drewfx1

mike_mccueTapered changes increase CPU and reveal the fragility of the playback engines when the engine encounters lots of unnecessary nodes.

 
This seems rather unlikely.

 
I base my estimation on first hand observation of playback smoothness and like many observation I may be making wildly incorrect conclusions.
 
I have also noted that DAWs like Pro Tools have commands that clean up envelopes by removing nodes, much like vector based illustrations programs have to simplify their shape descriptions.
 
I know by experience and observation that my installs of Illustrator and Freehand run much smoother when the shapes have simpler descriptions. That is very easy to experience.
 
I have observed similar impact on functionality while running DAWs. Perhaps I am attributing a symptom to the wrong cause? Perhaps I am just plain wrong? 
 
I shouldn't have said "taper" but rather just said "dense collections of nodes" as that is what I actually meant to describe.
 
A dense collection of nodes is a common result of moving the fader. We may hope to maintain a constant velocity (or not) but it usually seems to be interpreted and written as a series of various velocities requiring more nodes than one would probably end up with if they simply drew a taper as a linear vector or a curve with a bezier function 
 
In any event, I am, as usual, open to correction or refutation.
 
 
best regards,
mike
 
 

You can put all the touchscreens you want into a studio, but there will always be too many knobs in the control room.

Hi Drew,
 Thanks for making your comment.
 
 I went and made a test and I will probably end up agreeing with you but I think there are are some qualifications to the idea.
 
 First, what I just did was make 3 projects.
 
1) No envelope
2) Flat envelope
3) freehand pencil envelope
 
 Each had the same piece of 2 track music in it routed to a master bus with an input level turned down -40dB to protect the speakers and my ears.
 
 Then I added an envelope to #2, and #3.
 
 Then I cloned 95 more tracks.
 
 I minimized all the tracks so each project had similar screen display or waveform drawing resolution.
 
 I played back each on my new Win7 x64 4.5gHz monster with 32GB memory and I could barely see much difference, maybe 1% difference for each example.  I was reminded that SONAR 8.5.2 doesn't balance the use of the cores very well in Win7 on this machine. (Pro Tools 11 is incredibly well balanced on this machine)
 
 I then copied the projects and audio to my old trusty WinXP x86 DAW. It has 4GB memory and I forget what the CPU is.
 The no envelope project ran at about 40% CPU. The flat envelope ran at about 44% CPU and the complex envelope project ran at about 48%.
 I was reminded that SONAR 8.5.2 on the old WinXP machine distributes cores very well and that the CPU meters run very stable and don't spike up and down like the Win7 x64 install.
 
 At this point I realize that my opinion about envelopes, as stated previously, was formed on much older DAW computers running early versions of Pro Audio and SONAR and that my observations of complex envelopes crippling a computer playback are very dated. I used to rescue my projects by pulling out nodes and cleaning up envelopes.
 
 Never the less, I think this test was very simplistic in that it was all just on volume envelopes rather than any type of control over a more complex process.
 
 I wonder what would happen if I started automating more than one parameter or used a parameter in a VST that messed with latency compensation?
 
 The other thing to consider is that I routinely manage my mixes so I stay just below the red line by the time I have added fancy reverbs and look ahead limiting running and the small percentage of capability I have become used to saving by running simple envelopes is still a factor in my experience of enjoying stability when I work. 
 
 In any event, thanks for making the comment and inspiring me to take a fresh look.
 
 all the best,
mike
 
 

mike_mccue
I wonder what would happen if I started automating more than one parameter or used a parameter in a VST that messed with latency compensation?

 
Could improve the mix.
(or not)

This could lead to hand mixing!
 

I added a free hand pan envelope to the "complex" envelope example on the old WinXP x86 system. It took the average CPU up to 51%.
 
Each change seems marginal but it seems like it all slowly adds up.
 
The old system is running a Q9450 at 3.2gHz.
 
best regards,
mike

 
He he, Craig said 'knobs'.
 
 

I guess I resemble that.
 
:-)

 
I just reversed over some bloke who was on his way to a fancy dress party.
 
He was wearing a 'Dracula' costume.
 
I never saw him in my rear-view mirror.
 
 

Are you writing a book of jokes or reading one?
 
You'd be great to have near a microphone when bapu breaks a string on stage. ;-)