I have used many DAWs in the past for long years, and now I decided to jump on the Cubase wagon and I must say I m enjoying it and I like it, that s why I purchased it.
There is a thing I cannot understand, though, and I hope you can help me understand, which defeats the Logic, at least mine, on how I perceive this issue:
I normally track (record) my guitars or midi instruments at 48kHz and 128 buffer size.
All fine, no issues.
Then, for mixing the work done, I usually use a buffer size of 512, since i m not tracking anymore, so added latency won t be an issue, really, so that I d thought I d have less strain on CPU and resources. To my astonishment, when I change from 128 to 512, The performance meter shows the double of CPU usage. The graph increases by the double. I find this really odd. Shouldn t it be the opposite? Then I change back to 128 and the CPU reading returns back again to half. This is very weird.
I m not using Asio Guard, also, just to let you know, and I m on a Mac Studio M4 MAX chip, 36 Gb RAM with an SSL 12 audio interface.
Can someone help me understand this? I dont get it. Never seen this before.
The performance meter is measuring the “margin” to where there will be a problem. The system tries to reduce power by lowering cpu speed. This will reduce the margin. It will only be a problem when the system can not boost the cpu speed fast enough to get you out of problem.
I track with it off. For mixing ok, I can use it, although, the other day, Asio Guard on was giving me a totally different sound when using tone generator. A totally different tone, aliased and sounding horrible. When I turned it off, sound was fine from the tone generator, then back on ON, sound again wrong. That was weird.
Hello. No, there is nothing wrong with my setup and never has been. That might have been a glitch. I don t use that silly orange constrain delay compensation, if that s what you mean, which does nothing it just turns off things. I do that manually. Plugin delay compensation is done automatically by DAWs.
Actually what is wrong is Cubase showing a higher CPU load on a higher buffer size.
Maybe this has some interpretation, which I do not know. Which was my simple question.
Yeah I use the Asio driver for the SSL, of course. I suppose I can set up any DAW properly after 30 years of using them. Everything runs fine mate, I m just curious why on earth the performance meter shows the double length of its bars for 512 as compared to 128 buffer size
It s just weird, that s all. Thank you for your comment anyway
No it is not wrong. You do not state what audio device you are using nor the cubase version. If you have cubase 15 you can expand the audio-performace-meter. Take a snapshot and share it when there are audio glitches.
Do you have any cognitive problems? Read Cubase 15 at the very top of the post, it s there for something, and I also explicitly said it is an SSL 12 audio interface. Audio never glitched, I never mentioned that, and my post is very clear.
Let me ask you simply this:
You find it normal, that a 512 buffer size shows more CPU usage, or whatever those bars mean, than a 128 buffer size? I don’t, neither does anyone else.
Dude I can use all DAWs very well and I run circles around you all day. And yes, that is WRONG, by all standards…When the bars are smaller in length, it means higher performance capability, unless you think the longer the bars, the more performance. That s a philosophical way of looking at it, surely. LoL
You are again wrong. I m actually a real engineer. A mechanical engineer.
I don t have any problem, unlike you.
I appreciate if you leave my thread. You are not needed here with your impertinent comments. Whoever coined the term value added, surely was not thinking about you, and righteously. Thank you. Goodbye
Using shortcuts such as Latest Cubase topics, it doesn’t state the version you are using because it combines all Cubase versions. Once you click on the shortcut, then click on the thread, it’s easy to miss unless you scroll back to the top. I have done this myself a few times wondering what version the OP is referring to without scrolling to the top.
Well…ok. Personally I only use Cubase, and I’m still learning it after 28 years…part of those years on a daily basis. There is a lot to learn compared to “all DAWs.”
As @st10ss suggested, there must be something wrong with your system.
So back to @mlib question…why not? You said it might have been a glitch.
Users are simply trying to help by understanding where you are at. But with this attitude…good luck.
