Buss as the input of the new track it merely takes seconds to setup. Very simple indeed!

I always bounce the audio to disk.I have things like Reaktor and V-Station which you can't really have more than about 3 instances of (on a P4 2Ghz 1GB ram)without it getting sluggish.Although I end up having loads of audio tracks but my computer is fully able to handle it.When I'm approaching finishing a track, I'm up to over 50 audio tracks,maybe 1 or 2 vsti's and 1 or 2 reverbs and that's it!I think it's because I have a fear of total recall of a song not being totally recalled,if you see what I mean?I'd rather have it as a solid audio file which I know will sound exactly the same as I left it no matter what.

Never used freeze, can you edit it afterwards though?

im with sarge on this one.

i use my CPU cycles to make sure the PC is stable and will happily record/play back 24 tracks of audio. rock-solid stability is THE most important thing. if there is the slightest chance of the audio glitching or the CPU dropping out for a moment, it will always happen on 'that' take, with a paying customer.

i'm happiest knowing my cpu / HD meters are sitting comfortably in the bottom 30%

and ive got all the hardware i own so far, for a similar price to one of those cpu-hungry waves plugin bundles.

funny how most people who use plugins because 'theyre cheaper and easier' end up spending vast sums of money on things that may one day stop working thanks to an OS or driver 'update'

--------------------
Statick Audio

Hardware, or DSP-powered plugins like those on the UAD-1 card or Powercore.

And with "freeze", you can go back and change your settings (at least in SX) but hitting the freeze button again to "un-freeze" the track.

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Also, this:

http://www.fxfreeze.com/

Here's my key CPU-power saving tip for the soft-synth/FX users.

Next time you attempt to add the 10th plugin effect to a single track, consider if you are trying to compensate for something which is lacking in your music and would be better solved by going to the source of the problem and resolving, i.e. either your arrangement or the sounds themselves.

Inappropriate sounds + lots and lots of effects generally = bad mix and bad track.

And it'll save you CPU power too

- Mark

--------------------
"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent."

Given that HD space is not really an issue these days..

Creating a Drums and Bass mix for tracking guitars, VSTis saves loads of resources. It also hones ones mixing skills on a regular basis...

Building tracks like this by gradually adding to the bouncedown and , either, archiving to CD or replacing eachtime means that when you finally come to a mixdown for everything, that.

1 The song is, to a large degree, already mixed
2 You can up the latency to a much larger figure to allow for loads of tracks , VSTis, EFX etc without glitching.

PS using a 2.8 P4 1 gig of ram i have no problems runnning 3/4/5 instances of SIR a couple of VSTi's and 20-30 tracks of audio at 24 bit...

--------------------
nibbled to death by an Okapi http://www.soundclick.com/tubilahdog

Excellent suggestion SteveDog!



--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

some great advice here, im definately gonna do the bounce down trick next time i record, i got guitar rig and want to use it as a plugin as opposed to standalone, this should help loads to lighten the load on the processor

--------------------
as metal as your nanna`s new hip

Guitar Rig is an awesome tool but it is a huge CPU pig when used as a plugin. The bouncing helps to avoid using it as a plugin. By using this approach over the last couple days I have been able to layer multiple Guitar Rig tracks and reduce my CPU usage by 40% at the saem time!

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

Quote:

---

Guitar Rig is an awesome tool but it is a huge CPU pig when used as a plugin. The bouncing helps to avoid using it as a plugin. By using this approach over the last couple days I have been able to layer multiple Guitar Rig tracks and reduce my CPU usage by 40% at the saem time!

---

Excellent. If you want another tip for fattening up Guitar Tracks try using Waves Doubler (part of the affordable Musicians Bundle). Plug this into the same track as NI Guitar Rig befor you bounce. I think you can download the demo.

blimey! - glad I don't use a P4 then - i can run 8 V-stations easily on my 1667mhz amd xp2000 machine, and that's in Logic which is way hungrier on the old CPU use than SX2! (8 V-stations all playing a different sound, arp's pads, leads, bass etc, shows about 70% cpu on Logic's meter)

--------------------
www.7161.com
Free online music space & Homepages

Quote:

---

blimey! - glad I don't use a P4 then - i can run 8 V-stations easily on my 1667mhz amd xp2000 machine, and that's in Logic which is way hungrier on the old CPU use than SX2! (8 V-stations all playing a different sound, arp's pads, leads, bass etc, shows about 70% cpu on Logic's meter)

---

That really isnt an apples to apples comparison mate. And, with all due respect, this isnt a discussion of P4 vs AMD, Mac and PC, Logic and Cubase etc. etc. etc. blah, blah, blah

It is more a discussion on how to improve CPU performance when dealing with multiple demanding plugins on multiple high resolution audio tracks. A few instances of Guitar Rig along with a few instances of SIR 1008 would surely cripple your setup unless you made use of a few tricks.

