The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Waves introduces CLA MixHub Plugin
Old 27th July 2019
  #721
Deleted 5edf3fa
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by profvonsok View Post
Try Reaper. I'd be surprised if it didn't run more instances.
Ok, tried Reaper. Same story. Hiccup and audio breakup after 3 instances.

The actual CPU load is surprisingly reasonable per meters. Both show around 7%.
Old 27th July 2019
  #722
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
Ok, tried Reaper. Same story. Hiccup and audio breakup after 3 instances.

The actual CPU load is surprisingly reasonable per meters. Both show around 7%.
Yikes! That is rough. I thought for sure it had to do with Cubase.
Old 28th July 2019
  #723
Deleted 5edf3fa
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 5edf3fa View Post
The system is 100% stable. But as far as DAW speed goes... I'm not impressed at all so far.
I reverse my statement.

System is not stable at all at max loads, crashes when Cubase is pushed into ASIO clipping or when Prime95 stress test is run after a few minutes. So far every time I get close to the max, I get a crash. But ONLY when I get close to max in these situations. Not a hiccup from normal Cubase use or just Windows use.

I don't know if that's because my CPU installation wans't smooth (got a CPU tilt during install, possibly smeared some paste). Nobody has answers so far what the desired temp ranges needs to be at certain loads and what the acceptable max is. It idles at around 40C but I set Ryzen Perfomance plan and the CPU sits at 4.2Ghz all core at all times, I'll probably change that. I think I also disabled Cool'n'Quite BIOS feature when I was troubleshooting latencymon errors (all solved now). So it seems ok, but I don't know.

The good news is what I thought was the bad news.

It handles plugins like a champ, so I'm unlikely to hit max load. Forget about that % comparison between my old and new system. It's not valid.

I thought it was slow based on ASIO meter, but that meter is not linear at all, so all my assumptions about relative CPU performance go out of the window. This thing took on 96 instances of Kramer Tape (one of Waves biggest CPU hogs) before stuttering and cracking (and ultimately crashing).

When the meter is at 75% it was only 1/6 loaded. (see my attached gif) Then with each other batch of 16 plugins it only went up by a few percent each time. So in reality what I see at 40% could be like 5%.

Conclusion: badass VST performance, just be careful maxxing it out until better BIOSes are out and this whole temp/voltage/crashing thing is sorted out. But for normal use this thing is pretty much appears to be overkill. Just what I expected when I bought it.

Now if only Waves fixes their goddamn Mixhub...

IT's a GIF:keep watching, it changes every second as I add more and more.
Attached Thumbnails
Waves introduces CLA MixHub Plugin-asio.gif  
Old 28th July 2019
  #724
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
Ok, tried Reaper. Same story. Hiccup and audio breakup after 3 instances.

The actual CPU load is surprisingly reasonable per meters. Both show around 7%.
What happens if you distribute the plugin across the multiple tracks in REAPER?
I.e. create a new track for each MixHub instance.
Old 28th July 2019
  #725
Deleted 5edf3fa
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by meloco_go View Post
What happens if you distribute the plugin across the multiple tracks in REAPER?
I.e. create a new track for each MixHub instance.
You're a genius, man!



It works that way just fine (one instance per channel).

I can run 24 instances of Mixhub at 92% CPU load.



Mixhub Lite: 64 instances (yay!, I didn't add more, I believe it's the max supported count)



I also did some more tinkering with power plans and stuff... I'm happy to report that now I have a reasonably stable system. No more crashes in stress tests or Cubase even when loaded up. I don't know if my tinkering helped or if Mixhub is not supposed to be run on the same channel more than once (makes sense since it connects channels in a bucket mode) but no more problems with it. I wasn't using it right, I guess.

Anyway to sum up my weekend adventures with Ryzen 3600: superfast, stable and no more problems with anything.
Old 28th July 2019
  #726
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 5edf3fa View Post
I don't know if my tinkering helped or if Mixhub is not supposed to be run on the same channel more than once (makes sense since it connects channels in a bucket mode) but no more problems with it. I wasn't using it right, I guess.
All of the processing on the single track is typically assigned to the same CPU core. Which makes sense as the processing is serial in this case, while multiple cores handle the parallel processing load.
It's not just Mixhub, but other CPU-heavy plugins as well.
Old 29th July 2019
  #727
Lives for gear
 

Why not just release the d... Thing as a single plugin, with normal CPU hit - to update (or replace) the original SSL plugin?
Old 2nd August 2019
  #728
Lives for gear
 

If I recall correctly I was able to get 40 instances of the full version working in Logic on my i7 iMac. It was really pushing it though, with no other plugins running. Although I did enable every module in every plugin.

