More plugs with 128 buffer

[CCash]

Just passing this on. I was doing that DaveC test and found out that I could always get a few more plug-ins using the 128 buffer instead of 1024, contrary to rationale.

I've been trying to figure out the benefit to ever using a higher sample buffer... the only one I've come across is that ProTools acts better using the 1024 when you have other programs working with it in the background.

Anyway, thought that might interest someone...

[Stage]

usually the higher the buffer the more plugs.. but i've noticed on a friend's 001/g4/933 that it is reversed as well.. anyone know why?

[ajazzie]

G4 733 quicksilver,
more plugs on 128, no doubt and I dont know why???

[Severe]

This has been mentioned before, and there still hasnt been a definative reply from digi, to my knowledge. I usually just find a buffer size that is best suitable for the task, although I wish there was a more definate answer. The sometimes low/sometimes high thing is a bit of a pain in the pitoot.

[kris whitten]

I ALWAYS keep my buffer at 128.

Well, once I set it at 256, but... [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Maybe that explains why I got high track counts in Davec test.

Imagine,

digi sittin' in a room and someone says...

"lets tell the LE users to increase thier buffer sizes, so that they have crappier performance !!!"

president says, "Brilliant !!! " [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[the_riot]

Same here, on my dual 800 I always run at 128, if I try to switch over to anything higher for mixdown I always get crappier performance. Strange... [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Jon Plett]

Are you guys only finding these results with specific MACs? (ie the 733, or 800's)
And is the case for all people with the same machines?

[kris whitten]

G4 400

[bassbuddy]

1024 = anti groove

128 works great with many plugs.

G-4 733

Kenny

[Stage]

G4 933