If I intend to use the same settings on a mixing plugin for several tracks - for example, the same EQ for 6 separate F Horn tracks - would I be better off using an individual EQ plugin for each track, or routing each track to an AUX with the EQ on the aux? Is the difference in RAM/CPU usage significant?
My orchestral template has all tracks disabled at the start, and I enable as I go along. I currently use the AUX summing method I mentioned, but it has become a little messy doing this across the entire orchestra (especially when I try to use Track Archives.) I’d like to try individual EQs for every track, but I wanted to get opinions on it before I make the transition because my template has 1,000+ tracks.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated
Things get a bit cloudy. One would say that, for years, the right way to save resources would be to route all your tracks to a given fx track, using only one instance of some plugin, thus building a bus with only one instante of your cpu-hungry plugins on your project. However information has emerged lately that, when you do this, Nuendo (and Cubase, of course) tends to max out a single cpu core, intead of spreading the load through all cores available. I did some not so scientific experiments with heavy plugin-loaded projects, and found not much of a difference, if any. If I need a reverb I’m still using sends and not inserts, and if I want to compress a drum bus, well… it HAS to be the bus being compressed, not the individual drum pieces. But I follow with great interest, as a definitive answer is yet to be known.
A very thoughtful answer, thank you! I’ve also seen people do not-so-scientific experiments regarding Kontakt instances (whether or not to use the multi feature inside of Kontakt) and the results are similar; Using multis seems to be relatively the same as using multiple Kontakt instances.
Whenever I have had to process (EQ, compress etc.) a set of instruments with the same processing, I route them to a group / auxiliary and end up using only one set of plugins for the lot. Have done that since forever, especially when CPU power was harder to come by.
No need to do so individually. Also, once a processing is “set in stone”, I can and often do PRINT the individual tracks or group, to free up the CPU for other tasks. As usual, I save the session as new version… just in case.