Up until now as I've worked in Reaper when I render my project I've done an all or nothing kind of thing - rendering everything as the mastermix and I realize there may be some limitations on this.
Now my computer is powerful enough to handle this - lot's of headroom with memory and CPU -- I'm assuming I shouldn't lose quality with this approach but I may be wrong.
As far as workflow goes - once a track (individually) is rendered I'm assuming that while mixing, if I tweak an FX on the track (like EQ) then I would need to do this on my unrendered individual track and re-render and either delete or archive the previous render?
How do you guys approach this in workflow and what's the best strategy for managing track that you are still mixing? Do you wait until the mix is in the box then render each track, then render to the Master?
Comments
I'd thought this had all gone away with modern processors. A fri
I'd thought this had all gone away with modern processors. A friends Cubase project with over 200 tracks was happily playing away - I must admit I've never got that many in any of mine, but mine do have lots of plugins and the only thing that wrecks mine is when the computer suddenly does big data spike - and I haven't quite found out what it is or why it does it.
@paulears : I can confirm, their is more CPU hungry plugins, vst
paulears : I can confirm, their is more CPU hungry plugins, vsti and ampsimulator that will make your computer cry if used in high quantity... ;)
H-Reverb from waves, amplitube, guitar rig and many others are hard on ressources..
Off course, I'm running Sonar.. maybe Cubase found a way to cope for this challenge..
In the end, it's not that I can't play the projects but I certainly need to go to higher buffer settings
I don't render (or "freeze") tracks at all unless something is s
I don't render (or "freeze") tracks at all unless something is straining my CPU.