Old 07-06-2012, 08:52 AM   #1
Cuppa Joe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mount Rainier, MD
Posts: 69
Default Why so much processing?

I have noticed that people seem to expect gobs of processing on every track. I have a professional facility where I use a PC to mix and edit music. Routinely can expect 80-100 tracks per song with all kinds of effects and routing. My question is, does music really need 400 plugins per song or am I missing something? My Core i3-530 doesn't have much trouble keeping up with the demand I place on it, yet I hear people complaining about bottlenecks with i7 machines? Please someone enlighten me...
Cuppa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 08:57 AM   #2
andysarchus
Human being with feelings
 
andysarchus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: A metropolitan bubble
Posts: 1,126
Default

Do you use virtual synths? A single instance of something like U-he's Diva can cause a very respectable machine to throw its toys out of the pram.
__________________
"All the violence done to words is so vile that one can hardly bear to hear them any longer." - Adorno and Horkheimer
andysarchus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 09:01 AM   #3
Cuppa Joe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mount Rainier, MD
Posts: 69
Default not much

Most times the instruments come to me printed already so I don't use more than a few at a time. Even so, there are times where I will have everything I need and the computer doesn't struggle. I'm aware that newer softsynths tax a computer pretty hard. I just can't see being against the limit with the tasks I'm asked to do. Do modern works have to have 4 or 5 eq per track, 2 comps, linear phase everything with an L3 on it?
Cuppa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:03 AM   #4
Magoostus
Human being with feelings
 
Magoostus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 184
Default sometimes....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuppa Joe View Post
Most times the instruments come to me printed already so I don't use more than a few at a time. Even so, there are times where I will have everything I need and the computer doesn't struggle. I'm aware that newer softsynths tax a computer pretty hard. I just can't see being against the limit with the tasks I'm asked to do. Do modern works have to have 4 or 5 eq per track, 2 comps, linear phase everything with an L3 on it?
somtimes, i've found myself building effects pretty linearly lately. so ill eq, then ill add maybe a transient expander. then ill eq again. then ill add reverb (plugin insert instead of aux send) and then ill eq again. all in that order. so something like

EQ
Transient expander
EQ
Reverb
EQ
Dynamics

it happens just because of the decisions made at the time. no thought of optimization ever passes through my mind until i run out of cpu juice. and the more cpu juice i have, the more bloated projects get :P
Magoostus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:06 AM   #5
Viente
Human being with feelings
 
Viente's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuppa Joe View Post
I have noticed that people seem to expect gobs of processing on every track. I have a professional facility where I use a PC to mix and edit music. Routinely can expect 80-100 tracks per song with all kinds of effects and routing. My question is, does music really need 400 plugins per song or am I missing something? My Core i3-530 doesn't have much trouble keeping up with the demand I place on it, yet I hear people complaining about bottlenecks with i7 machines? Please someone enlighten me...
If its needed to achieve desired result, why not?
Viente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:25 AM   #6
Cuppa Joe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mount Rainier, MD
Posts: 69
Default I guess so...

One time I got a mix in where half the compressors weren't doing anything because the "engineer" didn't lower the thresholds. He was just turning knobs until he felt he did something. stuff like that bloating up sessions. If there's a specific chain that gives the result then great, but often misplaced or useless effects can bloat a session.
Cuppa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:32 AM   #7
Artbay
Human being with feelings
 
Artbay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Fort Worth TX
Posts: 1,757
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuppa Joe View Post
He was just turning knobs until he felt he did something. stuff like that bloating up sessions.
i bet that's the main problem: PEBKAC
__________________
www.valtraxysblue.com - www.reverbnation.com/valtraxysblue
"sometimes i like to sit by the fire, read some sheet music, and listen to a book on tape." - steven wright
Artbay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 02:38 PM   #8
shemp
Human being with feelings
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artbay View Post
i bet that's the main problem: PEBKAC
LOL!!!!
shemp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 03:10 PM   #9
Ollie
Super Moderator (no feelings)
 
Ollie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: On or near a dike
Posts: 9,834
Default

The only way to keep me from occasionally going nuts on plug-ins and explode at 3,000 ft altitude is sticking with my dualcore as long as possible.
Ollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 03:47 PM   #10
boatbassguy
Human being with feelings
 
boatbassguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 191
Default

To the original question 'does music need so much processing..?'

