Pro Tools|HD-TDM vs Nuendo-VST System Link vs Logic Pro-Distributed Audio Processing

[nikki-k]

Originally Posted by theother

Why have some ProTools users the misconception that more plugins means more latency on a native system?

Let me clear one thing up for you: Latency is a fixed value on my system.

It's always the same for every project I work on. No matter how many plugins I use. More plugins need more CPU power. Period.

The amount of latency is determined by the quality of your computer and soundcard.

Cool! IOW, you used a session/project with TONS of *stuff* going on, and figured the best setting for the buffer for your soundcard/I/O device, and simply use that for all your work- right? And since you have a very powerful computer (4 cpus), there is really no need to use a buffer high enough to cause problems for the people recoding- right?

Originally Posted by theother

I use RME MADI and a powerfull 4 CPU AMD system and my typical latency 3 ms when I record. And 6 ms when I mix (to give me more CPU power)

Ohhh- sorry- I thought the latency was "fixed" on your system...
Yeah, most of us still run into this little snag with native power. Even TDM/HD users who desire to use virtual instruments that utilize native/host DSP. While it will never go away, it seems to be getting very close to negligible. Soon, even with the most demanding processes (virtual samplers, mega-verbs, etc), negligible will be a reality as well. (just for grins, I am using "negligible" to denote a sub-3ms latency, including the serial MIDI process, or "hit note->time to life" period)

With no native processing in PT HD, there is no buffer.

Originally Posted by theother

All the plugins don't add any more delay than they do within ProTools.

Uhhh..ok. But, to tell ya the truth: PT HD actually has MORE delay for some things, due to bussing and such. After all- it is a self-contained enviornment (with the ability to "out source"), NOT a native enviornment.

But, while some of the native enviornment's processes (plugins) are waiting in line, chatting and such, hoping the great OZ (I mean, uh, cpu...) will see them soon, the self-contained enviornment's DSP chips are taking care of tasks, no waiting in line, cause there is someone smart enough to tell each task where to go, and knows how many "where to go's" for each type of task there are. A finite number, which cannot be exceeded. Thus, ONLY the time for the task, plus bussing time, is required for the sum. WIth native, one must add that "waiting to see OZ" time instead of the bussing time. Multiple "OZ's" do make life much easier, and alot closer to the multiple DSP thing with PT HD.

Originally Posted by theother

Some plugins like Waves L2 add more because they have a look-ahead feature.

ie. all the SSL Waves, URS or my Convulsion reverbs (Wizoo) I use with Nuendo add 0ms delay.

Although I havent had convulsions from a reverb, I have come close...some are downright nasty!
All kidding aside...well, some kidding aside...

Firts it was "all plug-ins," but now there is an exception? Or more? Sorry- I see both statements as requiring the "Some" disclaimer. No offense!

Also, you state later that all computers take time to process things; does this mean that URS and others have found a way to process without taking time to do so? Or is it the app itself doing this? Or is it a "negligible" amount of time is required for those plugins?

Originally Posted by theother

The only case when latency gets added is when you use a UAD-1 card, which doubles the latency when using it.

So I don't use UAD-1 when recording and that is the end of the story.

Latency is a delay caused by a buffering or processing of data- correct?
A soundcard (generalism for any device used to get audio data into a system) for a native system processes data at a given rate- correct? Any system getting data from an analogue source has a delay- or latency- that is inherent in the actual process of the device doing the analogue to digital conversion- correct? ALL converters.

Native systems require an additional bit of time to process the data, and this is the "latency" you are speaking of, correct? So far, that is conversion latency, and then processing latency (waiting in line). Any inserted process within a native mixer will require time to process, and will be dependent upon the number and complexity of the tasks concurrently occuring, right?

So, what we now have is: ADC time + buffer time (latency) + inserted processes time (plugins) + DAC time (another constant) = live signal appearing at monitors time. For audio data already within the system (stream form disk, for example), eliminate ADC Time from equation.

When you mix, due to the high power of your sywstem, and quality of components (soundcard + drivers), you are capable of mixing with DSP pig plugins, and maintain a nice, low buffer setting. Better yet, since the app is re-aligning all the data as it exits (plugin compensation), and since the ONLY effect that latency has with non-live work is the initial "filling of the buffer," you are virtually unaffected by any piece of that equation- correct? And anyone with a DAW utilizing proper compensation will experience the same- correct?

Thus, the latnecy, and desire for lower buffer setting, really only effectively enters the equation when considering live perofrmance capture- correct? I would imagine that something like overdubbing to be the MOST crucial area of concern, as it would presume the presence of material playing back, where as inital (non-OD) material would not require that assumption. And since playback of material is more demanding than recording...

BTW- if that pesky UAD card were actually integrated into the enviornment, I would imagine the delay- or latency- would drop drastically. Maybe even down to a few samples round trip. But, it is being used in a native enviornment...oh well...

Originally Posted by theother

ProTools does not have 0ms latency BTW. What makes you think it has? Every computer needs time to process things. And so does PT.

ProTools does have latency like my PC Nuendo system. I don't know how much it is but it should be at least a couple of ms. Because that's what PT needs to go back and forth to the DSPs on the TDM bus.

The equation above applies to ALL DAWs utilizing an analogue input and output. Eliminate native processing though, and that removes buffer part. Which is what PT HD does. It is (basically) the equiv of using ASIO drivers with a soundcard that allow passing of audio from in to out without having to buffer for processing and such. Some have a facility to allow this "behind the scenes," such as CueMix and such. Use an ADC and DAC with lower conversion times than a Digi 192, and you actually now have a system capable fo lower latency when using something like CueMix. Oh...ooops...I wasnt supposed to admit that, was I? Yes folks, it is true.

There is a difference between a self-contained enviornment (SCE ok so I dont have to type? lol...) vs a native one though. All the processes within the SCE take significantly less time, especially when compounded. One caveat is that even bussing will add time delay to the path. In the SCE though, the CPU is demoted to being a traffic cop, while on the native one, it is doing MANY jobs. Your sytem with 4 CPU's presents an excellent enviornment for all those tasks to be done in though. Each has pro's and con's.

I dont really see DSP/processing power as being the primary thing any more when comparing these two. I think it is a legacy "con" that has been alive so long that some native users simply need something to put on their "check me out ma!" signs. IMO, it is moot, period.

PT HD costs alot of money. Is it worth it? To some of us. To others, it is laughable. Do I like being "strong-armed" into hardware purchases? Hell no! Which is why I am happy with my self-built XP machine instead of a Mac. But it isnt any better, or worse, than the Mac I might have bought. Just different.

Originally Posted by theother

I just heard that Yamaha will bring DSP cards for Cubase 4 and Nuendo 4, that will work with any VST plugin and it will be an open platform/format.

Very exciting times! I think that Yamaha bought Steinberg was a good move after all!

Yamaha = DSP and controllers
Steinberg = software

Any time quality choices are present for us to choose from = great times.

Yamaha can add all the DSP cards they want, but it wont ever make Nuendo or Cubase the same as PT HD. Sorry, but it is simply different, as I said above: SCE vs NE (native enviornment). With DSP cards for plugins, it might be an enhanced NE, but still an NE just the same. Not inherently better or worse, just different in certain ways.

Additionally, I really feel PT is a different approach to things than Nuendo or Cubase. The software is visually different, and the features differ quite a bit, whether in existence, or implementation. I think Nuendo 3 is an excellent app, and I really wish I could get my head around it enough to make it my main app; but I simply have not been able to. Pro Tools HD simply provides an enviornment I am comfy in.

[Fidelis]

I'm a TDM user. I have a Mix3 and just upgraded to a HD3 Accel. Native system still a no go for me.

