Cubase. Saving CPU. How?

[Jevil]

Got a question about Cubase.
My problem is that a I have to handle too many tracks for my computer. 2 Ghz and 1 Gb Ram. Until I get a new computer I have to use it.

I always apply inserts for each track but I'd like to know if I create a group for all vocal channels and insert a compressor in the group track, and then I add a Reverb FX and adjust it for each track, will the reverb be pre compressor or after compressor?
This way I could use less Inserts and CPU would run better.

Any other tip to save CPU and Ram? How do you manage to use less inserts?

BTW, merry xmas or whatever you believe in, and may Satan Claus bring you guitars, tits and beer.

 

[Wolfeman]

Isn't that what the 'Freeze' option is for? To cut down on RAM usage?

 

[Torniojaws]

To cut down on RAM usage?

And CPU. Insert three tracks of DI guitars with Wagner, CurveEQ and SIR and your CPU-time usage will jump directly to 70 %, if not more. Freeze 'em, and you can actually use the guitars in a project with other instruments

 

[nwright]

I've never had any luck attempting to freeze anything in Nuendo. More often than not, it's not even showing up as (it's "grayed out" in the selection menu).

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

Freez is the tits.

 

[illegalfireworks]

it just takes so long for the tracks to freeze .. i wish there was another way

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

it just takes so long for the tracks to freeze .. i wish there was another way

There is a way to make it a bit faster:

If you using a shitload of effects, turn some of the others off, don't get rid of them just bypass them (obviously not the ones your using on the track you want to freeze) and it will make the freeze processing go faster.

 

[SickBoy]

it just takes so long for the tracks to freeze .. i wish there was another way

Are you sure you've set your project length to a proper value?
AFAIK the freeze function doesn't freeze between the left/right markers, but takes the project length value in account. My point being, if you leave it at default 10 mins (and your song is say, 4 mins) then the freeze function will process the track for the entire project length, which can be avoided and shortened if you set it to the length of the song.

 

[illegalfireworks]

i didnt know that! cheers!

 

[ExecutiveRob]

What OS are you using? If it's XP then steinberg recommend that in "System Properties->Advanced tab-> Performance "Settings"-> Advanced tab", you should have the Background services radio option selected in Processor Scheduling - Might help... a little.

I always apply inserts for each track but I'd like to know if I create a group for all vocal channels and insert a compressor in the group track, and then I add a Reverb FX and adjust it for each track, will the reverb be pre compressor or after compressor?
This way I could use less Inserts and CPU would run better.

I wouldn't really recommend compressing a group buss of vocals if there's a lot of vox going on at the same time. They hardly use any CPU anyway so you should be able to get away with it.

Is the reverb set up in an FX track? If so you can select this to be pre/post fader where you set the send level (between the "On" button and the "edit" button). You can do this in the individual audio tracks or in the group buss if you like.

Good luck!

 

[Erik Monsonis]

Bounce the processed tracks and remove VST inserts, mostly reverbs

 

[Glenn Fricker]

<cough> use SawStudio. Never run out of CPU again.....

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

<cough> use SawStudio. Never run out of CPU again.....

I doubt it. One instance of the Ampeg SVT plug in (actually even in stand alone mode) basically eats up all cpu headroom.

Cubase by itself uses (basically) no Cpu power. It's as soon as you start loading in plug in's that it really starts to get eaten up.

Reverb is the worst. To the OP: allways use reverb as a send effect (if you can)

 

[JBroll]

I wouldn't compress reverb.

Try to be more economical with plugins and get real friendly with groups.

Jeff

 

[Glenn Fricker]

I doubt it. One instance of the Ampeg SVT plug in (actually even in stand alone mode) basically eats up all cpu headroom.

Cubase by itself uses (basically) no Cpu power. It's as soon as you start loading in plug in's that it really starts to get eaten up.

Reverb is the worst. To the OP: allways use reverb as a send effect (if you can)

Belive it. I've been running SAW for three years now & never choked the CPU. Even running mulitiple instances of whatever you can throw at it. Hell, I've run 48 track mixes with 4 modelling verbs & a full suite of FX and it didn't even sneeze. Why do you think I'm so gung-ho about this program?

I'll run a check with the SVT if you like, if they've got a shareware demo or something.

 

[Splat88]

Revalver in Cubase uses the exact same CPU usage in my task manager it does in Revalver stand alone live mode using no DAW host. Unless SAW has some magical unicorn power, I see no advantage in CPU processing over any other DAW. As GuitarGodgt stated as well, I tested this with Ampeg SVT in Cubase and in stand alone mode as well and got the same results. The only time I ever max out on CPU is when I use a few instances of impulses with Wagner or Revalver and Ampeg SVT.

 

[MetalWorks]

What I always had to do with Nuendo on my G4 1.25Ghz with 1.75GB Ram was start drums in their own Project and apply any plugins to them there and bounce them down to a stereo wav and import that wav into a new Project with the other instrument tracks.

Considering 7 to 10 or so drum tracks all with their own Drumagog, Compressors, EQ and Reverbs, thats a pretty hefty savings on CPU in the final mix.

Its a bit of a hastle going in and out of the Drum Project and re-bouncing any changes but is alot better than freezing or any other hiccups.

 

[Glenn Fricker]

Unless SAW has some magical unicorn power, I see no advantage in CPU processing over any other DAW.

Saw's audio processing routines bypass Windows compleltely & have a direct line to the CPU. That's where the horsepower comes in. In a multiple track situation, all the SAW stuff (including EQ's & comps) gets out of the way so you can have more CPU for power-eating plugins such as verbs & amp modellers, etc.

sure you won't see a big difference in a standalone situation, but when you've got many, many tracks & the effects start piling up, this can make all the difference.

 

[Erik Monsonis]

Wow, it seems great, but it's f****** expensive!, I mean, 2500$ for the full version, 1200$ the lite version, and 300$ for the basic...

 

[Glenn Fricker]

Wow, it seems great, but it's f****** expensive!, I mean, 2500$ for the full version, 1200$ the lite version, and 300$ for the basic...

Against a full blown PT-HD system, which it's designed to compete against, it's a steal.

You can also get discounts & even used licenses . Someone has the mid version up for about $500 I think. And yes, licenses are transferable.

I got the full version on just such a deal.

Look here:
http://www.sawstudiouser.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6