Helpful Reply? concerning Pro Channel

Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
willard cottrell
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 12
  • Joined: 2014/12/24 11:17:27
  • Status: offline
2018/11/23 23:36:41 (permalink)

? concerning Pro Channel

I have (4) modules that I use assigned as a preset in PC.  I have the same preset on each channel.  Is there any difference in CPU usage between having the module off where it is not needed or removing it?
 
Thanks
#1
List Solutions Only

8 Replies Related Threads
    Keni
    Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 5769
    • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
    • Location: Willits, CA USA
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/24 01:14:23 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby willard cottrell 2018/11/24 01:52:21
    Not being certain, I believe having it enabled adds to the load on your cpu.. Having it inserted in a strip, but not enabled removes it's cpu load.

    Keni Fink
    Keni - Facebook
    Deep Space Records
    http://www.reverbnation.com/inexile
    http://www.cdbaby.com/artist/inexile
    Out Of My Head Music (BMI)

    SPlat/MacPro/Dual Xeon 3.06GHz 6-core (12 total)/64GB/Win8.1X64/Presonus 1818VSL/Soundscape SS8IO-1
    #2
    willard cottrell
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 12
    • Joined: 2014/12/24 11:17:27
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/24 01:56:00 (permalink)
    That's my suspicion.  I do my work on a better computer and notice some delay on my weaker one.  I decided to look over the Pro Channel and did notice many modules were on, but I wasn't utilizing them.  Find out for sure tomorrow!
     
    many thanks
    #3
    randyman
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 182
    • Joined: 2005/05/17 20:44:11
    • Location: ga
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/24 18:53:04 (permalink)
    I think I've read that having them only disabled does not reduce anything -  they are still processing things, only 'muted'... Just like a track that is muted per se.
     
    The track has to be frozen - or effect removed - in order to really disable them from CPU usage.  When disabled only, they are 'on the ready' to come into play - hence always running in the background waiting to be enabled.
     
    To be clear - I could be completely wrong - though from a programming logic, this makes sense to me.

    A rack of noisemakers is not a definitive substitute for creativity. (though it does seem to help)

    what I spend my lunch time doing:  (don't laugh - its just for fun!) www.soundclick.com/rnewburn

    #4
    willard cottrell
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 12
    • Joined: 2014/12/24 11:17:27
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/25 00:47:48 (permalink)
    That did appear to be the case today.  I had to substantially increase buffer size.  I'll try eliminating them and see what happens.
    thanks
    Willard
    #5
    Cactus Music
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 8424
    • Joined: 2004/02/09 21:34:04
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/25 07:50:30 (permalink)
    One thing I notice is it also increases load time. Watch the little blue box in the lower right as a project loads and you'll see Pro Chanel certainly taking up time. I noticed this and a few modules loading that I didn't think I was using. Checking a few tracks those modules were there but turned off.... but they seem to still use CPU. SO it would seem it's best to delete all unused modules from every track CPU wise. 

    Johnny V  
    Cakelab  
    Focusrite 6i61st - Tascam us1641. 
    3 Desktops and 3 Laptops W7 and W10
     http://www.cactusmusic.ca/
     
     
    #6
    Anderton
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 14070
    • Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/27 19:51:54 (permalink)
    I believe that plug-ins in general remain connected to the CPU when bypassed, so that they can start up instantly when enabled. 

    The first 3 books in "The Musician's Guide to Home Recording" series are available from Hal Leonard and http://www.reverb.com. Listen to my music on http://www.YouTube.com/thecraiganderton, and visit http://www.craiganderton.com. Thanks!
    #7
    pwalpwal
    Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3249
    • Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/28 13:11:55 (permalink)
    vst3 plugins support "no cpu usage when turned off" (assuming both plugin and host handle it) but prochannel is a vst2 hack (unless it's been updated and i missed that?) so unfortunately prochannel doesn't benefit from the vst3 stuff

    just a sec

    #8
    msmcleod
    Max Output Level: -72 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 920
    • Joined: 2004/01/27 07:15:30
    • Location: Scotland
    • Status: offline
    Re: ? concerning Pro Channel 2018/11/28 13:26:05 (permalink)
    One really strange issue I've seen with the pro channel (on my laptop running WASAPI), is a strange brick-wall limiter type effect when playing from bar 1. It's like a burst of volume that almost immediately settles down in a fraction of a second.
     
    This happens when ProChannel is enabled regardless of whether any of the modules within the ProChannel are enabled or not.
     
    Disabling the ProChannel makes it go away.
     
    My usual workaround of leaving an empty bar at the beginning of the project fixes this, but it's strange that just having the ProChannel enabled causes this behaviour.

    Mark McLeod
    Cakewalk by BL | ASUS P8B75-V, Intel I5 3570 16GB RAM Win 10 64 + Win 7 64/32 SSD HD's, Scarlett 18i20 / 6i6 | ASUS ROG GL552VW 16GB RAM Win 10 64 SSD HD's, Scarlett 2i2 | Behringer Truth B2030A / Edirol MA-5A | Mackie MCU + C4 + XT | 2 x BCF2000, Korg NanoKontrol Studio
    #9
    Jump to:
    © 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1