which takes up more CPU power?

[bdane]

Just wondering which takes up more CPU power in the computer, manualy automating the volume on a snare, or just puting in a gate plug-in? In my opinion, I prefer to adjust the volume on a snare manually, but didn't know if that takes up more memory or CPU than just adding a gate plug-in. Any advice???

[OddsAre]

putting a gate would "in theory" take more processing power cause its a plugin. BUT not much... Digirack plugins are pretty efficient. Automation, as far as I know really doesn't affect processing power at all. Either route isn't gonna bog down even a pretty wimpy processor.

[Leadfinger]

finding that with real drum parts on digital audio, for me it's often quicker
and more reliable to manually do it, at least on standard length songs. Rob

Can I ask you how you manually do this, sorry if that sounds like an obvious question but are you saying you draw the automation on to the track manually or do you use the fader to write the automation? I do know how to do this but I'm thinking there is more to it than that, maybe some more efficient way of doing it - if so can you pass on how you do it .... I have a noisy snare that I have gated but I'm not really happy with.

Thanks in advance.

[Forum Member LE]

Automation does take up CPU power, thus the reason for the Thinning feature .
It also hits you a little harder with certain control surfaces.

[Leadfinger]

Thanks Rob, excellent post.

[Forum Member LE]

Gates, while I suppose are still in wide use, are moot (for me) since the advent of automation. But I don't run a commercial facility for hire with high client/session traffic, where they might make more sense. Rob

How many gates ever sounded natural?
Get a good control surface and ride a fader.