Mac Mini, Magma Thunderbolt Chassis and Pro Tools HD?

[Hammy Havoc]

The Magma ExpressBox 3T isn't yet available to purchase, but feel free to add yourself to the interest list here.

[projektk]

Based on the description it sounds like everything should work perfectly on windows, for Mac the card would need specific drivers. Some things will work, some might not, but yea it's not available yet. The new MSI ivy bridge motherboard will ship with TB as well as some April ultrabooks. My guess though it with pro tools HD it will probably work. With native, I'm not sure how big the chassis is but the accel cards may require a custom chassis.

Sent from my LG-P925 using Gearslutz.com

[zimv20]

from what i've been reading, it seems hd native latency performance improves with "faster" machines (where "faster" is some combo of clock speed and cores).

my concern with the mac mini would be sub-optimal latency. also, i reckon plugin/VI count would be reduced compared to a mac pro.

would love for someone to put that combo through its paces and report back, once the chassis is ready.

[psycho_monkey]

Why would you spend top dollar on a pt hd system, then buy the cheapest computer possible?

That's like plugging a u47 into a presonus...

[audioconsult]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Why would you spend top dollar on a pt hd system, then buy the cheapest computer possible?

That's like plugging a u47 into a presonus...

the computer dont does any dsp calculations on a protools hd system and bus speed is pretty high on the new mac mini..and the speed also as fast as a 3 year old power mac.. only the graphics lacks..but should be ok..ther is not so much going on graphical with protools

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Why would you spend top dollar on a pt hd system, then buy the cheapest computer possible?

That's like plugging a u47 into a presonus...

Good question.

Because spending top dollar on a PTHD system means you don't have to buy the most expensive computer. There's very little native processing that the computer has to to with HD. Anything with a thunderbolt connector will work. TB is basically the PCIe protocol but I am skeptical about latency because they are still working to drive down the cost of controllers which is not a good sign.

I was just at a stdio with an HD 9 rig in a 15 year old G4. Works beautifully. The computer is basically a controller and GUI for a PTHD system.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by zimv20

from what i've been reading, it seems hd native latency performance improves with "faster" machines (where "faster" is some combo of clock speed and cores).

my concern with the mac mini would be sub-optimal latency. also, i reckon plugin/VI count would be reduced compared to a mac pro.

would love for someone to put that combo through its paces and report back, once the chassis is ready.

Makes total sense. HD Native is, at it's core, still a native system. Meaning all the processing is in the computer. It's essentially just like a Lynx or RME PCIe interface card, however I'm sure there are some improvements with its integration with pro tools. I could potentially see Native being discontinued and HD moving to be an option between PCIE cards or fully enclosed within a rack chassis (the I/O 192).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY5TjnR5Z-c


Anyone have any inside info about this????

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by audioconsult

the computer dont does any dsp calculations on a protools hd system and bus speed is pretty high on the new mac mini..and the speed also as fast as a 3 year old power mac.. only the graphics lacks..but should be ok..ther is not so much going on graphical with protools

Call me crazy, but if I were spending the amount that HDX requires, I'd think that the extra cash to get a known working setup that hundreds or thousands of people will have is worth the extra.

Heck, for the cash a magma will cost, isn't it almost as cheap just to get a mac pro?

The mac minis aren't really designed for pro level work. They might do it...but they're really just designed for home users. Why not just use the right tools for the job, instead of trying to make an untested system work to save a couple of hundred quid?

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Verve111

Good question.

Because spending top dollar on a PTHD system means you don't have to buy the most expensive computer. There's very little native processing that the computer has to to with HD. Anything with a thunderbolt connector will work. TB is basically the PCIe protocol but I am skeptical about latency because they are still working to drive down the cost of controllers which is not a good sign.

I was just at a stdio with an HD 9 rig in a 15 year old G4. Works beautifully. The computer is basically a controller and GUI for a PTHD system.

