Hi folks. 
A quick question regarding VST fx. It seems to me that there is little or no difference in cpu load between inserting separate instances of the same vst effect (a reverb for example) in each track's fx bin,  and setting up an fx bus in order to send multiple tracks to a single instance of the same effect. By doing that I just lose individual control of parameters for each track.
 
In other words, 6 x Reverbs ( 1 each on 6 different tracks) uses the same resources as 6 x tracks sent to 1 reverb bus.
 
Do I have this right or am I delusional?
 
Thanks:)
Bruce.

Generally thinking the more of any plugin you insert, the more of a hit your computers resources are going to take.

In your specific example perhaps that isn't a big difference but you will eventually find a ceiling where you will tax your system to its limit.

As for reverb if you're just mucking around with weird noises that's one thing but if you're trying to seriously learn to mix then that many different reverbs will create a wash that will make your music pretty unpleasant.

The idea to send the tracks to a bus with the fx probably applies more to a reverb than any other fx as you're trying to create or recreate a space. When you think of how music is played live every sound is in the same space. So only need to have the one. That's generally speaking and probably a good place to start.

Other fx like eq and the various dynamic fx are more suited to individual sounds and tracks. Again generally speaking. Hope that gives you a starting point. Go through some of the variety of tutorials, videos and blogs on the Cakewalk site and watch and read and keep asking questions. Also welcome if you're just new here.

Thanks for the response Mike. I understand the concept of an fx bus - and you are absolutely right about it's use with regards to reverb. My question is more from a technical point of view in that the same amount of processing is going on in both examples.
Good advice with the traditional vs more creative use of reverb as well!
 
Thanks for the welcome - though it is really just a login change since the new Cakewalk store:) This is a brilliant forum thanks to knowledgeable and incredibly helpful people like yourself.

There should not be much difference. Routing is pretty efficient especially when compared to the load imposed by the plug-in.

Great - thank's Steve.

It used to be different when a single convolution reverb would crash your system because of the CPU drain.  Computers are much faster now.  Still, 6 is bigger than 1.  Bound to take more CPU.
 
@

AT
It used to be different when a single convolution reverb would crash your system because of the CPU drain.  Computers are much faster now.  Still, 6 is bigger than 1.  Bound to take more CPU.
 
@

Thanks for the input AT. I fear however that you may have swerved around the point of my question and gone straight to some oversimplified maths. The numerical representation of my question is not 6 vs 1. It is more like 6x1 vs 1x6. 

tenfoot

AT
It used to be different when a single convolution reverb would crash your system because of the CPU drain.  Computers are much faster now.  Still, 6 is bigger than 1.  Bound to take more CPU.
 
@

Thanks for the input AT. I fear however that you may have swerved around the point of my question and gone straight to some oversimplified maths. The numerical representation of my question is not 6 vs 1. It is more like 6x1 vs 1x6. 

No, I think your maths is incorrect. It is six effects processing six streams of audio, versus one effect processing one stream of audio.

I think AT was right.

Thanks Jb1 01. I hear what you are saying. Thinking in terms of an analogue desk, there is only one stream of reverb processing from the six sends. However, if you do the experiment yourself in sonar and load up an intensive effect, firstly by inserting it on separate tracks individually, then by sending all of the tracks to a single bus, the cpu load seems to be about the same. This is why I asked the question. As counter intuitive as it is, it seems the digital processing required was about the same.
 
I would love to hear from someone who could perhaps shed some technical light on this. 

The load from one plugin on an aux send bus is less than running multiple instances of the same plugin. Any of us who were running DAWs in the 1990s can testify to that. As AT says, there was a time when a single plugin needing high computer resources could bring a PC to its knees unless tracks were frozen to reduce the total load.

Todays i7 quad-cores are so powerful that they can handle far more, but add enough plugins and you will eventually overload even a modern PC.

As for putting reverb on tracks versus an aux send bus, I set up a bus with a room reverb on it and use that as the overall reverb, so that everything sounds like it was recorded in the same acoustic space. The reverbs I use on tracks tend to be spring or plate emulations used for deliberate effect purposes, and those tracks also have sends to the ambient room reverb.