View Single Post
Old 21st February 2018
Lives for gear
TAFKAT's Avatar

Originally Posted by kdm View Post
It isn't a stretch here. It really depends on how your clients use their systems. They could load up 120 channels of bx Console E and only use 2 slots. Or they could load 40 or so channels of completely unique EQs, comps, channel strips, pres, tape emus, etc, that all use 2 slots each and hit the wall before coming close to a final mix. Granted, it isn't as likely during a mix because most of us don't use *that* many different plugins for general EQ, comp, channel strips. But some people do.
Its a stretch comparing it to TDM in that the working environment requires a scenario that many will not navigate in , whereas TDM ceilings were hard set , no matter whether they were individual unique or the same plugin used multiple times.

There is a quick way to hit the wall, though it isn't the most likely scenario - Analog Lab from Arturia uses 43 slots because it calls all of it's VIs at once. That leaves 28 slots in Cubase 9.5 - just load another 5 Arturia VIs and you are out of plugin slots. Unfortuately, some of Arturia's preset libraries they sell as add-ons are written for Analog Lab, and not the specific VIs they use, so that is why it could come up in a production session vs. being unlikely when used in live performance.
The more you keep mentioning Arturia, the more my leaning is towards poor developer imposed coding practices

I'll send you a list of VIs I've tested so far with FLS numbers for each - it isn't exhaustive, but enough to cover quite a few developers' plugins.
Just post it here, better to be out in the open.

This limit is reality for some of us, and I'm not the only one. I know of other users not able to open older Nuendo sessions because new Nuendo 8 features reduced the limit just enough. And that is a notable concern - DAW developers must use FLS slots if they add component libraries (i.e. modular feature sets vs. hard programming new features into the software). This is more common with Steinberg's approach, given the two application development (Cubase/Nuendo sharing a core engine, with add-on features). Fortunately for me, VEPro uses no FLS slots (nor should it, being just a server connection), so most of my work avoids it. However, with electronic music, where a lot of different VIs and plugins are common, it is far more likely.
Let me get this out of the way, this wasn't meant to be a slight or dismissing your concerns in any way, we go back a long way , I am hoping you understand my comments are coming from a position of mutual respect.

My comments are purely stating I haven't had clients report back to me as yet, and some work extensively in EDM , so I am just attempting to get a clearer narrative re the potential triggers and who will be effected by them.

I'd rather not enter too far into Steinbergs "features" or any narrative in that leaning, as I reached a point of apathy with anything to do with Steinberg/Cubendo many years ago, as you know. It has always been 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

Studio One just isn't there yet with its features set, and neither is Reaper (i.e. Eucon support, custom video engine, ADR, Reconform, etc). They both likely tally more free FLS slots for empty projects - I know Reaper has more free slots.
Horses for courses, I have had several long term Cubendo clients make the move to Reaper for some recent projects for other reasons, and haven't looked back, the new custom video engine being one of the triggers which is nothing but a cluster f**k , ground hog day and all that.., I digress.

Last edited by TAFKAT; 21st February 2018 at 03:47 AM..