Just to qualify, you mean a core card and 8 process cards right, probably running pt7 or below?

Because some will take that as you can run pt9 on a g4, which obviously you can't.

I'm sure it works fine, until you need more synths, elastic audio, or anything that isn't Tim. For pure dsp assisted mixing, I'm sure it's great.

Still wouldn't buy a mac mini for my hd rig. The g4 was the mac pro of its day, not the mac mini.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Just to qualify, you mean a core card and 8 process cards right, probably running pt7 or below?

Because some will take that as you can run pt9 on a g4, which obviously you can't.

I'm sure it works fine, until you need more synths, elastic audio, or anything that isn't Tim. For pure dsp assisted mixing, I'm sure it's great.

Still wouldn't buy a mac mini for my hd rig. The g4 was the mac pro of its day, not the mac mini.

Yeah sorry it was 7 not 9. We had to do that because the Mac Pro at the studio with HD 9 in it kept totally powering down in the middle of everything. Something was very wrong with it.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Call me crazy, but if I were spending the amount that HDX requires, I'd think that the extra cash to get a known working setup that hundreds or thousands of people will have is worth the extra.

Heck, for the cash a magma will cost, isn't it almost as cheap just to get a mac pro?

The mac minis aren't really designed for pro level work. They might do it...but they're really just designed for home users. Why not just use the right tools for the job, instead of trying to make an untested system work to save a couple of hundred quid?

You can get an HD-9 PCIe core card with a 192, software and cable for $3,500 on ebay at the moment. Brand new sealed in the box. Add a mac mini ($900) and a Magma Thunderbolt ($900) and you're looking at $5,300 for a simple single card HD system. Magma has two more slots so expansion is a possibility. Find some more used accel cards as you need them.

You can also buy (on Ebay) a 12 core mac pro with HD3 installed for 14k. Used.


This is the essence of my question, people load up a $5,000 mac pro with $10,000 worth of PTHD hardware, but is it really necessary. The link to the video I posted is from the Intel Developers Conference showing an HD system with a rackmount DSP unit and a laptop.

The migration to AAX plugins spells some compatibility problems with an HD9 system, but the main issues I run into with Native ProTools are my sessions getting too big for the host.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Verve111

You can get an HD-9 PCIe core card with a 192 for $3,500 on ebay at the moment. Add a mac mini ($900) and a Magma Thunderbolt ($900) and you're looking at $5,300 for a simple single card HD system. Magma has two more slots so expansion is a possibility. Find some more used accel cards as you need them.

You can also buy (on Ebay) a 12 core mac pro with HD3 installed for 14k. Used.


This is the essence of my question, people load up a $5,000 mac pro with $10,000 worth of PTHD hardware, but is it really necessary. The link to the video I posted is from the Intel Developers Conference showing an HD system with a laptop.

Let's get something clear - HD9 is 1 core card plus 8 accel cards, version of PT unspecified.

PT9 HD is PT9 running on an unspecified number of cards.

PT9 HD1 is not a good investment - nothing like as powerful as HD native on a good mac, limited with io and voices. I wouldn't go anything below an HD2 for anything.

For the price of your mac mini and magma, you could buy a mac pro 2nd hand that's actually designed for PT HD. Much better option if you want this route.

Personally I wouldn't buy a Tdm rig now. If you need one, make sure you really need one - and bear in mind all the people who bought pci rigs cheaply, and are now bitching about paying pro prices for upgrades.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Let's get something clear - HD9 is 1 core card plus 8 accel cards, version of PT unspecified.

PT9 HD is PT9 running on an unspecified number of cards.

PT9 HD1 is not a good investment - nothing like as powerful as HD native on a good mac, limited with io and voices. I wouldn't go anything below an HD2 for anything.

For the price of your mac mini and magma, you could buy a mac pro 2nd hand that's actually designed for PT HD. Much better option if you want this route.

