BrainModular

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T23:32:47+02:00

Hi Yvonne, I guess you're referring to the "create a combo box" part..?

On every input/output on Usine modules/scripts/etc, as well as the "modules" created within patches representing VSTs, you can ctrl-drag on the empty background to create a default control. On VSTs, most controls will create a fader ranging from 0 to 1, but doing so on the program input will create a combo box filled with the names of the current patches/programs/presets in the VST. You can right-click the combo box the assign a MIDI command to control it (a program change, a CC, or a note). This means that the VST doesn't need to react directly to MIDI program changes.

Did this help?

Usine also lets you store and retrieve presets in different ways; with the preset manager you can store the current values within a (sub-)patch, with the conductor you can create presets of the whole grid. Some also like to use the sequencer with markers as a kind of workspace preset manager.

Statistics: Posted by bsork — 08 Dec 2008, 22:32

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T22:26:04+02:00

"I wish to take VSTs that do NOT respond to program changes"

Wich ones?

Statistics: Posted by ethnix73 — 08 Dec 2008, 21:26

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T22:09:31+02:00

I will try to study on this senso. Very exciting because USINE has feature that suit my thinking beautifully I think... :--)

So... if anyone can explain what senso means... in 2nd part of response above.

For me thie only thing is finding a way to AVOID multiple instances of the plugin being in ram for no reason. (just to get the next program for the vst that I wish to use) I hope I am being clear enough here...

IF I load in several instances of a VST (that does not respond to program changes) and set each instance to a different program change THEN I can have the program I like, when I like... this is not good like forte though as there should not be all the confusion of trying to organize this (knowing which VST has which program inside running) and also with maybe 10 instances even if they were bypassed/muted would still take up ram (though not CPU really) ..no? yes?

I wish to take VSTs that do NOT respond to program changes and have them 're-load? themselves with the desired program running ... I am not sure what to do though I will not stop until I understand.

fun!

Statistics: Posted by yvonne — 08 Dec 2008, 21:09

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T10:26:30+02:00

SO... when used standalone USINE can (with contoller, or note or whatever command) MUTE/BYPASS a VST routing and save ALL of the CPU usage???

yes absolutely.

Can anyone think of a way to emulate the thing forte does... loading in the VST quickly WITH the patch that is desired.
Thing is that it's great to load up a lot of VSTs though most not being able to change patches is the problem... Playing LIVE it would be senseless to have 10 of the same VST loaded seperately/individually just to get different patches...

create a combo box control from the 'program' inlet of the vst. [wire +CTRL]
then make a midi learn (or whatever) on the created combo-box.

Statistics: Posted by senso — 08 Dec 2008, 09:26

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-07T20:23:08+02:00

thank you senso.

SO... when used standalone USINE can (with contoller, or note or whatever command) MUTE/BYPASS a VST routing and save ALL of the CPU usage???

This is a big feature as loading up a lot of VST is great only if they are ready to go yet NOT taking up the CPU by being ready.

Can anyone think of a way to emulate the thing forte does... loading in the VST quickly WITH the patch that is desired.
Thing is that it's great to load up a lot of VSTs though most not being able to change patches is the problem... Playing LIVE it would be senseless to have 10 of the same VST loaded seperately/individually just to get different patches...

What about the speed of a full load in USINE like forte does?

geez.... I would much much much rather do usine than forte I believe.
forte AND usine seems good as well.
USINE and REAPER would be perhaps my first duo choice i imagine.

thank you for your thoughts and reading.

Statistics: Posted by yvonne — 07 Dec 2008, 19:23

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-07T10:58:32+02:00

I can't answer because it depends on the host, not Usine!

Examples of hosts:

CUBASE: the audio engine of the vst is disabled but the 'graphic engine' (thread) is still active.
USINE : totally inactive (audio and graphic).
REAPER: probably like CUBASE?

Statistics: Posted by senso — 07 Dec 2008, 09:58

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-07T09:51:50+02:00

Hi.... great to be here!

So... forte is good.. USINE is way more 'me' ...
Thing is... after way to many months (understatement) of complexities I'm looking to do with USINE what I would do with forte...EXCEPT I'm thinking that by using usine as a VST in REAPER I can select locations in the arrange page of REAPER and have tracks mute (WITH cpu saving) and or use the VST's 'bypass' ....thing is that forte still beats this idea as it can quickly load up an instance of the VST WITH a program change...

As you know many VSTs ignor program changes....so as cool as selecting location points in REAPERs arrange page and having VSTs go on and off WITH CPU saving I still can't always have the program change in the VST.... this means having ram eating multiple instances of the VST loaded (though not taking up cpu power) .... this is not going to work... as with forte is simple and I can have unlimited patches...

SO...... DOES USINE save CPU (ALL of it pretty much) WHEN the VST is bypassed, disconnected or muted may I ask?
And this disconnecting and muting/bypassing in usince would have to be able to be called up with something automatically..

I GUESS that by using the REAPER locators bypass/mute thing it might assist USINE for getting something logical and MANAGEABLE?

BIG thanks for any thoughts on this!

Statistics: Posted by yvonne — 07 Dec 2008, 08:51

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T23:32:47+02:00

Statistics: Posted by bsork — 08 Dec 2008, 22:32

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T22:26:04+02:00

"I wish to take VSTs that do NOT respond to program changes"

Wich ones?

Statistics: Posted by ethnix73 — 08 Dec 2008, 21:26

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T22:09:31+02:00

Statistics: Posted by yvonne — 08 Dec 2008, 21:09

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-08T10:26:30+02:00

SO... when used standalone USINE can (with contoller, or note or whatever command) MUTE/BYPASS a VST routing and save ALL of the CPU usage???

yes absolutely.

Can anyone think of a way to emulate the thing forte does... loading in the VST quickly WITH the patch that is desired.
Thing is that it's great to load up a lot of VSTs though most not being able to change patches is the problem... Playing LIVE it would be senseless to have 10 of the same VST loaded seperately/individually just to get different patches...

create a combo box control from the 'program' inlet of the vst. [wire +CTRL]
then make a midi learn (or whatever) on the created combo-box.

Statistics: Posted by senso — 08 Dec 2008, 09:26

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-07T20:23:08+02:00

Statistics: Posted by yvonne — 07 Dec 2008, 19:23

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-07T10:58:32+02:00

Statistics: Posted by senso — 07 Dec 2008, 09:58

NEED: one clear answer about CPU savings when muted or bypass

2008-12-07T09:51:50+02:00

Statistics: Posted by yvonne — 07 Dec 2008, 08:51