instrument racks/chains for large live performance sets
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2017 7:00 pm
Hi, I am currently trying to figure out an efficient way to change between chains of instrument racks as I change between songs during live performance. For the past few dozen shows, I have used a system that involves using each song's instrument/effect racks on a chain with a section where the chains blend, so I can get a smooth transition between "song A" and "song B" while playing drum and synth clips from each as I transition. This is done by having the chain selectors mapped to MultiMap Max For Live devices, which are mapped to a knob on a MIDI controller. I find the CPU hit is a little high since I run between 8-15 tracks per song, but it is generally manageable even with Resolume Arena doing live visual projections as well. Here is what it looks like:
However, this is quite limiting as it is better suited to a setlist that doesn't change very much. If I want to go from "song A" to "song D" that night, I also have to scroll through the instruments and effects of "song B" and "C" which may not sound appropriate. It also runs with about 20% CPU at idle on a top of the line MBP from 2016 (pre-touch bar version) and a few percent lower on a PC with i7-6700HQ. I thought when the chain selector is in a zone which does not have other chains active, that the devices are off? I am trying to find a way which will use less CPU if possible, especially for sets with more songs and more flexibility.
Last night I tried a new idea: having all chains in the same zone, but mapping each chain's volume and the speaker switch to a fader on a MIDI controller, so I can fade up all the instruments of "song A" and if I want to transition to "song D" I can just change the appropriate faders while triggering clips for the song I want to change to. I thought that by having the speaker switch mapped as well, it would disable the instruments of any chains whose fader is down at zero, and save some CPU. Sonically, this works very well, but the CPU hit is actually much worse! It was often in the 30 or 40% range on the MBP when idle. When playing audio, it was in the 50s, and sometimes spiked to 70s and dropped out.
Is there something I'm doing wrong here? Should I be mapping the on-off switches of every single device in every instrument rack chain to the faders as well to make sure they are truly off when their fader is down to save the CPU usage?
I realize this is a more difficult setup than bouncing or freezing instruments into audio clips, but I can't think of a flexible way to smoothly blend between different songs and their individual elements when using bounced audio since only one clip can be played in a track at the same time. And I don't want to simply DJ partially completed versions of my songs, it would be nice to continue to play keys on an instrument from time to time, or experiment with using the kick patterns of one song, the hats of another, the synths of another or adjust a parameter on my Push while remaining in key as these setups allow. There are posts on here of people using rack chains to have 64 or even 128 instances of VST in a single rack with only about 1 or 2% CPU usage when idle... how can something anywhere close to this be achieved? I do not have/use Omnisphere or Kontact or any big, hungry VSTs, mostly stock, a few Max for Live synths such as Bass. Not all songs use all of my 15 tracks either, some have only about 8 tracks.
Really could use some help here!
However, this is quite limiting as it is better suited to a setlist that doesn't change very much. If I want to go from "song A" to "song D" that night, I also have to scroll through the instruments and effects of "song B" and "C" which may not sound appropriate. It also runs with about 20% CPU at idle on a top of the line MBP from 2016 (pre-touch bar version) and a few percent lower on a PC with i7-6700HQ. I thought when the chain selector is in a zone which does not have other chains active, that the devices are off? I am trying to find a way which will use less CPU if possible, especially for sets with more songs and more flexibility.
Last night I tried a new idea: having all chains in the same zone, but mapping each chain's volume and the speaker switch to a fader on a MIDI controller, so I can fade up all the instruments of "song A" and if I want to transition to "song D" I can just change the appropriate faders while triggering clips for the song I want to change to. I thought that by having the speaker switch mapped as well, it would disable the instruments of any chains whose fader is down at zero, and save some CPU. Sonically, this works very well, but the CPU hit is actually much worse! It was often in the 30 or 40% range on the MBP when idle. When playing audio, it was in the 50s, and sometimes spiked to 70s and dropped out.
Is there something I'm doing wrong here? Should I be mapping the on-off switches of every single device in every instrument rack chain to the faders as well to make sure they are truly off when their fader is down to save the CPU usage?
I realize this is a more difficult setup than bouncing or freezing instruments into audio clips, but I can't think of a flexible way to smoothly blend between different songs and their individual elements when using bounced audio since only one clip can be played in a track at the same time. And I don't want to simply DJ partially completed versions of my songs, it would be nice to continue to play keys on an instrument from time to time, or experiment with using the kick patterns of one song, the hats of another, the synths of another or adjust a parameter on my Push while remaining in key as these setups allow. There are posts on here of people using rack chains to have 64 or even 128 instances of VST in a single rack with only about 1 or 2% CPU usage when idle... how can something anywhere close to this be achieved? I do not have/use Omnisphere or Kontact or any big, hungry VSTs, mostly stock, a few Max for Live synths such as Bass. Not all songs use all of my 15 tracks either, some have only about 8 tracks.
Really could use some help here!