My system specs are listed above and they are certainly not weak by any means, but I am sure your comments were made with good intentions. Thanks for the thoughts.

Cheers,

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

Seeing as this thread has evolved into something completely different than the small tip I started it with, I'm pretty amazed that a lot of people were unaware of bouncing tracks down to audio/freezing them to free up resources.

Still, if something useful's been learnt, that's the main thing.

Off topic: Another plus point of bouncing down of vitual intruments is that for me it stops the temptation of endless tweaking rather than getting on with the actual music in hand.

Quote:

---

That really isnt an apples to apples comparison mate. And, with all due respect, this isnt a discussion of P4 vs AMD, Mac and PC, Logic and Cubase etc. etc. etc. blah, blah, blah

It is more a discussion on how to improve CPU performance when dealing with multiple demanding plugins on multiple high resolution audio tracks. A few instances of Guitar Rig along with a few instances of SIR 1008 would surely cripple your setup unless you made use of a few tricks.

My system specs are listed above and they are certainly not weak by any means, but I am sure your comments were made with good intentions. Thanks for the thoughts.

---

er.... Your PC SPEC'S may not be 'weak' on paper, but thats like saying you have an AMG Merc!... but it's only firing on 2 cylinders and the local pizza delivery moped can piss all over it on a standing quarter mile run.

Therefore i think my comment's relevent.


to present an analogy - you're like a guy walking into a car tuning shop with a car that's got a serious problem with it's timing and carb setup and is seriously performing WAY WAY below stock spec... then you're asking the mechanic for a power tweak!

any decent mechanic would tell you he'll need to sort the problems out FIRST (unless he's a total cowboy) - you cant tune a [ ****** ] engine mate! - If you're machine is performing so crappily as standard then what possible use is a few piddling cpu saver 'suggestions' that at the absolute most will offer almost negligible results.

sort it out man I say - the discussion may be all very interesting sure, but it ISN'T going to help your problem much imo.


I dunno about the SIR, & i dont use guitar rig, I'll try 'em - I d/loaded SIR... runs a couple (cathederal & theatre) at about 35%.. I'm d/loading guitar rig, but i dont expect it to push the cpu much more than amplitube or green.. I can run PLENTY of those.



I'll let you know how it goes.

--------------------
www.7161.com
Free online music space & Homepages

ew... that SIR's hungry eh! - anyways, I got Battery running a kit for some drums backing, a Logic stereo-widener, 4 Guitar rigs and 3 SIR's running Cathederal & Theatre files before it peaked. (at 512ms latency for doing live playing overdubs) - if i knock off one of the SIR's then I can add more G.Rig's tho of course.

but to be honest, why doncha work with a lesser reverb and use the SIR at the end on mix rendering off parts using it one by one or whatever? (if you MUST use SIR that is, i didnt think it was all that good for the stress it causes, nice, but I could live without it

i have to say Amplitube is lighter in use than Guitar rig perhaps.

--------------------
www.7161.com
Free online music space & Homepages

I appreciate your thoughts 7161 but a couple things worth noting:

1 - Guitar Rig is a superior simulater to Amplitube [which I also own]. The resources that it consumes is dependant on the effects you add to your rack. Specific tones can require a number of components that chew up resources. If you run several tracks of guitars with this plugin the system will choke unless you bounce the tracks down.

2 - Convolution is superior to most, if not all, reverb plugins. Try some of the other impulses available and you will soon see why it is so popular and then attest to its resouce chewing nature. The only way to improve it would be with hardware outboard gear like a higher end Lexicon or TC Electronic unit.

3 - My system runs perfectly. As a matter of fact I do own a couple computer companies www.gamepowersys.com and www.matrixit.net and I can assure you that I am equally familiar with the benifits and limitations of both the Intel and AMD environments. I am also confident that my systems configuration is solid. I build myself a new DAW every couple months in order to evaluate components. I also oversee the building of a few thousand workstations and laptops for clients every year.

