"Plug-In Sharing" . . . not sharing enough...(?)

[dave-G]

When I look at my system usage window, in a fairly moderate session on my HD3 rig, I see three (count 'em, 3!) instances of "Plug-In Sharing", each at 14%. Why doesn't PT optimize those to 42% on a single chip?!? I thought that avoiding sessions with numerous barely-used DSP chips was one of the goals of plug-in sharing in the first place.

Is this a further sign that few are making plugins that fully take advantage of "Multishell" (if that's still a concept in HD)?

-dave
(hooray beer!)

[dave-G]

Certainly some companies like Waves, et al use their own shells for chip-sharing, but I thought that Digi had developed "Multishell" (MuSh or Plug-In Sharing) for just this purpose; to allow chip sharing between dissimilar plugins, to get the most out of our hardware. This was how it was originally promoted, anyway. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, it seems that actually implementing MuSh has been less than desirable for most of the plug-in manufacturers out there.

What I don't get is this: when I see "Plug-In Sharing" on an HD process chip, that means there are some plugins actually using MuSh, right? So, why would there be three of them at 14% rather than one at 42% ?????

-dave

[Mikey MTC]

If you close that session, and then reopen again, do you still get 3 chips with 14% each? Sometimes it needs to restart to organize things if plugs have been coming ansd going during the session.

[ashdot]

Also, sometimes plugins that use plugin sharing need different kinds of chips.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Aren't all HD chips identical?

[dave-G]

Originally posted by F Umminger:
The dsp manager does not try to compact all of the plugins using plugin sharing onto a single chip until it needs a free chip. This saves you from having to wait through plugin shuffling when it is not really necessary.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Aha! Well, that's good news.

Also, sometimes plugins that use plugin sharing need different kinds of chips.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Huh? I thought all HD chips were the same.

Also... most of my favorite plugins seem to use their own, exclusive chip-sharing schemes (Waves, McDSP, Wave Mechanics, etc) if any sharing is done at all. . . . Is there a future for MuSh? Or, will things just continue as they are?

Thanks for your response, Frederick.

-dave

[F Umminger]

The dsp manager does not try to compact all of the plugins using plugin sharing onto a single chip until it needs a free chip. This saves you from having to wait through plugin shuffling when it is not really necessary.

Also, sometimes plugins that use plugin sharing need different kinds of chips.

[DigiTechSupt]

Originally posted by F Umminger:
Also, sometimes plugins that use plugin sharing need different kinds of chips.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You are correct...the DSP chips on HD cards are the same. This comment was specific to Mix hardware.

Brent

[tamtamstudio]

[img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]