waves hcompressor

S

stupidfatnugly

New member
I just tested a demo version of this out and it makes every track I put it on sound better. However, I run out of power. My laptop just crawls.

besides the digidesign stock plugins I just have autotune; so I guess my question is:

besides getting a new computer, is there a way to get more than a few plugins going at a time? I mean I didn't have much trouble with the stock plugins but this waves compressor and autotune pretty much do it in.

what's up with that?
 
This is what locking tracks is all about. I'm not sure whether Digi calls it "locking" or "freezing", they are just two different names for the same thing; you'll have to look it up in the online help.

But either way, what it does is pre-renders a copy of the selected track with the plug-ins processed so that you don't have to try running all your plug-ins in real time at the same time. The beauty is that it's reversible. If you want to go back and re-do a track, you just un-lock it and it returned to the original un-rendered version with the real time plugs intact and changeable.

But by locking/freezing any track that you are at least temporarily done working with, you are saving CPU resources by temporarily pre-rendering the plugs so that the CPU doesn't have to render them on the fly every time you hit the play button.

G.
 
Do you put your effects on a bus? You could use one bus to cover any plug-ins that you are using twice on separate tracks.

Doing that, in addition to locking your tracks, can help you to make sure your sessions don't start stuttering.
 
stupidfatnugly said:
so this is pretty common?
Click to expand...
If you have too many tracks trying to run too many real-time effects at one time, it can happen to anybody.

Get used to locking any track you're not working on at the time and not only will you never have that problem (unless you're trying to run a trillion plugs on one track), but you'll also save yourself from accidentally working on the wrong track at any given time (something that otherwise eventually happens to everybody sooner or later.)

I always just start my projects with every track locked, and then just unlock the one(s) I'm currently working on. When I'm done with one track and I move to the next one, I re-lock the one I am leaving and unlock the one I am moving to.

G.
 
You can upgrade to Intel i7 based compooper :D

Although, I am sure if you ran autotune on every track, you'd still hit it's limits... :o
 
stupidfatnugly said:
i don't know if protools does that freeze thing.

what alternatives are there for really good compressors?
Click to expand...
Is it really true, guys, that you can't lock tracks in PT? Yikes. Yet another reason I don't like PT.

I gotta say, though, S.F. & U., that if you're using compression and autotuning on every track, there's something seriously wrong because you should not ever have to do anything that severe to your tracks.

G.
 
Glen,

You can do it in PT using the technique I described above. They just don't use the freeze or lock terminology.

With TDM systems it's less of an issue because the processing can be offloaded to the PT hardware.
 
masteringhouse said:
Glen,

You can do it in PT using the technique I described above. They just don't use the freeze or lock terminology.

With TDM systems it's less of an issue because the processing can be offloaded to the PT hardware.
Click to expand...
Tom, I'm not familiar with the terminology. When you say "duplicate playlist of the track", is that the moral equivalent of what other packages might call an "alternate take" of the track? Not a new recording, obviously, but in this case another virtual copy of the same track?

For me it's not just the saving of hardware resources, though admittedly that's the major part of it, but as I described, I also like the level of project management that track locking provides. It's helpful especially when working on a large number of tracks in one song project, not only when deep into the project, but it can be a saving grace when I come back to a project after a day or three off, and by just looking at what's locked and what's not, I get an instant snapshot reminder of just where I left off in the project.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Tom, I'm not familiar with the terminology. When you say "duplicate playlist of the track", is that the moral equivalent of what other packages might call an "alternate take" of the track? Not a new recording, obviously, but in this case another virtual copy of the same track?
Click to expand...

It would be nice if DAWs used a consistent set of terms, but that's marketing for ya.

A playlist could be considered a virtual copy of a track, a copy of an EDL (edit decision list), etc. Essentially it's just "pointers" to regions (wave files) and how they are arranged.