Personally I wouldn't buy a Tdm rig now. If you need one, make sure you really need one - and bear in mind all the people who bought pci rigs cheaply, and are now bitching about paying pro prices for upgrades.

Ha! Yeah sorry man HD9 is 1 core and 8 accel. I meant PT9 HD.

I can see PT9 HD1 not being a good investment in terms of future scalability and I would certainly want more than 96 audio tracks.

So would a single HDX card be a better way to go?

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Verve111

Ha! Yeah sorry man HD9 is 1 core and 8 accel. I meant PT9 HD.

I can see PT9 HD1 not being a good investment in terms of future scalability and I would certainly want more than 96 audio tracks.

So would a single HDX card be a better way to go?

HD1 isn't a great investment unless you do really low track counts but need HD timecode features - i.e. you work in DVD production or something. HD2 is useable - but I wouldn't want to mix on one unless it had a high powered computer to run lots of RTAS plugins, and really ditto on an HD3.

I wouldn't want to track a full band natively either, though I can't say I've tried with HD native.

A single HDX card would definitely be preferred over HD1, but again I really don't see the point in buying this and then skimping on the mac when for a few hundred pounds more, you can get a fully approved Mac pro that will do the job with no worries at all.

[frontierfran]

I'd like to resurrect this

I am putting together a 24x24 PT rig utilizing a couple of 192s lying around here. I need it to be mobile, so racking a mac mini/mbp with a sync i/o, 2 192s, and the magma t-bolt chassis sounds like a fantastic idea to me.

only putting 24 mic lines from a mixer into PT to track. sending out 24 to monitor.

I have 2 core cards and a few accel cards lying around. and I see the Magma is now available.

Would those who contributed to this condo see any issues with this application?

[nst7]

I don't think the Magma will work with the TDM cards, only HDX and HD Native. You may want to call Magma and find out.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by nst7

I don't think the Magma will work with the TDM cards, only HDX and HD Native. You may want to call Magma and find out.

I think this is correct as well.

[frontierfran]

correct gentlemen. sadly TDM, moreso PCI-X, will not work.

[Verve111]

OWC released a new T bolt chassis but it's only half length so that doesn't help you.

The only other one I know of is the Sonnet Express Pro (full length). No Avid cards are listed as being compatible yet but Avid is listed as a partner, I'm sure the details are being worked out (drivers).

There's also this - maybe what you are looking for?


http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Sonne...logies/XMACMS/

[smack]

So I have the Magma box and an HD2 Accel running on a retina MBP. Or I should say "connected to".

PT10.3.2 HD runs fine, but no part of the computer can see the PCIe HD Accel cards at all.

oh, and wow, I never saw PT launch so fast.

[The MPCist]

Originally Posted by smack

So I have the Magma box and an HD2 Accel running on a retina MBP. Or I should say "connected to".

PT10.3.2 HD runs fine, but no part of the computer can see the PCIe HD Accel cards at all.

oh, and wow, I never saw PT launch so fast.

Can three cards fit in? I heard that the 3rd slot was 1/2 size....

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by The MPCist

Can three cards fit in? I heard that the 3rd slot was 1/2 size....

He's saying it's not working....HD software works, but it's not seeing the hardware.

[DirtyMan]

he asked about fitment not funcionality

[s12512]

Originally Posted by smack

So I have the Magma box and an HD2 Accel running on a retina MBP. Or I should say "connected to".

PT10.3.2 HD runs fine, but no part of the computer can see the PCIe HD Accel cards at all.

oh, and wow, I never saw PT launch so fast.

so protools is running off of your computer and not the cards??

[DistortingJack]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Why would you spend top dollar on a pt hd system, then buy the cheapest computer possible?

That's like plugging a u47 into a presonus...

Just to chime in, usually I completely agree with you mate but this one I think it's the wrong way of looking at things.

A U47 into a presonus sounds worse. You would be doing your recording a disservice by using that setup.

