New CLA Plugin - Looks Very Cool

[Stephen Bond]

Better emulations probably use more CPU. That said, there's many ways to skin a cat and some programming can be far more simple and elegant to achieve the same result. Either way, native processing power is up exponentially over what we had say 10-15 years ago and we can run many scores of plugins without resulting to AudioSuite.

Personally I'm highly unlikely to run the CLA MixHub on every channel. I tend to grab whatever comes to mind and see if it works. I tried it on a lead vocal on a mix the other day. I found the original CLA-76 blue stripe sounded better than the MixHub switched to Bluey compressor so I took it off. One instance didn't seem to tax my modest i5 more than any other Waves plugin. Anyhow, a welcome addition to the arsenal. I'm sure it will get some use.

Stephen

[DonaldM]

Originally Posted by simon.a.billington

I find that every few years or so there is a paradigm shift in audio processing where there is an increase in quality/features of the software we use, but it has always come at a cost. This is no different from some of the other developers creating some very demanding plugins as well. I believe Slate is one.

Can anybody back me on that??

I've noticed the same trend. I first began noticing it with VIs. Lately it seems I'm always hitting up against CPU limits with any number of plugins. The better VI's, for example, hit the CPU pretty hard. Omnisphere is a good example. Great VI, no question, but definitely a hog on the CPU. So is Synapse Audio's Dune 2 and Dune 3. The trade off, though, is they sound so great! There's others like that as well.



Now, it seems, we're seeing the same thing with processing plugs, like the CLA Mixhub. Great concept, and I do like the sound I can get from it. But, I am limited for now on how much I can use in any one session. I have to make judicious use of track freeze and rendering etc to free up resources.



Of course, I'm more vulnerable to CPU limits that many others because my system is a bit outdated (kind like its user!). I'm sure when I finally upgrade to a newer system with more recent and faster CPU and such, that things will be much better.



It would be nice to have the developers say that on, say, a Win-10 64bit system running "XX" cpu at XGHz, we had no issues running X instances of this plugin. Or something like that. At least it would be a guide as to what to expect.

[simon.a.billington]

Originally Posted by DonaldM

I've noticed the same trend. I first began noticing it with VIs. Lately it seems I'm always hitting up against CPU limits with any number of plugins. The better VI's, for example, hit the CPU pretty hard. Omnisphere is a good example. Great VI, no question, but definitely a hog on the CPU. So is Synapse Audio's Dune 2 and Dune 3. The trade off, though, is they sound so great! There's others like that as well.



Now, it seems, we're seeing the same thing with processing plugs, like the CLA Mixhub. Great concept, and I do like the sound I can get from it. But, I am limited for now on how much I can use in any one session. I have to make judicious use of track freeze and rendering etc to free up resources.



Of course, I'm more vulnerable to CPU limits that many others because my system is a bit outdated (kind like its user!). I'm sure when I finally upgrade to a newer system with more recent and faster CPU and such, that things will be much better.



It would be nice to have the developers say that on, say, a Win-10 64bit system running "XX" cpu at XGHz, we had no issues running X instances of this plugin. Or something like that. At least it would be a guide as to what to expect.

To some respect I can begin to see the practicality in a SoundGrid. It’ll help take that extra load off the system and it’s sometning that you can make itself useful of for a number of year. It’s just a pity not too many have gotten on board. Flux has and so have Sonnox, outside that Plugin Alliance just have a small selection of plugins.

[Sugarnutz]

I wonder how or if this will map to my D-Command I just bought, I'm in the Philippines for a funeral until the 3rd of March so no way for me to test it until then. Any ideas? I picked it up from AudioDeluxe this morning for $42 with the LOVE30 promo code.

[fsilano]

I agree it's pretty great plugin overall but there are some things that are not all that great as well.

The good: It sounds very good. The comps and eq are great and very easy to tweak. It is good enough as a stand alone channel strip to pay the asking price. The Bucket View makes it easy to tweak comp and eq in "groups" which is a similar workflow to a console - at least for me. I have about 30 tracks going on a current mix and only around 45% CPU and Memory usage. Still very responsive.

The bad: Bucket View is *only* good for tweaking comps and eq for a "group" of channels in the same window. There is no mute-solo, limited pan, and the biggest thing for me is no actual grouping functionality. This forces you to have to dance between the plugin and the DAW to tune in these operations. One work-around I have been playing with is to buss/submix/stem groups of tracks like vox, guitars and drums where you have a number of tracks that you wish to process together. This is more for mixdown but it helps with tracking too as things can get complicated quickly due to the whole no-grouping/no-mute-solo issue. Also - why only 8 channels in a bucket? This is limiting if you regularly end up with say 10-12 tracks of drums, vox or guitars. You end up having to split them between several buckets.

What I would like to see in the future is:
- An "All Channels" view. This would really be a time saver for folks like me who mix-on-the-fly - i.e. I build my mixes up as I go.
- Increase the number of tracks in a bucket and use a scroll bar.
- Add the mute-solo and full panning to the bucket view.

I'm sure Waves will improve this plugin as time goes on and they have a great starting point. I am looking forward to more usability improvements.

Thanks,
Frank

[simon.a.billington]

Originally Posted by fsilano

I agree it's pretty great plugin overall but there are some things that are not all that great as well.

The good: It sounds very good. The comps and eq are great and very easy to tweak. It is good enough as a stand alone channel strip to pay the asking price. The Bucket View makes it easy to tweak comp and eq in "groups" which is a similar workflow to a console - at least for me. I have about 30 tracks going on a current mix and only around 45% CPU and Memory usage. Still very responsive.

The bad: Bucket View is *only* good for tweaking comps and eq for a "group" of channels in the same window. There is no mute-solo, limited pan, and the biggest thing for me is no actual grouping functionality. This forces you to have to dance between the plugin and the DAW to tune in these operations. One work-around I have been playing with is to buss/submix/stem groups of tracks like vox, guitars and drums where you have a number of tracks that you wish to process together. This is more for mixdown but it helps with tracking too as things can get complicated quickly due to the whole no-grouping/no-mute-solo issue. Also - why only 8 channels in a bucket? This is limiting if you regularly end up with say 10-12 tracks of drums, vox or guitars. You end up having to split them between several buckets.

What I would like to see in the future is:
- An "All Channels" view. This would really be a time saver for folks like me who mix-on-the-fly - i.e. I build my mixes up as I go.
- Increase the number of tracks in a bucket and use a scroll bar.
- Add the mute-solo and full panning to the bucket view.

I'm sure Waves will improve this plugin as time goes on and they have a great starting point. I am looking forward to more usability improvements.

Thanks,
Frank

I read in an interview with CLA a month or two back. is that he wanted Solo and Mute options, but it's a DAW thing. Apparently there're seems to be no way to get the plugin to communicate to the DAW regarding Mute and solo operations.

It's something he still seems interested in implementing, we just might be waiting for the DAW developers to make the accommodations available.