Rayzoon Technologies LLC

[max]

Just wondering about this:

Again ...running inside standalone Chainer... which let's me see cpu use as a percentage in it's lower right hand corner.

OK... let me try to explain the question...

If for example, I load BFD by itself, and just play on like mad, I see a fairly low cpu % being used.

and... If I load JS by itself, using it's internal sounds, and free jam, I also see a very low cpu percentage in use.

but then, if I load JS and use BFD as an external vsti inside it, I seem to see a higher cpu % use than the addition of the two above examples.

I would have expected the cpu use to pretty much be the combination of these two amounts... but it actually seems to come out higher.

My question then is about cpu efficiency for using a vsti drum instrument with JS. Lets say now inside a host like SX or Sonar... does JS add some cpu use just by loading the vsti into JS? And, therefore... IF that is true, would it be more cpu efficient to just let JS generate a midi track with it's internal sounds, then give that midi track to whatever vsti drum intrument?

I am asking this with BFD as the example, however the cpu use with BFD is not so alarming... but it gets to alarming amounts with things like some of the kontakt drum kits. [80% inside Chainer standalone... which would be not very useable inside SX, you see?]

This is not a complaint.... it's just a question to help my own thinking.

[Ralph [RZ]]

I can't duplicate that. Which BFD DLL are you using?

Also, I do not see added CPU usage in Sonar or SX.

You can set things up so a module doesn't load into Jamstix. In SX you just route the MIDI out of Jamstix to the MIDI in of BFD etc. In Sonar this requires DirectiXer.

Also, in the demo MIDI-out is limited to bars 1-4.
_________________
Ralph Zeuner
Rayzoon Technologies LLC
http://www.rayzoon.com

[max]