Depends on your hardware, which you left out.
Easy way to find out. Drop five of that nine off your source sequence. If your playback improves with only four camera feeds, you have your answer.
After paying for Production Premium for mainly Premiere use I was dissapointed to find out that it's multicam performance is terrible.
6core 3.2ghz cpu
1.5Gb Nvidia 560TI
I even bother to give each camera it's own hard drive to operate from (20mbps datarate footage)
The result, at the smallest possible resolution multicam window, is absolutely terrible - and this is only 4 camers.
So I think the problem is Premiere, not your hardware!
Also, the multicam preview quality is another issue...
On another note... I downloaded a trial of Edius the other day to compare performance.
With a 3 camera multicam, all running from the same hard drive, the footage ran at real time and the quality was great!
Having spent money with Adobe, I feel cheated as 90% of my work is multicam (should have done some research!)
I find the biggest culprit to this, is the audio...
To try a simple test, mute the audio track in your multicam sequence, and see if your project runs smoother.
If the answer is yes, then i'd suggest going back to your nested sequence, export the audio files, and then use these exported audio tracks in the multicam sequence...
Regardless of hardware, i find that many of us PPro users have the same issues..
As far as resolution goes, i don't give a darn. This is a rough preview, that's intended for us to decide which camera angle to use. I'm sure that performance is more important than resolution in this case..
I remove all but one audio track and to be honest this doesn't have a huge effect.
With regards to resolution and quality... I guess I see where you are coming from, but Edius doesn't seem to have a problem with audio / resolution / quality.
I see that CS6 has multicam support for more than 4 angles, but imho, they needed to sort out the poor multicam performance before adding more angles. This is definitely something that Adobe need to work on!!
I remove all but one audio track and to be honest this doesn't have a huge effect
Just to be sure...
Ignoring the multiple clips that are put into a nested sequence.
There's only one audio that gets created in a master multicam sequence.
I suggested just muting the track that gives you the headache, and checking for the response...
Also, there's another issue i didn't mention. There's a flyout at the top right of the multicam window. There's an option to have "audio follows video". Absolutely uncheck this.
But yes, i agree..It seems to be a very common theme with Adobe and audio...
I delete all but one track of audio from the nested sequence.
Audio following is also disabled! It's a shame that features like audio-following are really a marketing tool / sales pitch as opposed to something that actually function.
I've been using multicam and getting frustrated for over a year now... and was shocked when I saw the performance of Edius... I know I've mentioned it a few times, but you have to try it to believe how amazing it is for mulitcam.
It's unfortunate that I am unfamiliar with the workflow of Edius, but it looks like I will have to learn!
I delete all but one track of audio
That won't help much. Audio takes very little processing power, it's the video that you need to look at here. Drop down to 4 tracks, then to 2 tracks, and see how the performance changes.
I can confirm it definitely runs quicker with 1, 2 or 3 video tracks in comparison to 4 video tracks.
I think the problem is that although Premiere offers multi angle video editing, it's incapable of doing it as efficiently like other programs out there.
It really needs to be able to play 4 tracks in real time as a minimum!
How many tracks it can play will depend on your media and your hardware.
Ah this is something I didn't talk about...
It's 20mbps AVCHD in a .MTS wrapper.
My machine is:
6core 3.2ghz cpu
1.5Gb Cuda Video card
Each angle has it's own seperate hard drive to avoid any bottle neck (but the datarate is only 20mbps!)
What model CPU?
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T
Yeah, that's not the best. An i7 CPU would have been a better choice for this kind of media.
Of course better hardware would give better results, but Edius seems to play fine at higher quality and at real time?!
I think the problem is Premiere unfortunately and they need to sort it out!
What Edius does isn't really relevant if you wish to use Premiere Pro. With that media on that hardware, PP will definitely have trouble with a 9 clip multicam.
Now I don't mean to suggest there's no room for improvement with PP, but that's not likely to get here in a timely manner, as CS6 is only about 6 months old. So in the mean time, that leaves better hardware as the solution for PP.
I only work with 4 cameras and CS 5.5 (I was replying to the guy above!)
I feel that the fact Edius is able to handle the files shows that the media and hardware are not the problem, but the software is!
Well then the solution is easy. Edit it on Edius if thats whats works best for your computer and media.
The CS6 multicam is definitely buggy. I'm trying to edit 3 HD (H.264) with a single uncompressed audio track. I couldn't get it to work at all, and then I switched to using multiple driver, and everything worked - for a while, that is. When working, I got all three previews in real-time and everything was fine. Perfmon showed disk io for 4 threads, with each of the video threads doing around 1-3 MB per second.
Well, half way through the 2.5 hour sequence, multicam suddently stops working - the hard disk access goes way up - to over 20 or 30 MBps per thread - with the total coming at often at over 100 MBps. It's as though PP is suddenly lost and groping through the disks as fast as possible - the mc monitor falls 30 seconds or more behind, and gives one update everyt 30 seconds or so. The disk IO continues at a horrendous rate and no more editing can be done. The audio continues to play fine, but the video is useless. And this situation persists for the project - it does not recover. Closing and restarting, rebooting, etc all have no effect. The only thing that works is going back to the beginning of the sequence, where mc works for a few minutes and then gets scrambled and useless again.
Now for the hardware -
Sandy Bridge Extreme - 3690X at 3.4 GHz with 64 GB memory on all four channels, with 3TB hardware RAID4 benchmarking at over 350 MBps sustained write and better than 190 MBps random read, a second SATA3 drive and a 500 GB SSD which benchmarks at over 300 MBps random reads. I've spread the source files onto the RAID and SSD. The video is GeForce 660Ti, which I've added to the Cuda support file.
This works great for some time until PP losses it's mind. There really is no excuse for this not to work on this hardware setup. I'm open to suggestions, but there is ample other evidence that PP has numerous bugs - such a 3 application crashes over the last two weeks, periodic episodes of totally mangled audio (sounds like wrong sample rate) and corrupted xmp files on HDV tape imports.
I've run extensive memory tests and hardware stress with complete stability. So at this point, I guess I need to see about getting my money back, as this application is far from fit for production work. I'm sitting with a half edited project for clients and cannot finish it because the software doesn't work.
All right, Jim, I'll give that a try - the files have already been
transcoded, however, into h.264-BluRay, which makes it seem unlikely.
There is more than adequate CPU on this system - when the multicam is
running CPU is solidly under 20%.
My work flow is to bring the stream files in and then sync them to the real
audio track - given it is a music performance, the audio from the small
cameras I have is never very useful. I have 96kHz, 24-bit audio with real
mics that I use for recording the performance. I then sync all of the
video and render each of the video files with the master audio. Then I
want to do the multicam angle selection.
I used to do this in VegasPro, and thought I'd give Adobe another try, but
you're telling me that Adobe still hasn't figured out how to do file IO
correctly, at least with the 2 or 4 GB stream files that come from the
consumer AVCHD cameras. It's not that hard - heck, I have enough RAM to
load the whole source into memory.