In short, I think we could all use more resources if we wish to experiment with more plugins on more tracks. The stuff is getting more demanding all the time and so are all of our expectations for our gear.

Cheers!

--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca

uh-oh....

ok...


"1 - Guitar Rig is a superior simulater to Amplitube [which I also own]. The resources that it consumes is dependant on the effects you add to your rack. Specific tones can require a number of components that chew up resources. If you run several tracks of guitars with this plugin the system will choke unless you bounce the tracks down."


well that's a matter of opinion. I wouldnt say that myself, although it has some nifty extra features like the tape deck from what I can see - at the end of the day I wouldn't use EITHER for a serious guitar recording cos they simply dont have the depth, feel and sustain of a real amp & cab setup for me anyways.

---------

"If you run several tracks of guitars with this plugin the system will choke unless you bounce the tracks down."


well YOUR system chokes is what you mean!... I got fed up noodling metal riffs and lead after adding 5 of them. and those amp sim s/w's especialy dont cut it when it comes to lots of guitar layers imo (it all sounds like mush once you start to add a few layers imo, esp' with metal sounds) even IF i wanted lots of layers which i dont frankly. (showing about 50% cpu with 5 Guitar rigs running + drums)

------------

"2 - Convolution is superior to most, if not all, reverb plugins. Try some of the other impulses available and you will soon see why it is so popular and then attest to its resouce chewing nature. The only way to improve it would be with hardware outboard gear like a higher end Lexicon or TC Electronic unit."

sure... it sounds good, but mebbe you DONT make music for a living... you dont need top-end verb when your working on things composition, tracking and arrangement wise etc, add it at the end & render stuff when you fine-tune the mix if you dont have the grunt to run a couple of them in realtime with your mix.


-----------------

3 - My system runs perfectly. As a matter of fact I do own a couple computer companies www.gamepowersys.com and www.matrixit.net and I can assure you that I am equally familiar with the benifits and limitations of both the Intel and AMD environments. I am also confident that my systems configuration is solid. I build myself a new DAW every couple months in order to evaluate components. I also oversee the building of a few thousand workstations and laptops for clients every year.


NO IT DOESNT RUN PERFECTLY!!! (well, unless ALL P4's of your spec are that weedy)... it's not much of an endorsement of your pc-building prowess if your echte-super p4 cant run more than a couple of those NI rigs and two SIR's now is it when my crappy old 300 quid amd can run more!


-------------

"In short, I think we could all use more resources if we wish to experiment with more plugins on more tracks. The stuff is getting more demanding all the time and so are all of our expectations for our gear."


well now that IS true - people DO 'expect' MORE - But it's also a testament to the power of marketting products as an answer to problems over teaching recording or producing skills that so many here dont even know about bouncing for gods sake, & just think 'more = better' which is complete tripe!

i dont know what you know about recording or what is your experience, but imo when you record guitar music, the PERFORMANCE is king (as long as there's no problems with the take such as noise or hum or whatever) - you should already have defined the guitar sound, so you can safely render that rhythm track as a 'sound' from the amp-sim.

I just cant think of any situation where i'd need to NOT define and fix guitar parts as I produce the track, or frankly where i'd need tons of amp-sims in the first place! - to me a good rock sound only needs a few guitars to set the rhythm parts and the playing itself is the 'make or break' part.


i do realise of course that some people just think "add more = better", but i dont want to 'experiment' with ludicrous quantities of guitars, I just want to get the job done for which I'm being paid.

mind you, if you're addicted to those SIR reverbs then, i dunno... if you run mega tracks rates and HUGE monster mixes with tons of them running in realtime, get a dual G5 with a raid outboard 2 terrabyte rack for 6-7 grand and be just done with it.


anyways ALL this twaddle is somewhat immaterial because NOTHING you can do in terms of tiny little tweaks (as is the topic) is going to get you enuff extra power to slot another SIR in the rack when you run out of steam, so it's all academic really innit?... it's either - get more power or learn to produce a bit more and define what you're doing rather than dithering around thinking it'll all somehow miraculously 'come together in the mix' with some fiddling & changing of sounds at the end.... cos it wont!



--------------------
www.7161.com
Free online music space & Homepages

7161,

You seem to be awfully confrontational. Have you considered making a positive contribution? I am sure that would be much more appreciated.



--------------------
www.gpsystems.ca