It could be a little less than 40, I just don’t remember now.
Old 3rd August 2019
  #729
Deleted 5edf3fa
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon.billington View Post
If I recall correctly I was able to get 40 instances of the full version working in Logic on my i7 iMac. It was really pushing it though, with no other plugins running. Although I did enable every module in every plugin.

It could be a little less than 40, I just don’t remember now.
Mono or stereo? All examples in my screenshots were stereo (forgot to mention that).
Old 5th August 2019
  #730
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by simon.billington View Post
If I recall correctly I was able to get 40 instances of the full version working in Logic on my i7 iMac. It was really pushing it though, with no other plugins running. Although I did enable every module in every plugin.

It could be a little less than 40, I just don’t remember now.
Only 40 instances, and no headroom for other plugs?? That's ridiculous and probably why people have lost interest in this strange concept from Waves and moved on already...
Old 5th August 2019
  #731
Lives for gear
 
PMoshay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lydfar View Post
Only 40 instances, and no headroom for other plugs?? That's ridiculous and probably why people have lost interest in this strange concept from Waves and moved on already...
Who's lost interest?.... its a fantastic plugin! speak for yourself. If you dont care for it, thats ok... but its hardly a consensus.
Old 5th August 2019
  #732
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by lydfar View Post
Only 40 instances, and no headroom for other plugs?? That's ridiculous and probably why people have lost interest in this strange concept from Waves and moved on already...
FWIW we work @ 96k and currently have over 40 plugs in a session, plus several others, including reverbs. Full mix. It is heavier than Scheps Omni which i also like, but not unmanageable.

Mac 2013 12 core trashcan 64GB RAM here.
Old 5th August 2019
  #733
Lives for gear
 
PMoshay's Avatar
 

and it sounds fantastic... the compressor modeling is spot on fabulous, VERY fast & useable for so many situations....... not to mention driving the channel with the mic knob is a uber fantastic color that just does not exist unless you add some other harmonic plugin.
my thought is that's its dsp heavy because it needs to be to sound great, which it does.
Old 5th August 2019
  #734
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lydfar View Post
Only 40 instances, and no headroom for other plugs?? That's ridiculous and probably why people have lost interest in this strange concept from Waves and moved on already...
Yes, but only a fool would run it that way. You’d prioritise your key instruments with the full version and then you’d assign other tracks to the lite version. It will also help push them back in the mix.

On top of that you group instruments into stem like tracks. CLA does this to squeeze it into 48 channels.

Mind you, in a couple of years the instant count will be 50 instead of 40. Than 60, then 80. It’s a type of limitation that won’t be permanent.
Old 7th August 2019
  #735
Deleted 5edf3fa
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon.billington View Post
Yes, but only a fool would run it that way. You’d prioritise your key instruments with the full version and then you’d assign other tracks to the lite version. It will also help push them back in the mix.

On top of that you group instruments into stem like tracks. CLA does this to squeeze it into 48 channels.

Mind you, in a couple of years the instant count will be 50 instead of 40. Than 60, then 80. It’s a type of limitation that won’t be permanent.
That's what I do.

Vocal and drum bus = full version.
Other prominent instruments = lite version.
Small background sounds = other plugins
Old 7th August 2019
  #736
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMoshay View Post
and it sounds fantastic... the compressor modeling is spot on fabulous, VERY fast & useable for so many situations....... not to mention driving the channel with the mic knob is a uber fantastic color that just does not exist unless you add some other harmonic plugin.
my thought is that's its dsp heavy because it needs to be to sound great, which it does.
Yes, I absolutely love the color of driven signals on it. I usually do that in parallel channels while sweeping the freq with high gain and Q values. Love it!
Old 11th August 2019
  #737
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 5edf3fa View Post
That's what I do.

Vocal and drum bus = full version.
Other prominent instruments = lite version.
Small background sounds = other plugins
Yeah, that’s the idea. It’s pointless putting prime grade processing on sounds that might not even get noticed. Sounds that may even be arguably redundant in a mix. That’s a lot of wasted horsepower that can be better appropriated.

