I am using a very old machine to make music yet I rarely have to freeze tracks and my sessions are usually on the large side. You will only need to do that if you are using some serious CPU hogs, giant sessions or specific presets using lots of DSP intensive soft synths. And even then how many of the CPU hogs are running at any given moment in time ? Typically not many, though I guess that depends on how your DAW deals with non playing synths that are in memory.
I usually leave the VSTi live along with all effects processing and mix that. I rough mix as I go and do the final mix when the track is complete. I find bouncing/render in place time consuming and disruptive to my composition progress. So when I can avoid it I do, for mixing it is not helpful either, having to re-activate synths on what is almost always a fast growing session is not conducive to smooth mixing workflow. I rarely have less than 100 tracks in a project. Not all VSTi but many are.
One advantage for rendering/bounce/export to audio is you have the entire multitrack session as .wavs (as a more secure multitrack format for any future DAW) - but you could do that right at the very end once it is mixed. In the event of needing to go back in the future or archive.
I often do not know my final effects processing automation until the final mix so I don't want time based effects consolidated into audio prematurely either.
I can only imagine you are using a lot of cpu hog synths for this to be an issue or running at high SR.
Cubase - why bother to mixdown, why not just...
-
- KVRian
- 1185 posts since 27 Apr, 2016
Last edited by Synthman2000 on Sat Sep 23, 2023 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 8705 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
It's really easy. Try 2 Wavestates and an Opsix. That kills my laptop dead even at 44.1 or 48kHz. High sample rates are simply not an option. And they don't even have to be running at the same time. Those bad old days of saving CPU are most definitely NOT in the past.
-
- KVRian
- 1185 posts since 27 Apr, 2016
Fair enough I see your point. I personally would never use a laptop for audio production. Laptops and audio always felt completely wrong to me.
-
- KVRAF
- 8705 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
There are laptops that are very capable. Mine is mid range and gives some grunt that can easily handle big tracks, just not hogs like Korg. I used to have desktops but for various reasons a laptop is by far the best option now. It's one of the many reasons I like hw synths - I don't have CPU anxiety with them 
And they never seem to make computers with knobs on.
And they never seem to make computers with knobs on.-
- KVRian
- 1185 posts since 27 Apr, 2016
Laptops never felt robust enough, either physically or with CPU horsepower. Weak choice of audio interfaces, noisy fans, screen too small, keyboard uncomfortable, the CPU's are always some kind of compromise and few of them specced for reliable audio use, by definition rarely well set up for audio purposes (OS tweaks AV etc). I appreciate some might not have a choice. Never have and never will use one for audio. I always want a full blown desktop box, usually built myself or by a audio builder.
Anyway you prove the point that there is sometimes need to commit softsynths to audio, which is fair, when needs must.
Anyway you prove the point that there is sometimes need to commit softsynths to audio, which is fair, when needs must.