Either way it seems like an odd way to work. Not sure what you think that you're gaining by keeping the synth/VSTi live but not the effects. IMO, you might as well render both out at the same time, as a loop.
Is it possible to freeze only the effects in cubase sx3?
-
- KVRAF
- 4822 posts since 14 Mar, 2002 from Somewhere else, on principle
I suppose that another alternative might be to just record a 100% mix of the effect. Then take the effect offline and use the render of it, in it's place.
Either way it seems like an odd way to work. Not sure what you think that you're gaining by keeping the synth/VSTi live but not the effects. IMO, you might as well render both out at the same time, as a loop.
Either way it seems like an odd way to work. Not sure what you think that you're gaining by keeping the synth/VSTi live but not the effects. IMO, you might as well render both out at the same time, as a loop.
-
- KVRAF
- 4822 posts since 14 Mar, 2002 from Somewhere else, on principle
I was suggesting putting the effect, by itself, on a submix and routing the synth/VSTi to the sub. Then just freezing the submix. I'm not sure how Cubase works but I just tried this out in Ableton Live, but Live won't allow the freezing of a track that is recieving ("monitor" set to "in") input from another track. :shrug"BONES wrote:I don't know if you guys are just stringing this dope along or what but its completely and utterly impossible to freeze just the effects for a track. Think about it, what comes out of the effect is totally dependant on what is fed into it so if you change the input, the output must also change. OTOH, you can freeze a synth just fine as it has no input, just output.
-
- KVRAF
- 8749 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
Pre-fader send
Send to group channel
Pull down source channel fader
Solo
Render to audio
Sorted.
As already mentioned though...why would anyone want to render an effect and not the source? If it's purely to save CPU then common sense dictates you render both. Either together or separately (personally I prefer separately)?
Send to group channel
Pull down source channel fader
Solo
Render to audio
Sorted.
As already mentioned though...why would anyone want to render an effect and not the source? If it's purely to save CPU then common sense dictates you render both. Either together or separately (personally I prefer separately)?
-
- KVRist
- 258 posts since 10 May, 2005
Dont forget though that Cubase has offline effects. Any midi or audio file should be right-clickable and then u see ur VST FX options for this type of offline processing. U can render statically and even tell Cubase how long u want the tail to be. In this way, u can keep applying FX to ur sound sources without using CPU.