TRACKING LEVELS

[blackcatdigi]

Yes. Folks were noticing that their audio was degrading with faders set anywhere other than unity. What you're describing was a truncation or rounding error in the system. I forget what rev of PT addressed this problem but it was addressed well before the release of HD. Verified fixed.

As for the mix bus issue, I've always perceived it to be a complete system issue, comprised of lots of little issues.
The tdm point to point truncation, the plug in i/o truncate/dither/whatever issues, the accumulator rounding or truncation in the mix busses, the aux resolution/truncation issues. Lots of small flaws contributing to cumulatively degrading the audio...

The rocket scientists at D.A.G. released a mixer plug-in that specifically addressed the mix bus issues (D.A.M.).

Plug-in developers are left to their own devices whether to truncate, round, or dither their respective i/os in the tdm bus.

Nothings perfect. When you're aware of issues you make informed decisions. You do your homework and figure out what works for your particular situation.

Try this experiment. Take a large mix with tons of plugs and bounce a mix to disc. Make a copy of the session, deactivate the plugs and BTD. Import both mixes into a new session and listen... What do you hear? Whats the difference (other than lack of eq, etc.)?

I currently use PT as a tape deck/editor. I minimize plug-in usage. I'm not afraid to use PIs, I just know that there is a tradeoff. I'd love to be able to work in the box, exclusively, but to my ear, it's just not there yet. But everyone's mileage varies on this. It broke my heart to dump the Pro Control to go back to an analog mixer, but the difference was so completely audible, it was a no brainer.

Cheers

[Jax]

Originally posted by blackcatdigi
Yes. Folks were noticing that their audio was degrading with faders set anywhere other than unity. What you're describing was a truncation or rounding error in the system. I forget what rev of PT addressed this problem but it was addressed well before the release of HD. Verified fixed.

Was it all fixed in HD? IIRC, the 24-bit dithered mixer turned out to be an improvement, but not the fix-all that some expected it to be. Along with the handful of little issues that contribute to the flaws of the PT mixer, I think the aux buses still truncate to 24 bits in at least a pre-HD system.

The key seems to be that it takes time, research, and experience to incrementally improve and work around the sonic gremlins in most DAWs. For that matter, is there any DAW that one would call perfect? Are we there yet?

Just two examples (I'm not looking for another list):

Radar?
SADiE?

[Jax]

Cool to see that the issue of dig. gain staging (esp. in PT) was already being discussed here. I didn't need to start a thread!

[blackcatdigi]

Originally posted by Jax


Was it all fixed in HD?

Dunno... I was just referring to the Faders @ Unity thing...

Originally posted by Jax
IIRC, the 24-bit dithered mixer turned out to be an improvement, but not the fix-all that some expected it to be. Along with the handful of little issues that contribute to the flaws of the PT mixer, I think the aux buses still truncate to 24 bits in at least a pre-HD system.

I believe they (auxs) do. I think it was a TDM design limitation.

Originally posted by Jax
The key seems to be that it takes time, research, and experience to incrementally improve and work around the sonic gremlins in most DAWs. For that matter, is there any DAW that one would call perfect? Are we there yet?

I don't believe we are. I'm not aware of any perfect systems. Just varying strengths and weaknesses.

Cheers!

[bassmac]

HD's auxes have the same headroom as the main mix buss.

[groundcontrol]

My personal experience is in agreement with what Casey is saying. HD is a major step forward for Digi. I still use as little plug-ins I can go by with and as much outboard I can put my hands on. I might well go back to an analog board too. I'm not moaning about PT though. It's a tool that does some things really well and some others not as well. It's up to each user to educate himself and experiment as much as he can to find what works for him.

Re.: the other systems...

Radar doesn't do mixing/dsp/summing.
Sadie is not really viable as a multitracking solution.

One of my most "golden-eared" engineer friend now uses Pyramix at his studio. He doesn't really have to care (lucky him) about compatibility issues with other studios. He A/B'ed most available systems (including some standalones) and chose it on the ground of sonic transparency and absence of sonic degradation to the audio material once you start to "use" the system.

[Jax]

Originally posted by groundcontrol
Re.: the other systems...

Radar doesn't do mixing/dsp/summing.
Sadie is not really viable as a multitracking solution.

Well, that's sort of what I meant by there being no "perfect" DAW yet. I wasn't claiming either of those two is perfect. Each of those systems addresses a specific need, and neither tries to be an all-in-one platform. I guess I shouldn't have embraced that particular adjective for my examples.

However, everything I've seen about Pyramix agrees with your engineer friend's ears. Every report I've read from golden-eared mastering engineers seem to think it's the bee's knees. And as you (gc) probably know, but others may not, it is one of the first systems out there (along with Sequoia) that can actually do everything as well as the big boys (multi-track like PT, edit, mix, and master like Sonic or Sadie, and maintain audio integrity with impeccably designed code from top to bottom like Sadie/Sonic). Apparently, Abbey Road has installed a number of Pyramix systems, so they must fit the bill. The only place it probably falls short is in the category of plug-ins it can use in comparison to PT.

I'd like to demo a Pyramix system eventually and see if it beats out Samplitude (the older, yet less developed sister of Sequoia).