Performance on audio mixer (plugin)

General discussion about Gig Performer
1

I’m intending to use a 24 stereo channel audio mixer solution in my global rackspace and since GP does have 32 channels audio mixer plugins as maximum, I’m splitting it into a 32 and 16 channel audio mixer plugin (or maybe even smaller later).

However, regarding performance (CPU speed), I have some questions:

  • When an input is not connected to an audio mixer plugin channel, does it take up resources (for that channel)?
  • What if that channel input is connected via a To/From (Global) Rackspace port and then unconnected?
  • when a channel of an audio mixer plugin is muted, does it take up resources? (or when unconnected, it is not necessary to also mute it?)
  • I assume when the entire audio mixer plugin is bypassed it will not take up any resources; is this true?
1 Like
2

I’m sure someone more knowledgeable (like the developers…) will give a more complete answer, but from my experience the answers are:

  • Yes? I don’t see any change in CPU use whether 1 or many channels connected - but CPU use of the mixer blocks is TINY
  • I don’t see any increased CPU usage from using Global To/From (which is incredible in my opinion, this is such a killer feature)
  • See above - I think they are always processing, but CPU footprint is tiny
  • Yes, this definitely stops using resouces when bypassed

Hope that helps!

2 Likes
3

Thanks for those findings. I had the same feeling.

4

This is somewhat related to another post on here where mixer plugins were used for routing, and the construct was massive. You might find it interesting to read and see what he did, especially the global screenshots, and no complaints on latency. Build what you want and try it out, I’m sure there will be no latency or resourcing problems.

Rocket Surgeons - Gig Performer in Action - Gig Performer Community

2 Likes
5

Thanks, I will read that link later today when I have more time.

It looks a bit like my ‘spider web’ solution (so far): Mixer output not passed to Gain and Balance plugin, why not? - Gig Performer 4 Beta Discussion Group - Gig Performer Community

Good that no latency problems occurred. And it seems CPU usage is also good (using a refurbished I7 laptop).

6

I’m the OP of the “Rocket Surgeons” post… and fair warning, latency becomes a challenge. Thus far I have managed it, but all my gear and plugin decisions must be made with latency in mind… and plugins that CAN accept latency should be run on another CPU via AudioGridder to keep from affecting the other flows. (For example, I plan to run a reverb bank this way, and will accept some latency as pre-delay.)

Feel free to ask questions or PM me if you like.

Chris

4 Likes
7

Chris, fantastic - you are certainly an expert in this area. Thanks so much for offering to help other users interested in pushing these boundaries!

2 Likes
8

Hey, after spending all this effort, time, and money, I feel compelled to save others the effort!

3 Likes
9

Thank you Chris for that article and this nice post.

I’m using much less gear than you, but I have the same principle: keeping as much as possible in the global rackspace. So far I didn’t run into latency problems, but I have to say I haven’t used it with an intensive number of plugins.

1 Like
10

Yes, my rig is complicated by the requirement that it host multiple musicians at once. Of course I do plan to solo-gig on it as well, and in those cases the plugin load is slightly lower.

I say “slightly” because at least some of my loops are recorded pre-plugins, to allow for changes in timbre and effects over time. In these cases I’m still tied to running lots of simultaneous plugins… but with GP I can pick and choose when I want to go that route and manage my overhead thusly.

2 Likes
11

You made indeed use of a lot of different features of GP, and it turns to work out well.

I also like the flexibility of GP, and try to make the most use of it.

1 Like