Most CPU efficient host?

[braj]

There is the Reaper menu extension that simplifies it all, maybe they should consider cleaning up and simplifying the menus by default and allow users to add complexity as they see fit. But at least when you want to put something somewhere it is totally likely that it will bend to your whims. I really like that actually, one man's poison... but then if you are working in the music world professionally having everything standardized, including the GUI, helps efficiency when collaborating with others, no 'where the heck is the mute button' and other such things. I am a home hobbyist but if I were a pro I would likely use something other than Reaper.

[hibidy]

but that is tweaking...........tweaking is bad!

[braj]

but that is tweaking...........tweaking is bad!

It 'apples and oranges' as they say there are benefits and drawbacks to everything, evey coin has an opposite side, every cloud has a silver lining its all good.

[Arglebargle]

fair question. I've actually grown weary of certain aspects of the reap lately (their REFUSAL to address midi needs/desires of a large user base, it's not like they simply cannot fix/change some of the things) but I think having efficiency with the cpu DOES increase workflow. In fact I can load up some gigantuous templates/projects with minimal cpu hit. This means I don't have to worry about freezing/cpu spiking/etc, which means I can do what I want. I can't do that in studio one.

Cockos seems dead set against simple MIDI improvements, but you can probably say that about any DAW company, "they are ignoring X". My gripes with Reaper are a lot more tolerable than my problems with Sonar.

[Hink]

fair question. I've actually grown weary of certain aspects of the reap lately (their REFUSAL to address midi needs/desires of a large user base, it's not like they simply cannot fix/change some of the things) but I think having efficiency with the cpu DOES increase workflow. In fact I can load up some gigantuous templates/projects with minimal cpu hit. This means I don't have to worry about freezing/cpu spiking/etc, which means I can do what I want. I can't do that in studio one.

Good points. I do almost no electronic music - everything is recorded instruments/vocals

*spoken in the positive* I would love very much to hear some

[hibidy]

but that is tweaking...........tweaking is bad!

It 'apples and oranges' as they say there are benefits and drawbacks to everything, evey coin has an opposite side, every cloud has a silver lining its all good.

was

joking

[hibidy]

fair question. I've actually grown weary of certain aspects of the reap lately (their REFUSAL to address midi needs/desires of a large user base, it's not like they simply cannot fix/change some of the things) but I think having efficiency with the cpu DOES increase workflow. In fact I can load up some gigantuous templates/projects with minimal cpu hit. This means I don't have to worry about freezing/cpu spiking/etc, which means I can do what I want. I can't do that in studio one.

Cockos seems dead set against simple MIDI improvements, but you can probably say that about any DAW company, "they are ignoring X". My gripes with Reaper are a lot more tolerable than my problems with Sonar.

agreed.

[heffus]

Studio One does have CPU issue. Luckily with the new version i can finally see which plugin is using the most cpu power.

How do you do that?

Pretty easy, just click the performance meter on the bottom left of the transport bar and check the show device tab.

Never new that. Thanks!

[munchkin]

Let's be honest the poll looks like a huge middle finger from Reaper to the other DAWs. And if it was a pissing contest the poll would shoe Reaper users with huge wangers compared to the competition. Any other conclusion is just penis envy.

[hibidy]

Let's be honest the poll looks like a huge middle finger from Reaper to the other DAWs. And if it was a pissing contest the poll would shoe Reaper users with huge wangers compared to the competition. Any other conclusion is just penis envy.

haha!

[CTStump]

I think the poll should have just listed Reaper, would have saved the other hosts the embarrassment. Unless the poll was closed to Reaper users but than there wouldn't be anything to vote for. Paradoxical irony hurts my brain.

[koolkeys]

I think the poll should have just listed Reaper, would have saved the other hosts the embarrassment. Unless the poll was closed to Reaper users but than there wouldn't be anything to vote for. Paradoxical irony hurts my brain.

It WAS closed to Reaper users. We're all Reaper users, whether we know it or not, haven't you heard?

With that being said, despite owning multiple hosts that I consider "efficient" on the CPU, I have no problem saying that Reaper is the most efficient as a host. I don't completely buy into the whole idea that it makes different plugins more efficient when loaded through Reaper. There is no way it can really do that. It CAN possibly thread them better on the various CPU cores. But with just a single VST loaded, no way.

With that being said, even some of the "heavier" hosts I use are typically not enough to worry about on any semi-modern system. The host portion itself isn't terribly significant with any of them.

Brent

[CTStump]

I figured I'd get a rise from that.

[LawrenceF]

I figured I'd get a rise from that.

Troublemaker.

[CTStump]

I figured I'd get a rise from that.

Troublemaker.

I'm a thrill seeker of sorts and this reminds of the altered lyrics of an old song...

You don't tug on Superman's cape,

You don't spit in to the wind,

you don't pull the mask of the ol' lone ranger and you don't mess with "Reaper" men

There I said it....


Got to remind myself to do this once a day, makes me feel so ALIVE!!!