I would guess that "locking" a track would still render the file and the EDL/playlist/virtual track would point to the rendered version rather than the original. Same thing would be accomplished with the playlist idea above in PT.
 
masteringhouse said:
A playlist could be considered a virtual copy of a track, a copy of an EDL (edit decision list), etc. Essentially it's just "pointers" to regions (wave files) and how they are arranged.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, it's nice to hear that the term EDL is still used. Brings me back to my old days at Discreet Logic. OK, that brings the concept home to me.
masteringhouse said:
I would guess that "locking" a track would still render the file and the EDL/playlist/virtual track would point to the rendered version rather than the original. Same thing would be accomplished with the playlist idea above in PT.
Click to expand...
Yep, locking (or freezing, depending upon the marketing team ;) ) pre-renders the track on the spot while saving the un-rendered copy (with all plug assignments) intact. "Un-locking" the track automatically reverts back to the un-rendered version.

There is an additional function that's preformed when you do that; while a track is locked or frozen, it is also uneditable - i.e. it is locked out from further editing until/unless you unlock it (hence the names "lock" and "freeze" ;)). I don't know about you, but I'd bet that at least once in your history you have inadvertently - usually later in the evening on a project with a large number of tracks - tried modding a track unsuccessfully for a half hour or so only to find that you accidentally had track 22 instead of track 24 highlighted and were unsuccessful because you were working on the wrong track. Locking tracks you are not currently working on avoids that possibility. Plus there is usually a pretty obvious visual indication in the form of a different color scheme or something like that to let you know immediately what is locked and what isn't. Very handy when coming back to a project after taking a break to tell just what you were working on before the break.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Is it really true, guys, that you can't lock tracks in PT? Yikes. Yet another reason I don't like PT.

I gotta say, though, S.F. & U., that if you're using compression and autotuning on every track, there's something seriously wrong because you should not ever have to do anything that severe to your tracks.

G.
Click to expand...

To make anything "inactive" in pro tools just use CMD + CTRL + Click for mac.
CTRL + Start + Click for windows. To make an entire track inactive just do this command on the track logo. ex where it shows weather the track is audio, midi or whatever (mix window). You can also turn off the voice for the track. This was a hidden trick on older versions of Pro Tools but I think it is now in one of the drop down menus.

I didn't see anyone mention for the OP to raise his/her buffer size for mix down. A higher buffer size will fix that problem most of the time.
 
Glen,

You can lock regions (sections of tracks) and tracks with the Apple-L command in PT. Locking in the terminology you have been using includes the render, on PT it does not. BTW which DAW are you referring to?

Zeppe said:
I didn't see anyone mention for the OP to raise his/her buffer size for mix down. A higher buffer size will fix that problem most of the time.
Click to expand...

A higher buffer size will not fix an over-taxed CPU which from the OP's original description seems to be the problem.
 
Last edited:
Zeppe said:
That doesn't stop pro-tools from using system resources on those tracks or regions.
Click to expand...

True, but that's not what the OP wanted to accomplish. He wants to be able to play the track with the effects, only not use as much CPU. Not kill the track entirely.
 
masteringhouse said:
BTW which DAW are you referring to?
Click to expand...
Well, the functionality and names can change slightly from DAW to DAW, and I can't document version numbers in which the feature became available, but the ones I have encountered or read about include:

CEP/Audition - Lock
Cubase/Nuendo - Freeze
Logic Pro - Protect (if I remember right)
Sonar - Freeze
Vegas - Lock (I don't remember if this pre-rendres or not, or whether it's just an edit lock, but it does also have alternate takes, which can be combined with an edit lock, like PT, if necessary)
Samplitude (I think)

Of those that I have actually used (and remember using), the one in CEP/Audition is IMHO the best executed and easiest of them all. It's a simple one-button click and it's all automatic from there, whether locking or unlocking.

G.
 
masteringhouse said:
True, but that's not what the OP wanted to accomplish. He wants to be able to play the track with the effects, only not use as much CPU. Not kill the track entirely.
Click to expand...

Locking a track wouldn't accomplish that either. Locking a track or region just prevents an inadvertent move or edit.

Processing the effects to the tracks and the removing or freezing the real-time plug-in would be the way to keep real-time plug-ins from taxing the CPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top