Whichi Is More Efficient? Using Output Or Return Tracks For SubMixes?

[Todd R]

In my typical work I use noise reduction, EQ and DeEss VSTs on RETURNs and route input tracks through the RETURNs to process voice "interviews"...mostly talking.

My signal chain is typically preFader in this order:Acon DeClick> Acon DeNoise> FabFilter ProQ3> FabFilter ProDS

I have also just started using Acon Extract: Dialogue which is impressive.

So my signal chain looks like for the main mics:
Acon DeClick> Acon Extract: Dialogue> Acon DeNoise> FabFilter ProQ3> FabFilter ProDS

I'm currently working on a podcast with 3 mics and I'm getting buffer underruns; so it's been an automation balancing act around my comping that just isn't working.

I'm finding the best settings for the RME UFX+ at 256 samples and buffers set to 10. Essentially, it looks like my abuse of ProQ3 dynamic EQ is eating a lot of bandwidth; probably around 12% MT Load per instance and ProQ3 is on every mic. My solution to the workflow for now is to complete a job of bounce FX and that will free up headroom so I don't have to automate the VSTs on the RETURns; then I can put the comps in a new job and have some VST freedom.

My question is, would there be less MT Load using OUTPUT tracks as the subs rather than the RETURNs?

I've always used the RETURNs this way...maybe there's a more efficient way?Also, I should say this is on SawStudio Lite 32 on Win 7 Pro 64. I do have SAW Studio64; I just haven't been able to set it up fully yet and the work needs to get done so I'm still on my old workflow. Also, UFX+ is connected via USB

many thanks,_todd

[cgrafx]

since your not running anything real-time, try increasing the samples to 1024. this should reduce the processing load.

I don't know what the RAM requirements are for the VSTs you are using, but if they are memory hungry you may want to accelerate your move to Saw64 (as that will significantly increase the available space for those plugins to operate)

just on general principals, I wouldnt expect changing the location of the plug-ins from returns to outputs to make any difference, its still the same amount of processing either way

[Todd R]

Hi Philip,
thanks for that fast answer :-) Much appreciated. I had started to try the difference but the automation isn't compatible between an OUTPUT and a RETURN track afaiaa.

This machine has 64GB RAM...should be enough for some heavy tasks, no?

OK, I have tested the MT Loads of each VST one at a time and how dare I accuse ProQ3!!!
Acon DeClick.................................26%
Acon DeNoise............................24%
Acon Extract: Dialogue...............19%
ProQ3........................................04%
ProDS........................................02%

et voila, so I bounced whatever I deemed to be the static FX per bus/sub and should have plenty of wiggle room now

I am getting worse performance with 512 or 1024 than with 128 or 256...so I'm happy to stick with the lower numbers

thanks again :-)

[cgrafx]

Hi Philip,
This machine has 64GB RAM...should be enough for some heavy tasks, no?

Even though you have 64GB of RAM 32bit programs will generally be limited to 2GB max.

"The 32-bit limit generally means 2 GB of RAM per process. Many processes run well with ***8220;LARGE ADDRESS AWARE***8221; mode, which lets them use 3 GB of RAM when running on a 32-bit OS, or 4 GB of RAM when running on a 64-bit OS. However, you can run many 3 GB processes on a 32-bit OS."

I am surprised that you see worse performance at the larger sample size, but if your seeing lower CPU utilization at the lower sample size then definitely stick with that.

[Todd R]

well, for pete's sake!
Two of my bounces worked but the 3rd one has created a corrupt file name in the edl
there seems to be an anchor character at the end of the file name the SAW edl is pathed to
if I try to re-path; SAW crashes

what do I do there? re-name the file to match the edl?

[Todd R]

OK, I have confirmed the last .wav file I bounced has become corrupted.
If I:
_create a session with only that bounced .wav file in an input track
_save session>
_close SAW Studio Lite
_open SSL
_open edl
SAW dialog popup asking for the .wav location; but there is a special character appended after the file extension. That special character looks like a key...or a cross with a little circle on top. If I repoint saw to the bounced .wav:
_equals SSL crash
so I cannot recover any undo files using SSL on Win7

I have, however, been able to jump through the repath hoops using SAWStudio64 and SAW does not crash if I skip the repath to the corrupted .wav; thus I am able to recover a recent undo and hang on to to my latest mixing and console setup. My VSTs got burned (my fault) but that's not a huge problem because I carefully name and save all my custom VST presets and religiously update the VST presets if I make even slight changes.

Aaaaaaand, that will fast track me using SAWStudio64 on Win10 for which I can report about performance comparison :-)

Also, the special character appended to the corrupted .wav in the SAW repath dialog prompt is different with SSl on Win7 and SS64 on Win10. The SSL character looks like a key as described above. The SS64 on Win10 is an up arrow followed by a missing font square.

[Todd R]

ok, wow, a little update if anyone is interested.

Turns out the "corrupted" .wav file was not the one the repath dialog warning was asking for; it was the wav bounced before

ok, I have been able to restore an undo from the problem edl using SAWStudio64.

I'm also seeing a vast improvement on MT Load using SS64 on Win10 over SSL on Win7. With the bounced preMixes two instances of Acon DeNoise; two instances of Pro-L a Pro-DS and a ProQ3 all MT Load is under 30% max and mostly under 20%.

I am having some SAW issues with border padding and the rending percentage not updating as TaskMonitor says SS64 is "not responding".

Anyway, in the event my logging helps someone I post my experiences :-)

[Todd R]

Also, the SAWStudio64 on Win10 performance I'm enjoying is at 128 samples with input buffers set to 4 and outputs set to 6

The render percentage dialog doesn't work tho....I suppose I should ask in a specifically titled new thread?

[UpTilDawn]

...
The render percentage dialog doesn't work tho....I suppose I should ask in a specifically titled new thread?

I wonder if the border padding issues and the render dialog issue could be related - specifically to border padding settings? Bob has always suggested to turn off border padding...

[Bob L]

All the current versions of SAWStudio (for a while now) are handling border padding correctly. Make sure to clear your default FKeys and start fresh to allow the internals to calculate and include the border padding in the window sizes.

Bob L