Logic has Track Stacks, which are effectively Aux style folders. I tend to use them as a non destructive way of stemming together elements. I kind of use them like mixer channels which I then feed to another set of auxes that act like submixes. Each stage is an opportunity to process things together, which is also away of achieving a more cohesive mix.
Old 12th August 2019
  #738
Haven't been using it a lot (if at all really) since the immediate purchase after launch. By chance I now did put it on a recent recording of our studio upright and man, did these keys come to life. Especially with the mic drive engaged, starting from the Piano 1 preset. I am really impressed. Will put it on some more sources in the near future. :-)
Old 4 weeks ago
  #739
Gear Nut
Once I upgrade the DAW to 14 core, I'll bring it in again for everything. Not only do I love the sound, but the workflow really did work for me too. In the meantime Plugin Alliance Console N is working fine. I do more orchestral work anyway and the Console N is modeled on a Neve that was particularly clean. But for analog feel for rock/pop etc... the CLA Mixhub is very very hard to beat. I researched for a year and a half before choosing it, only to then find it is hard for my cpu resources to keep up with. Deep plug, very very nice.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #740
Gear Nut
 

I just purchased Sonimus Satson CS because the mixhub is so heavy on the cpu - The workflow is different but the sound is awesome. Think it's a nice alternative for CLA MixHub
Old 4 weeks ago
  #741
Lives for gear
 
Finnish's Avatar
 

Just got it, cost me about 30€ from everyPlugin.com
Old 4 weeks ago
  #742
Gear Maniac
 
4fmb's Avatar
AudioDeluxe one-day sale on CLA Mix-Hub

Just picked up CLA Mix-Hub at AudioDeluxe for $35.10 -pricing good today (8/19/19) only.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #743
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon.billington View Post
...It’s pointless putting prime grade processing on sounds that might not even get noticed. Sounds that may even be arguably redundant in a mix...
if they're really that, then why put ANY plug in on these channels?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #744
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
if they're really that, then why put ANY plug in on these channels?
To create more headroom for the instruments that matter most.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #745
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
if they're really that, then why put ANY plug in on these channels?
Well, yeah. Sometimes you don’t need anything. Or maybe just top and tail it with a roll off. Saving CPU is the other merit to avoiding overprocessing.

For the tracks that do need a little attention and are kind of semi-important you could always opt to use Waves’ original E, among other things, but especially if you want to stay consistent with the SSL vibe. That’s not always necessary in my opinion, but others may share different thoughts.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #746
Lives for gear
I’m much more likely to just leave those things alone and make them lower.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #747
Gear Nut
When this first came out I laughed at the CLA video and moved on. But of course when Waves once again enticed me with a special price of $39 and I just went ahead and got it. Didn't even demo it. I actually like it as a channel strip plugin.

But I am not CLA. I do solo and mute. And I have no clue how to mix "in buckets". Maybe one day I'll learn how but I think I'll probably just use this as a channel strip for the EQ/dynamics and call it good at that.

It's also just too confusing having two faders to deal with, Cubase and the plugin, for mixing. Maybe use this like NLS - put it on every track for the flavor, eq, and dynamics, but not for actual fader work.

Like anything, it's not for everyone. Some will love it, some won't. I'll use it in a way that makes the most sense for me. No hate on Waves here. Nothing but love.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #748
Lives for gear
 

So you can run it as a single plugin, with all the input saturating and everything? Dose it make it more usable in regards to CPU? I wonder how come Waves, don't just sell it as an updated version of the original SSL plugin? They should be able to sell a lot more - a signature CLA SSL channelstrip!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #749
Quote:
Originally Posted by lydfar View Post
So you can run it as a single plugin, with all the input saturating and everything? Dose it make it more usable in regards to CPU? I wonder how come Waves, don't just sell it as an updated version of the original SSL plugin? They should be able to sell a lot more - a signature CLA SSL channelstrip!
Yes, I am also using it solely as a channel strip. Sounds really great, has a lot of interesting presets (heavy lifting like I normally wouldn't do, but sounds good) and I do not have any CPU issues. But I never use more then 3 or 4 in a mix.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #750
Lives for gear
 

I could see a lot of interest, if it also could function as an updated version of the original SSL version. I use maybe 50 or so in a busy rock mix, plus a lot of other stuff. How hard is the new one, compared to the old, (and to other modern SSL clones) when it comes to CPU? Used as a single channel, with only the obvious functions enabled and in "light mode" Thanks for the patience...
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump