Can I use being~ with a gate~ to turn vst processing off?

    Feb 27 2013 | 9:53 pm
    I was just reading about the begin~ in the documentation and am wondering if this mechanism can be used to disable VSTs that are temporarily unneeded?

    • Feb 27 2013 | 10:59 pm
      You should be able to use the 'disable 1' message to vst~.
    • Feb 27 2013 | 11:54 pm
      I was under the impression that "disable" caused 0 to come out of VST but the begin~ stuff actually stops calculations, which would seem to be much more useful to save CPU cycles. Did I misunderstand it?
    • Feb 28 2013 | 12:06 am
      It should stop processing. If you are experiencing otherwise, please let us know.
      Thanks, -Ben
    • Feb 28 2013 | 12:38 am
      I have not tried it yet....I have a pretty large system and I wanted to understand whether the begin~ mechanism would work. The documentation for the disable message suggests that a 0 is sent out continuously and the ret of the objects would continue to process that 0 mesage and I got the impression that bracketing objects with begin~ and gate~ would actually stop processing completely.
      If that is not the case, then what is the difference between using begin~ and simply using a gate~ by itself which would presumably send out 0 if the gate is turned off
    • Feb 28 2013 | 12:41 am
      Other objects would indeed continue to process a 0 signal, but the vst~ processing should stop.
      begin~ is deprecated, so I would avoid it at all costs. You should look at poly~ for such functionality.
    • Feb 28 2013 | 1:30 am
      Yeah, I haven't quite figured out how to integrate poly~ into my environment. It seems to be a way to instantiate multiple copies of patchers each of which produce single notes. But I'm using lots of VST~, some of which are not only polyphonic but also multi-timbal. It is not obvious to me how that fits into the poly~ paradigm. I don't want multiple instances of a particular VST to be created and the benefits of wrapping each individual VST inside a poly~ are still unclear to me.
      I do however appreciate your feedback.
    • Feb 28 2013 | 1:42 am
      you can use poly~ to load just one instance of a patch. The benefits are that you can load and replace sub patches including VST objects without interrupting the dsp. You can also up/down-sample everything inside your poly~ and you can enable parallel processing for items inside. It's really quite simple to use, especially if you only need one instance of your patch.
    • Feb 28 2013 | 1:50 am
      Replacing a VST without stopping other VSTs would certainly be very useful. How does parallel processing work if there is only one instance? If I could create separate poly~ objects for each different VST and then have each of those poly~ objects be on a separate thread(core?), that would certainly be beneficial.