I don't know why this is happening, but I just loaded a 64-bit Nuendo 5.5.6 project that was using one instance of MAutoDynamicEQ (among other plugins) and it can't play back properly until I turn it off. This is with the latest 7.13 version.
When I turn it off, the VST meter drops about 40%. The plugin isn't doing much more than dynamically attenuating a single frequency band.
This project might have been set up with an earlier version than 7.13 because the project played back correctly the last time I ran it.
Has anyone else noticed higher CPU use with the 64-bit version of this plugin? Thanks!
High CPU use of MAutoDynEQ 7.13 in Nuendo 5 - SOLVED!
-
MeldaProduction MeldaProduction https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=176122 - KVRAF
- 14325 posts since 15 Mar, 2008 from Czech republic
Hmmm, that looks like a problem of some kind. First - can you remove any 32-bit versions you have there? Steinberg hosts for some reason sometimes choose 32-bit wrapped plugins even if 64-bit is available and the host is 64-bit. Then of course, everything gets quite problematic.
Also, does it happen with a new project? What if you remove the plugin and create a new instance?
Also, does it happen with a new project? What if you remove the plugin and create a new instance?
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1895 posts since 13 Oct, 2002
I figured it out: it's the upsampling! For some reason I used 4X upsampling and it was OK till I reloaded the project.
Is it possible that there's a bug where the upsampling doesn't always take effect immediately? Or perhaps the project has to be reloaded for the upsampling to take effect?
Either way, lowering the upsampling to 1X significantly reduces the CPU use; but I must say that I find it somewhat unusual for CPU use to rise so much for upsampling since this doesn't seem to require as much CPU in other plugins I use.
Anyway, problem and solution found.
Is it possible that there's a bug where the upsampling doesn't always take effect immediately? Or perhaps the project has to be reloaded for the upsampling to take effect?
Either way, lowering the upsampling to 1X significantly reduces the CPU use; but I must say that I find it somewhat unusual for CPU use to rise so much for upsampling since this doesn't seem to require as much CPU in other plugins I use.
Anyway, problem and solution found.
-
MeldaProduction MeldaProduction https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=176122
- KVRAF
- 14325 posts since 15 Mar, 2008 from Czech republic
Well, I cannot really take any stand about if the CPU rises more or less than it should. From the technical point of view, the 4x upsampling should increase CPU requirements about 4x, since the plugin is processing 4x more data plus the additional filtering. Of course, upsampling can be programmed well or not - the filtering stage can be either implemented with high quality like in the other case, or you may use inferior algorithms, which will take much less CPU. But the main processing stage, meaning 4x CPU for 4x upsampling shouldn't change. If so, then something is wrong.
The upsampling should take effect immediately, so you should see it on the CPU meter. But quite frankly, MAutoDynamicEq takes for example 0.4% CPU on my computer, so increase to 1.6% may not be very significant. It may be some kind of problem with your host's latency compensation. Or it may be graphics...hard to say.
The upsampling should take effect immediately, so you should see it on the CPU meter. But quite frankly, MAutoDynamicEq takes for example 0.4% CPU on my computer, so increase to 1.6% may not be very significant. It may be some kind of problem with your host's latency compensation. Or it may be graphics...hard to say.