What I don't understand is why Protools is the only non native system in the market. Why no other company try to make a TDM like system? THAT would drop digi's price!!!

[nikki-k]

Originally Posted by Fidelis

I'm a TDM user. I have a Mix3 and just upgraded to a HD3 Accel. Native system still a no go for me.

What I don't understand is why Protools is the only non native system in the market. Why no other company try to make a TDM like system? THAT would drop digi's price!!!

PARIS (deceased), Pyramix, SoundScape, and maybe Fairlight (closer to RADAR vs computer enclosed DAW I think tho...)?

[Rob G]

From what I'm hearing Logic Pro still can't run non Apple plug-ins on the nodes. If this is true then they need to get on the ball for this.

Rob G..

[digi882]

Well I had a HD system and yess protools works reliably with even slow machines for that matter, however, if i were to list in order of importance then it goes like this.
1. audio quality
2. element of DSP
3. raw cpu power

now this WILL change guys make no mistake, raw CPU power will eclipse any dsp of any sort all these intel chips will sell in the bucket loads, emebedded systems will use them pc's will use them heck even you next gen car will use them. they will always be cheaper than custom dsp with a smaller number of sales.

I sold my HD for a RADAR and s/h Mix TDM (stability puposes and loading all my TDM based songs), plus i use a core 2 duo PC and UAD. now this combo sounds better than anything ive ever recorded on as the RADAR as a ad/da is simply out of this world plus i can submix to the RADAR and back etc.

But as CPU power is getting into stratospherical levels it is a matter ot time before native out do's a dsp based system. so for the interim there is no such thing as just native unless you mainly record 2 tracks at a time and then mix totoally itb. if you need to record live then you need some sort of outboard which i guess most native guys tend to have in that scenario it could be argued they have an advantage over a purely dsp only setup (which again might be rare as most dsp systms users tend to use at least 1 outboard sometimes).In then end we are not all stupid we will use a system that works reliably one way or the other,(and what is wrong with bouncing, freeze tracks etc) oh and ask a HD user what happens when the system is maxed out including the rtas host based processing i bet the system tends to behave erratically then. I might add that this may take much longer than a purely native system but still happens heck i ran out of power with HD core plenty of times and as for mix system you have enough power jsut to run it. fortunatetly this is where UAD, TC powercore, focusrite liquid mix, duende now make this whole debate interesting.

right now im about to buy the wormhole plugin which adds to the fun of distributed processing as now i can use my more powerful core 2 duo PC in conjunction with my TDM mix and dual g4 set up with UAD and then use RADAR.

again as mentioned in the end we all know the limits of our systems lets get on with making music and if you have to get a dsp/native get the one that suits you believe me when i say until you use your setup all the advice in the world wont really truly help as every ones needs are different i guess one good advice would be to get the most reliable setup you can afford if it then means bouncing printing audio then good, or getting a mixer to monitor then good get one, if that means buying an old mix systems then good, if that means getting quad,dual power pcs/mac then good BUT and a big BUT plan very well and do a deal with whoever you buy from so you can change if your system is toooo bugeyed blue (screen).

Peace y'all

[alphega]

Great thread guys! Just read the whole thing through. Someone should make a book... or maybe not.

Anyway, just wondered if anyone fancies resurrecting this topic. What's happening in the world of TDM v Native these days with the advent of 8-core Intel Macs and things like that? Can anyone make some accurate comparisons?

Cheers,
Alex =)

[SL_]

yeah, I'd like to hear some fresh thoughts on this one as well.
I heard that Logic Pro does a "node thing" for 3rd party plugs as well. If it's true, that would narrow the gap even more...

[JH4music]

I read through this whole discussion too, it's really interesting. 3 years ago, someone was willing to build a $9000 8 core machine. Now you can buy one from apple for about $3000. Right now the 8 core macs aren't at their full potential from what I hear. Snow Leopard is supposed to address this. I've noticed that the current lineup of macs hasn't been updated this year, so there might be something bigger and better on the way.

