Feb 21, 2007 04:09 pm RAM might help a tad bit, but I don't think sound card will help at all. I think really the CPU is your main booster.
heres a question..
Posted on Feb 21, 2007 03:38 pm
Marcus D
Ace in the whole
Member Since: Nov 24, 2004
If my computer is practically snapping under the weight of too many plug ins going at the same time in Cubase se3, I know that that is CPU, but would more RAM, memory or just a better sound card fix that?
[ Back to Top ]
Feb 21, 2007 04:09 pm RAM might help a tad bit, but I don't think sound card will help at all. I think really the CPU is your main booster.
Feb 21, 2007 04:46 pm I doubt ram will help at all with effects. It will improve projects with many different tracks as to save the swap file some work. But real time processing of effects is CPU bound.
Now the buffers on your soundcard, that's another story also. After I get done recording everything at 128 I then jack the buffer to 16,000+ for mass amounts of effects processing.
Feb 21, 2007 05:16 pm ^^^ From personal experience, I added 512RAM (basically doubling) a month ago, and there was very little difference in the amount of effects processing improvement, though this is anecdotal, I didn't run any scientific test though.
Feb 21, 2007 05:24 pm it really depends on the type of effects you are running and how they are programmed. In theory RAM will help other things run better as well, freeing up CPU for your effects.
The best thing is to buy a DSP PCI card and process your effects on it instead of the CPU.
Feb 21, 2007 05:35 pm I recently went from 1GB to 2GB. I noticed improvements in load times and what not, but projects that were popping from too much going on still popped. Freeing up CPU with RAM makes sense to me, I just don't think it would be that noticeable on machines that are already stacked (his profile says 3.2Ghz and 2GB Ram). Just my theory though.
Now on a machine where say you had XP and 512 RAM, I'm guessing a RAM boost would be extremely noticeable.
A DSP PCI card sounds right up my alley. Never even read up on them, anything that is priced right you can reccomend DB?
Feb 21, 2007 05:41 pm I can't say I know of any to recommend, I personally never needed one. Having more RAM also allows one to hard-set their virtual memory higher which can help the disk a little...
Feb 21, 2007 11:21 pm Thanks all for the advice. My computer setup has actually changed. My old studio system crashed and wiped my registry clean. OUCH!! ANyway I now have less RAM then before with only, the capacity on this motherboard for 1 gig. I have 750 now and am looking to get a nother 250 to make a Gig. I still have the cheap "gaming card" SB Audigy 2, so I was thinking about getting an EMU 1212 or maybe a Firewire card, or even like an M-Audio Audiophile. Really can't find alot of direction on that stuff either way. Anyway I do have more Memory now.. apparetly the only thing I don't really need for my DAW not to buckle when I have a few too many VSTs going.
Still not really sure what to do... 1 gig is the most I can do with this sytem, but I still want be able to do heavy processing and not have my project shut down or freeze.
this is my new setup
P4 3.2GHz Processor
Intel 925 chipset
800MHz FSB
750 RAM
80GB System SATA
200GB Media SATA
250GB Media SATA
SB Audigy 2
Win XP Pro
Cubase SE3
FL Studio 7
Adobe Audition
Various VSTs
Feb 21, 2007 11:41 pm If you haven't already, clean down all the unnecessary processes running in XP. I think I'm down to 20 on my DAW only PC.
There's been some chatter on the reaper boards about this one guy's project, and it's FX, and if people can run it.
He's got a dual-core, and it works fine (not sure of the CPU tax).
On my DAW (see profile) it wouldn't run until I cut out one stereo chorus. Then it would squeak through at ~85-90% without glitches / pops.
This guy was running approx 12 tracks, with 2 to 4 effects on each channel. Consisting of EQ, compressor, and reverb on a couple. I think there was a few on the master as well.
Alternatively, like mentioned above, one of those DSP cards, like the UAD will take the processing and put it on a card, freeing up your CPU.
Feb 22, 2007 10:25 am I think I mentioned this in another thread, and I've yet to attempt it myself, but if you have another junker computer laying around you can try to use ASIO system link, where you run your plugins on the junker, link it up to your main workstation, and it takes the processor load for the VST plugins.
