Not related to this, but as I see you reading here:reflex wrote: Assuming FL or Windows is set to a higher dpi value, these plugins don't have vector UI's. Instead, they have bitmap graphics that are scaled up, so they will indeed look a bit blurry.
Perhaps you can remember talking/writing about the noticeable CPU difference between having single plugins in the mixer vs. having the same plugins in Patcher...
Today I noticed this CPU difference is increasing dramatically when using parallel routing in Patcher...
The first tests I did (where I send you the files) ended up more or less, that the CPU load doubles with FL native FX (VST was worse): single plugins vs. serial chain in patcher...
Now I did more or less the same with parallel routing for having "send FX" in a single mixer channel...: single plugins (delay 2, PEQ, Reeverb) in the channel: 8% (for 50 channels)... very good efficiency
The same plugins routed in Patcher with 1 "dry" cable between in and output, 1 cable "input-delay-PEQ-output" and 1 cable"input-Reeverb-output" (here all plugins full wet with level handles used for volume balancing... CPU 29% in the same project (nothing else running...)
Windows metering showed more or less the same values...
I did the same test in Bitwig: difference between single plugins vs. parallel chains: zero!!!!
Bitwig uses 100% the same amount of CPU for serial vs parallel routing...
Did the same in Studio One... difference: zero!!!! 100% the same CPU load single vs parallel
Did the same in Reaper... difference: zero!!! 100% the same CPU load...
So, this must be something FL internal as the other shown this cannot be a limitation of multicore processing or similar...
Would be very nice if Patcher could behave the same soon...