Currently Logic 8 only supports nodes on the Logic plugins, so no "noding" of third party plugins... yet. I think this has to do with license agreements more than software capability. A company can then sell you a separate license for each computer you install their plugin on.

I run a multiple computer studio. I have a PT 6.4.1 mix system that does mixing, tracking and editing of audio. Logic on an imac for a sequencer/VI host. Also a few other "sound module" machines with audio and midi interfaces that pipe audio into Pro Tools. This lets me load a full orchestra while I compose.

I have been experimenting with sending audio over a network using plasq wormhole. It works, but still not as reliably as a synchronized digital connection between computers. And of course when used with a VST to RTAS wrapper in Pro Tools, the graphics don't display properly, making it even less viable to use.

My opinion in general is that a network connection is not reliable compared to using audio interfaces that are all slaved to the same clock source. This makes multiple computer setups expensive. I see the industry moving to a single, powerful computer powering a studio. I'd happily trade all the hours I spend maintaining, wiring and troubleshooting several computers to just having one box that does it all. More time to compose that way.

[drblank]

I am wondering how much is going to change in 09 with regards to Apple going with a full 64 bit OS with Snow Leopard and that Logic is probably going to get a big upgrade to full 64 bit as well. I am sure they will probably improve the sound quality as well as the features.

it just seems that since Apple is partnering with Apogee that they might have a viable alternative to Pro Tools in the next year or so. Apple has gone after the Avid market with Final Cut Pro so it would make sense to not have to rely on Pro Tools/TDM. Plus Apple is integrating some new processor technology to offload processing onto other chips rather than just using the main processors.

I know Pro Tools has its place for now, but Apple has been improving Logic with more features to compete with the rest of the crowd.

Just an observation.

I think it will interesting to see what emerges and how everything is going to compare.

[tomdarude]

been logic user forever (okay, okay,...i think at least since logic 3.5), the problem is not the "sound" of logic, or 64bit processing of the app, or something like that....

the problem is, that the Logic MIXER just plain sucks!!!

It starts cool in an empty project, you turn up a send and pull up that bus fader....sounds good!
....now you start a bigger project with more cpu load (40-50%), turn up a send again and pull up the corresponding bus-fader => PHASING galore!!!

mixing a song with loads of VI´s (independant alongside on each others tracks), film-score style....works great!

mixing a rock/pop song, tracked live, with multi-miking of the same sources....COLLAPSE!


sorry but the internal mixing/bussing/routing structure in Logic is screwed up BIG TIME!.....and there´s no workaround, because the problems are dynamic (changing on mood, cpu-load, weather, who knows what??)

and I heard people experiencing the SAME with all the other native daw´s (at least cubase/nuendo)


I just got a 2d card for my metric halo2882 (which takes logic´s internal 32bit audio stream into it´s own mixer) and bypassing all the bussing in logic and using just the MIO console for mixdown, busses, 2-track capturing etc.
That really made a HUGE difference!! so much actually, that I was suddenly convinced of the power of a dedicated DSP system.
I´ll keep the MetricHalo for my native/logic/macbook set-up anyway...but also

enough to finally feel how flawed native still is for my very personal use of it,
enough to push me over the edge finally and letting me get a DSP system next year, for sure!!!
we´ll see what Digi comes up with....otherwise a used HD2 and a MacPro (along with finally the great MDW EQ and other great TDM plugs) will be the ticket for me!



I´m fed up with computers, updates, workarounds......I wanna make records

[tomdarude]

Anyone satisfied tracking/mixing rock/pop/indie music with LogicPro ??

[digi882]

Well not for the faint-hearted what you should do is go and get a pc find the efi tool kit and then get a mxo osx install disk install osx on your pc and run you pci card on a pci mix pcie motherboard this way you get more out of your system and have no need to change to another mac