PDA

View Full Version : Best quality for Plt+ Versions


HardyP
09-05-2012, 06:30 AM
Allready posted in General Forum, but in order to bring it to the official place:

As far as I know, Plugins know if the Sequenzer is bouncing in "Realtime" or "Offline".
So I would like a standard routine in PLAY, that even if you are playing in 16-bit (for the reason of low latency), PLAY switches automatically to the 24-bit samples if it comes to mixdown (in offline modus).

This preferred workflow will help me, and can keep EWs quality goal.

Jose7822
09-05-2012, 10:51 PM
I'm not a programmer, but that may be impossible to achieve. What you ask requires PLAY to halt the bouncing process in order to load the 24 bit samples, then tell the DAW (whatever you may be using) to start bouncing once it finishes loading the new samples. Not only that but, most likely, you'll want it to go back to the 16 bit samples once it's done bouncing, right? Well, the huge problem here is that this will most likely require cooperation from the DAW manufacturer as well. As you know, there are many of them out there.

And that's not taking into account that, perhaps, this project barely plays well with the 16 bit samples loaded, which is the reason why you're using them (to minimize system stress in order to play more samples). Assuming this is the case, what do you think will happen when you load the 24 bit files? Your system will start dropping samples left and right, rendering the bounce file useless. Your processor will probably be able to keep up, but not your HDDs. They are the bottlenecks these days, even if using SSD's. All this depends on how heavy the project is, of course. But I assume a programmer would likely think of the worst case scenario before considering implementing a feature.

Again, I may be wrong about all this, in which case I wouldn't mind being corrected.

HardyP
09-06-2012, 01:56 AM
I
...this project barely plays well with the 16 bit samples loaded, which is the reason why you're using them (to minimize system stress in order to play more samples). Assuming this is the case, what do you think will happen when you load the 24 bit files? Your system will start dropping samples left and right, rendering the bounce file useless.

Hi Jose,

thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Youre right, I also fear that the process of switching the samples my be the toughest.
But the other one I do not understand what you mean. I want to bounce OFFLINE (availlable at least in Logic), which is one of the 2 intentions of this function: That your big project can not be handeled by processer and HDD in realtime, so the host (literally speaking) waits until every plugin is ready with its calculations until it processes the next sample.
Maybe I got your point wrong, and you can explain it a bit more to me?

Rgds, Hardy

Jose7822
09-06-2012, 06:41 PM
No problem.

And again, I may be wrong in all of this, so take what I say with a grain of salt. The reason we experience drop outs during export is because of the fact that HDDs are still the bottlenecks of any current system. Yes, when using offline bounce, as you said, the host waits until the CPU cores (threads) are ready to process the next chunk of data. However, I'm not so sure it does this taking into account the latency introduced by the HDD's read speeds. AFAIK, oflline processing is done at the speed the CPU can process data, which is considerably faster than HDDs. That's why it is recommended to use online bounce on heavy projects instead, to give HDDs the necessary time they need to read the sample data.

Hope that explains it :-)

gstitt
09-07-2012, 06:35 AM
This is definitely possible. The only reason you should ever have a problem with offline bounces is due to a bug. The whole point of an offline bounce is to give your system as much time as it needs to render without errors. So, there is no reason why you couldn't load new samples during an offline bounce. There might be practical limitations that prevent this from happening with current software, but it is technically possible.

If a particular program doesn't wait for data to arrive, I would consider that a bug or a very poor design decision.

gstitt
09-07-2012, 06:37 AM
That's why it is recommended to use online bounce on heavy projects instead, to give HDDs the necessary time they need to read the sample data.

Is EW recommending this? I know they did a long time ago before Play supported offline bounces, but I haven't seen this recommendation recently.

Jose7822
09-07-2012, 01:24 PM
Is EW recommending this? I know they did a long time ago before Play supported offline bounces, but I haven't seen this recommendation recently.

AFAIK, and in my experience, real time bounces give the best results on heavy projects. I get glitches if I try rendering some of my projects (not all) using fast bounce. YMMV!

gstitt
09-07-2012, 02:02 PM
I believe this is a known bug with certain combinations of Play and DAW software. If realtime works best for you, definitely go with it, but offline renders should always be perfect. I believe hosting Play in VE Pro solves the issue. I have plenty of projects that are too intensive for realtime, but render perfectly offline with this combination.

Jose7822
09-08-2012, 06:46 AM
I've seen this many times, where hosting Play inside VEP gives better stability. Not sure what's going on, but it may be a hint that there is something going on with Play. And btw, I don't always get perfect playback of my projects, even with real time bounce. There's a big thread on this somewhere in the forum. Hope this get addressed in Play4.

gstitt
09-08-2012, 09:23 AM
Yeah, it is weird that it seems to work better with VE Pro. By the way, I wouldn't expect that you would ever get the exact same render in real time. If you do a diff of multiple real-time renders there will almost always be tiny differences. If you do it for an offline bounce (at least one that works correctly), there are no differences. I demonstrated this a long time ago with some examples, but I forget where it was posted.

As you said, hopefully Play 4 fixes this so it won't matter.

tayloran9
09-09-2012, 02:08 PM
The way rendering / offline bouncing works for me in both Reaper and Sibelius and which is totally logical is that it renders at a much reduced speed where necessary than real time rendering in order to give the system as much time as it needs to render the heavy and cpu intensive sections, especially when reverb is in question. My offline renders are always perfect quality whereas I regularly get dropouts and pops and clicks during real time playback. I've never had dropouts during export and it doesn't make much sense to have so. The whole point is to render the piece perfectly, even if it takes 20 minutes for a piece which is only 5 minutes long. It makes no sense that a realtime bounce will give better renders than offline which should always be perfect.

gstitt
09-10-2012, 04:36 PM
That is correct. An offline bounce simply removes all time constraints.

HardyP
09-10-2012, 06:23 PM
An offline bounce simply removes all time constraints.

Thanks for pointing that out, during that discussion I started doubting to the procedures Ive followed since several years now ;-)...
So back to my original idea - generally speaking it should be possible. Admittedly, the step of automatically changing the samples before starting the bounce maybe a/the? showstopper.
Would like to hear EWs or another programmers opinion on that...

gstitt
09-11-2012, 06:23 AM
Yes, definitely possible. With EW libraries, the bounce may be really slow because for a large template it could take 15 minutes just to switch samples, but it is possible.

There are other libraries that do similar things but I can't mention them due to forum rules.

HardyP
09-15-2012, 08:17 AM
Yes, definitely possible. With EW libraries, the bounce may be really slow because for a large template it could take 15 minutes just to switch samples, but it is possible.

Shure, Im aware of this. But if it goes to bouncing, I have that time - esp. since during composing eg I saved time and headache with a better performance of my system ;-)!