Why is everyone so obsessed with plugin CPU consumption?

[rockstar_not]

Simple answer:
For sounding professional, you still have to use every cycle of your CPU. Example: 16 tracks track, each one:
Synth/sampler - Saturation - Mod FX - Small Reberb/Delay -Comp - 2nd Comp/Limiter - EQ

Up to Busses, to main out with some fx, summing up to, say:
12 Synths and 100 FX .

Some of my songs don't even have 100 NOTES in them, and folks tell me I sound professional, sometimes, even on those songs.

-Scott

[reggaemylitis]

The Professionalizer (tm) is available for $999 at www.GiveMeYourMoneyAndYouTooWillBeProfessional.com.

will there be a group buy on this one?

[corman rapeblio]

Simple answer:
For sounding professional, you still have to use every cycle of your CPU.

You can buy my fantastic Professionalizer (tm) VST-plugin. If your project only uses say 20% CPU, you can insert the Professionalizer (tm) which will consume the remaining CPU cycles, making sure you always sound 100 % professional.

The Professionalizer (tm) is available for $999 at www.GiveMeYourMoneyAndYouTooWillBeProfessional.com.

[spacefox]

Anyway, I think you are all idiots, work that CPU til it screams, thats why you bought it, and try bouncing or freezing once in a while, you might like it

The moment that CPU screams you stop making music and go into "computer operator" mode. Freeze, bounce, pinpoint problematic plugins, etc. Sure, it's not that hard. It does somehow interfere with your flow.

Those little road bumps and minor annoyances are not really time-consuming or anything, but might have a negative effects on inspiration. You know, there are just those situations when you don't won't to bothered with trivial shit.
Having enough headroom all the time, makes sure you never hit the ceiling at just the wrong moment.



You are right about one thing though. We are idiots.

[Kebmaster]

Freezing and bouncing (if you have the facility)is a pain in the ass. Especially as you cant move or edit the frozen data. If you cant understand why people are obsessed with CPU consumption, you obviously dont use any decent plug ins. Unless you have a modern dual core super duper computer, these REQUIRE CPU CONSUMPTION!!!

[wrench45us]

i think a lot depends on how you work. if you have a whole song ready in your head and just need to put togetehr a set of audio tracks that are all going to fit together perfectly, cpu levels should never be a problem.

but if you're working with a few song segments and working out how they should fit together and how some sections may be layered up with other tracks, it can get to be a problem. the more balls that need to be juggled in the air at one time, the greater the strain on the cpu. even with freeze or bounce to track it's handy to move ahead, but that may only get you to the chorus and you have to unfreeze and plow ahead through that section.
even splitting the drum kit into channels and applying the different fx chains can be enough to grind an older machine into the ground.
if you have freeze or bounce to track it's a matter of doing things in a certain sequence to work with your box. The other obvious trick is once all the parts are played in, you can usually raise your latency to get on with the arranging and mixing and the old box will accept another layer of fx processing.

[.jon]

I don't get you guys - I don't freeze (well ok maybe twice a year), but rendering is a vital part of my workflow!

Start with something, consider it cool - bounce on a new track, next track. I'd never finish a thing if I kept all the tracks virtual until the endspurt.

Synths are waste of CPU cycles! Viva Effectissimo!

[pekadan]

I find that it reduces the options available, i.e. having to bounce/render to me is a bit like adding sugar to tea - you can't take it back out again. Because my meager machine craps out at about 6 instruments and a few fx, I have to bounce stuff a lot - I therefore tend to end up with several 'versions' of the same project with all different bits bounced so that I can still go back and change stuff.

This is probably down to the haphazard way I work...

Yep, same here. I like to play around a lot when I'm composing. I don't necessarily compose with a few VSTis until my song is "written", then load-record-bounce. I like to load up a few different instruments and quite a lot of effects and try stuff out as I go along. I jam a lot and later go back and edit the midi tracks.

Usually I run out of both CPU power and memory long before a project is finished and I have to start compromising. (Like before even trying to start a CPU hog late in a project I must bounce 3 other tracks first and shut those VSTis down. Then very often I won't even bother to start the hog). So I end up bouncing different versions of tracks and saving temporary presets like crazy. No fun. Usually muting midi-tracks is not sufficient, VSTis must be unloaded for the CPU to start breathing.

To get memory reallocated, often I need to restart the host and reload the project. Takes forever.

I always hate when I get to this point (this is when Cubase usually start hanging and crashing too). I run out of options and making music is only half as fun as when I started my project. This is why CPU consumption IS an issue for me. I don't want to change the way I make music, but I know I must. I have a 3GHz P4 and 2Gb RAM so it's not a *totally* out-of-date machine I'm using either.

[CypherOne]

I find that it reduces the options available, i.e. having to bounce/render to me is a bit like adding sugar to tea - you can't take it back out again. Because my meager machine craps out at about 6 instruments and a few fx, I have to bounce stuff a lot - I therefore tend to end up with several 'versions' of the same project with all different bits bounced so that I can still go back and change stuff.

This is probably down to the haphazard way I work...

Yeah but the way I work is to save a different project version with every major change to the track, so once I bounce a synth down if I decide i want to cahnge something that can't be done just on the audio I just revert to a previous version and do it there. Disk space is cheap, I have about 40 versions of one track at the mo

yeah, that's what I meant

[whyterabbyt]

Freezing and bouncing (if you have the facility)is a pain in the ass.

I dont find that. Ive been doing it since my first DAW, and its part and parcel of my workflow. Make decisions, stick to them, move on to the next bit, tweak the detail later.

Especially as you cant move or edit the frozen data.

That actually depends on how you do it, and what your host is.

If you cant understand why people are obsessed with CPU consumption, you obviously dont use any decent plug ins.

Nice display of all the logical faculties of a crowbar.

Oh, and I can understand why some people are concerned with CPU consumption, but being obsessed with it is bullshit; more than likely a crappy excuse for failing to actually get any music done.

Unless you have a modern dual core super duper computer, these REQUIRE CPU CONSUMPTION!!!

Wow, thanks for the emphasis kiddo. Noone would ever have understood that software requires CPU consumption if you hadnt put it in capitals. Wowsy.

[bluedad]

but being obsessed with it is bullshit; more than likely a crappy excuse for failing to actually get any music done.

that could be the most likely scenario..
same thing with updates

[stayne]

you'd be surprised at what you can accomplish with just a few plugins. try to limit yourself and be a bit more creative.

[Hunter]

I find that it reduces the options available, i.e. having to bounce/render to me is a bit like adding sugar to tea - you can't take it back out again. Because my meager machine craps out at about 6 instruments and a few fx, I have to bounce stuff a lot - I therefore tend to end up with several 'versions' of the same project with all different bits bounced so that I can still go back and change stuff.

This is probably down to the haphazard way I work...

Yeah but the way I work is to save a different project version with every major change to the track, so once I bounce a synth down if I decide i want to cahnge something that can't be done just on the audio I just revert to a previous version and do it there. Disk space is cheap, I have about 40 versions of one track at the mo

yeah, that's what I meant

Maybe i should have read all your post

[Hunter]

You are right about one thing though. We are idiots.

I feel BONEO may have influenced my posting style

[Hunter]

I don't get you guys - I don't freeze (well ok maybe twice a year), but rendering is a vital part of my workflow!

Start with something, consider it cool - bounce on a new track, next track. I'd never finish a thing if I kept all the tracks virtual until the endspurt.

Synths are waste of CPU cycles! Viva Effectissimo!

I think you have a good method there, I always get stuck in the tweaking trap where I just keep tweaking stuff incessantly and never get it finished, I should force myself to render more, definitely.