A DSP card sounds like an intriguing idea.
Although I can't believe that a 3.2 GHz machine would choke on a few measley VST plugins. I mean, with my 1 GHz Celeron with 512Mb of RAM, I can run maybe up to 20 tracks, each with 2 or 3 inserts, plus a couple of send effects.
What I found out was that I could be a little smarter about how to apply effects. If you find yourself putting the same or similar effects on many tracks, then set up an aux send, load that effect as an aux send effect, and send each of those tracks to the same instance of the effect. Then instead of having several instances of the same effect running, you only have 1. That will greatly reduce the strain on your system.
Another thing I learned (for Cubase at least) is that the single most taxing thing for my computer was loading VST plugins on the master bus. For some reason, it reeeeeeealy makes a big difference on processing load. So I keep effects off the master bus until I mix down to a stereo wav, then I can open a project that only contains that stereo wav and apply all the effects I want to it with little processing strain on my system.
Feb 22, 2007 10:28 am I agree with Tadpui, I look at the specs of the PC and I am really curious exactly how many tracks you are using and how many effects on the average project.
Also, the sound card I am guessing is your major weak link, not the PC.
Feb 22, 2007 11:16 am Another tack would be to cut down on the number of VST effects you have running. I know it sounds glib, but I ran into a situation the other night where I was working on a song and the CPU usage bar was pegging. Not good. I did a 'save as' and basically pulled out every VST I had running, and reset the EQ on every track. I went back through and added back the VST's only where absolutely necessary, and did minute EQ adjustments. It sounds awesome! So much more organic, and alive. I found that I'd been slowly strangling the song by dicking about with every track to get a perfect tone. I realised that my original takes were actually very close to the sound I needed. Sometimes less is more. In my case, the song is greater than the sum of its parts.
Feb 22, 2007 11:17 am Does Cubase SE3 have track freezing?
Feb 22, 2007 11:53 am If it does, I'd love to know how to do it!
Feb 23, 2007 09:13 pm Wow, I promise this is the best site on the internet!
Ok, Tadpui. I thinj you are right about being smart. alot of times I just pile on effects and vst's ad nauseum. That is obviously a major faux pas!!!
I want to learn though how to wrangle and organize them for omptimum effect. This will take only time and more great advice from the pros (like yourselves.)
DB, A typical track might constist of 5 or 6 midi drum tracks, with only effects being added to the original plug in. Maybe a midi bass and pad sound, give or take. And then anywhere from 3 to 7 audio tracks, usually with gutiar and vocal.
This is where I start to crack. I am adding compressors, guitar effects, various vocal effects, warmers, exciters ect to the various audio tracks to taste and i can't get the song to play without poping and clicking.
I may be working too hard and not smart enough for my modest setup. Possible some refining and cutting back of the fat is in order. Also I do think a new sound card would work wonders.!
Feb 24, 2007 10:04 pm Marcus, that set up is surely not modest in the CPU category. I run and AMD 3200 XP chip with 2 gig of ram and can run 50 to 60 tracks of audio and software synths. I do use the freeze function though to get there although I have run pure audio only projects at the 50 plus track mark without completely taxing the system.
One thing I really can recommend is is off-line processing which is adding the effect permanently to the track. I will usually run through several effects and find what suite the track best before applying them though. And as well I have plenty of HD space so I will also archive an original un touched track in case the need to go back to scratch is there.
There are tons of ways to do huge project on meager systems, you just have to as you said, think smart about how to get it done.
Feb 24, 2007 11:07 pm As for DSP cards and outboard processing. HEre are a few to look into.
Universal Audio has the UAD-1 and several others in variety's from big to small. Theya re probably one of the best out there. I have tried the UAD-1 and it worked very well and was a huge increase in power.
TC Electronics has the PowerCore with again comes in a few flavor's as well. Another excellent choice for processing and again, I have used it and installed several and they work stable and fast.
Waves has a unit called NetShell which is as above available in several flavors.
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.