Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy
I guess you're seeing the dreaded pyramid of CPU usage where the middle cores get hammered most. That evens out noticeably when you are not record armed but that is obviously no help with your workflow.
Yes you would need to use the additional buffers in VE Pro. At least I always have done and have them set to x2. That is the price you pay for using VE Pro. However, I find it is definitely less demanding overall than running the same VIs in ProTools at a higher buffer because there is MUCH less CPU spiking. On my slave PC, the CPU usage is right up there so there is definitely a LOT of processing being offloaded. Ultimately, I find it way more solid and stable than running the VIs in Pro Tools and get very few -9171/3 errors. I also get significantly better performance running VE Pro locally on the same Mac as ProTools. It's all about juggling compromises!
At least the piano roll editor in PT is a very good one and second only to Cubase IMO!
|
Hmm, alright that's fair enough. I think I'll try using my mastering plugins on the slave machine and working inside of Pro Tools exclusively to start. That should take care of a ton of overhead right off the bat. I'm still worried about getting that buffer low enough but we'll see how well Pro Tools compensates during actual playback. I'll report back with results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman691
What version of DP did you try? DP9 has come a long way from the olden days.
What didn't you like about DP?
|
It's been a long time, but I remember it feeling a bit clunky but nothing more than that, maybe 7 or 8? I've been reading some reviews and checking out a couple demo videos today, looks pretty slick actually. With a full 30 day demo I think it's definitely worth checking out the notation features to see if they're a little less awkward that Pro Tools or Cubase. At this point I've got something like 4-5 DAWs. Gotta catch 'em all, right?
