Sonar EQ options

  • Thread starter Thread starter jdier
  • Start date Start date
jdier

jdier

New member
I am running 2.2 xl with NO external mixer or effects.

I am curious which EQ sonar users employ when adding small amounts of roll off or eq'ing to their drum tracks.

I am concerned about overloading my DAW with the multiple instances of EQ plugs.

- Should I be worried about this?
- Are the EQ plugs resource hogs?
- Is there one choice which uses less resources?

NOTE: I know I could destructively apply these effects and have 0% strain on my CPU, but for now, as I am getting started with drum micing and recording, I would like to keep them all real time.

Thanks in advance.

Jim
 
I usually run the Waves Audiotrack (it's an EQ and compressor in one) on almost every track I have in a project (in realtime). With a 24 track song, coupple of reverbs, 2 or 3 softsynths, etc, my computer is struggling...

There should not be a problem with running several instances of one plugin, that's one of the cool things about software effects. :)

And, well, EQs use CPU cycles. How much depends on the plugin.
 
If you're running the stock cakewalk EQ's, either one should do the trick, you should have..

The 4 band parametric EQ, pretty easy on the CPU, I can run a LOT of these on a P-III 600 mhz.

FX-EQ, I can run lots of these too, these are pretty cool in the fact that you can select how many bands of parametric there are, and whether or not you need to have the shelving filters too, this means you could set one up with only one band of parametric if that's all you need, and the plugin will use minimal resources.

Sonic Timeworks EQ, very nice EQ, definetely uses more CPU than the others, I mainly use this across the L/R mix on the main out, but I also use the FX-EQ in this spot a lot too.

I wouldn't be worried about using them at all, at least up to the point that your system starts to show the strain of running TOO MANY plugins, IMO it's much better to use EQ's non destructively, and leave your original audio alone.

If I had to resort to destructive EQ applications, I would copy the tracks needing it, apply the EQ to the copies, and archive the originals untouched, then they won't be using any resources and if you decide a week later that the EQ's are off a little, you can just delete the EQ-ed copys, un-archive the originals, and do it again.
 
i see u have the XL version then YOU MUST use the timework Equalizer...shits on every cakewalk eq and most others...and it has a built in spectrum analyzer..but since its soo good its def a cpu hog compared to the cakewalk plugs
 
I use the Timeworks EQ for any EQing I have to do. I usually have between 15 and 20 tracks to a song, with Timeworks on the majority. There may be better EQ's, but it's what I'm used to. I think it rocks.
 
i think the only ones that are SIGNIFICANTLY better then timeworks are H/W units costing 500+(speck being the only 500 alt. that i know of the rest are 1000+)...Sonic timeworks are very well designed plugs-ins...64 bit floating point allows for extremely accurate processing
 
Does Timeworks make reverb-plugins?

I think that good software-reverbs lack something I can't describe which hardware-reverbs provide...
 
Has anyone compared the Timeworks EQ and reverbs to the ones in Izotope's Ozone or the ones with the UAD-1?

Thanks,
-lee-
 
i didn't like the ozone reverb but i didn't try to learn it either..sounded way to fake and 'cold' ...can't recall too much about the EQ...
i would imagine that the UAD-1 plugs sound better..
 
I've heard the UAD-1, and to me it's not comparable to any software effects. It sounds like hardware. It's the best from two worlds! :D

The usability in a sequenser, none CPU-strain and really quality plugins. That adds up to: "I want one!" :)
 
moskus said:
I've heard the UAD-1, and to me it's not comparable to any software effects. It sounds like hardware. It's the best from two worlds! :D

The usability in a sequenser, none CPU-strain and really quality plugins. That adds up to: "I want one!" :)
Click to expand...

WOW...that looks sweet!!!!

To much $$$ for me though. Unless I start selling my body at night...oh wait...I don't think that will work either :( (maybe 20 years ago) :D
 
the catch is there's only a limited amount of instances per card...the number slips my mind...
 
Yeah, man...
I'd prefer plugins alot cause I can use it in how many ever track I wanted. Not to worry it has only two inputs / outputs. I have the older version of timework reverb, but it doesn't even close as nice as TC Native in my ears. The installation CD has been corrupted anyway, so I can't install it anymore :( Hey... TW EQ ROCKS, man... ROCKS !!!!


;)
Jaymz




...please consider Pre-ordering Homerecording.Comp CD's Vol 2 :)
 
Teacher said:
the catch is there's only a limited amount of instances per card...the number slips my mind...
Click to expand...
Well, it depends on what "plugin" you use. You can have 20 EQs running at the same time without problems....




And please DO NOT consider preorder Homerecording.Comp CD's Vol 2... :D
 
I have a question for someone who's running a UAD-1, how many instances of the channelstrip can be run at once? I realize that this would also depend on how "much" of the channelstrip was being used in each instance, let's say..

8 with EQ + Compression
4 with EQ + Delay
8 with EQ only

That's 20 channels total, is this many on one card possible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top