Check this out:

http://m.soundcloud.com/owduo/rosemarys-baby

Stereo pair, direct to two track, no processing. Sublime.
boatbassguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 06:48 PM   #11
Nip
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuppa Joe View Post
One time I got a mix in where half the compressors weren't doing anything because the "engineer" didn't lower the thresholds. He was just turning knobs until he felt he did something. stuff like that bloating up sessions. If there's a specific chain that gives the result then great, but often misplaced or useless effects can bloat a session.
Well, that might be he want the coloring of the plug - not the actual compression.

A CLA-2A brings stuff, working below the threshold or not.

Different strokes for different folks.
__________________
-- Windows 11 Pro, i7-12700F 2.1GHz 32G, RME Digiface USB Audient ASP800 Lexicon MX200, Reaper 4.78 --
Nip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 08:30 PM   #12
AudioWonderland
Human being with feelings
 
AudioWonderland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 729
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuppa Joe View Post
I have noticed that people seem to expect gobs of processing on every track. I have a professional facility where I use a PC to mix and edit music. Routinely can expect 80-100 tracks per song with all kinds of effects and routing. My question is, does music really need 400 plugins per song or am I missing something? My Core i3-530 doesn't have much trouble keeping up with the demand I place on it, yet I hear people complaining about bottlenecks with i7 machines? Please someone enlighten me...
I'm with you. I might have a few delays and a couple of reverbs setup on their own channels and whatever tracks need effects to them. Very much like it was done with hardware mixers and effects once upon a time.
AudioWonderland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 08:36 PM   #13
Magoostus
Human being with feelings
 
Magoostus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boatbassguy View Post
To the original question 'does music need so much processing..?'

Check this out:

http://m.soundcloud.com/owduo/rosemarys-baby

Stereo pair, direct to two track, no processing. Sublime.
i dont believe for one second that this was recorded with a single stereo pair.. its too good
Magoostus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 09:42 PM   #14
Panic
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 989
Default

In the military the food tastes like crap, so you learn to doctor it up with healthy dose of whatever you have available; ketchup, hot sauce, whatever. The more the better. I suspect it's the same sort of thing with mixing audio; the worse the source tracks, the more sauce you need to cover things up.
Panic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:14 PM   #15
EricM
Human being with feelings
 
EricM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia
Posts: 3,801
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuppa Joe View Post
I have noticed that people seem to expect gobs of processing on every track.
As said by andy, for the mixing & mastering part there is not
much need in processing power. For composing & sound
creation however, it's needed really really badly.

For fast workflow, I like having everything live, that means
running multiple instances of heavy VSTis with maximum
of 10 ms latency, so everything can be tweaked live.

This of course is the CPU bottleneck, where as for mixing
low latency is not needed.

e
__________________
Shoelace 4 Theme | SoundCloud/erXon
EricM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2012, 03:31 AM   #16
boatbassguy
Human being with feelings
 
boatbassguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magoostus View Post
i dont believe for one second that this was recorded with a single stereo pair.. its too good
.... your loss.


Last edited by boatbassguy; 07-07-2012 at 03:36 AM.
boatbassguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2012, 03:58 AM   #17
timlloyd
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magoostus View Post
i dont believe for one second that this was recorded with a single stereo pair.. its too good
But it was And to top it off, the total cost of that stereo pair is ~$300.
timlloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2012, 04:24 AM   #18
Wolffman
Human being with feelings
 
Wolffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 2,148
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timlloyd View Post
But it was And to top it off, the total cost of that stereo pair is ~$300.
OK, you've got me curious, what were the mics used to record this ?

Cheers
__________________
" Serve the song "

https://soundcloud.com/wolffman7
Wolffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2012, 04:27 AM   #19
timlloyd
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
Default

Line Audio CM3s, direct to a Sound Devices 702 iirc (there's a thread somewhere on gearslutz about it). The whole EP is here ... and it's really good Those two play great music!
timlloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2012, 08:33 AM   #20
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boatbassguy View Post
.... your loss.
Yes but you didn't mention they were using special green mic leads ;-)
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2012, 02:40 PM   #21
boatbassguy
Human being with feelings
 
boatbassguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Yes but you didn't mention they were using special green mic leads ;-)
Oh come on man! EVERYONE knows that without special green mic leads you've got no chance, regardless of how many fancy plugins and overclocked sizzlers you slap on there.
boatbassguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2012, 10:54 PM   #22
Cuppa Joe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mount Rainier, MD
Posts: 69
Default that does sound good!

wow man it's good to hear excellent mic technique
Cuppa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.