However if you use a Mac Mini setup it will sound the same. Pro work is about usability and features.
I agree ideally a Mac Pro would suit the OP best but for both price and portability his setup looks really interesting. The Mac Mini is not consumer/non consumer; the Mini is successfully used in pro server farms around the world so the distinction doesn't really apply.
Also to remind people the new i7 Mac Minis benchmark at over 13k on Geekbench, outperforming most other Macs out there, including many Mac Pros.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by DirtyMan

he asked about fitment not funcionality

So why would you care if a card fits but the whole system doesn't work?

From what I read, the question misunderstood the fact the cards weren't working in the chassis, doesn't really matter if they fit or not.

Originally Posted by s12512

so protools is running off of your computer and not the cards??

Again, the OP should answer, but if PT is booting but it's not seeing the cards, then you're not running HD, just the Hd software...ie it's booting but using the Mac's internal audio.

Originally Posted by DistortingJack

Just to chime in, usually I completely agree with you mate but this one I think it's the wrong way of looking at things.

A U47 into a presonus sounds worse. You would be doing your recording a disservice by using that setup.

However if you use a Mac Mini setup it will sound the same. Pro work is about usability and features.
I agree ideally a Mac Pro would suit the OP best but for both price and portability his setup looks really interesting. The Mac Mini is not consumer/non consumer; the Mini is successfully used in pro server farms around the world so the distinction doesn't really apply.
Also to remind people the new i7 Mac Minis benchmark at over 13k on Geekbench, outperforming most other Macs out there, including many Mac Pros.

The problem with the Mac Minis is that the bus architecture etc isn't really designed for pro applications. you're limited in terms of the number of internal drives, RAM etc.

Benchmark stats aren't always a reliable indication of this.

I do see what you're saying. I just find it a little odd that someone gets together a few grand for a PT HD rig, then doesn't stretch the budget a little further to get a computer that is designed for purpose.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

The problem with the Mac Minis is that the bus architecture etc isn't really designed for pro applications. you're limited in terms of the number of internal drives, RAM etc.

Benchmark stats aren't always a reliable indication of this.

I do see what you're saying. I just find it a little odd that someone gets together a few grand for a PT HD rig, then doesn't stretch the budget a little further to get a computer that is designed for purpose.

Certainly so with the current Mac Minis. The whole idea is a peripheral based DAW setup, but I get the point about skimping on the computer.

I think once Apple implements the Sandy Bridge into the Mac Minis there will be little to no performance difference compared to equivalent iMacs or MBPs or perhaps even a native PCIe MacPro running internal vs external HDX or Native HD setups.

I have a brand new 15 inch MBP here at home which handles big sessions better than the HD3 accel setup in a MacPro at the studio I work at. Both on PT10, I get more errors on the HD setup than I do at home. I can run any session I currently have at a 128 buffer, 5 copies of Altiverb, tons of EQ plugs etc with minimal latency issues. On firewire. I'm sure I could go lower on the buffer but alas, the interface.

Most of the latency problems I have on my home setup are from my crap interface. Amazing what the new Apples can do.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Verve111

I have a brand new 15 inch MBP here at home which handles big sessions better than the HD3 accel setup in a MacPro at the studio I work at. Both on PT10, I get more errors on the HD setup than I do at home. I can run any session I currently have at a 128 buffer, 5 copies of Altiverb, tons of EQ plugs etc with minimal latency issues. On firewire. I'm sure I could go lower on the buffer but alas, the interface.

Most of the latency problems I have on my home setup are from my crap interface. Amazing what the new Apples can do.

Which interface? Latency issues might be from the driver...but not always.

Your statement above isn't necessarily a fair comparison - I don't know what computer you're running your HD3 rig on, I'd have to assume it's at least a mac pro (otherwise no PT10)....if the computer is a decent spec, then it should outperform your home rig. If not, something either isn't optimised or there's some other problem. Are you running Altiverb on the HD cards or natively? if natively and you've got an older computer, that explains it. Try running the HD version of Altiverb and you'll see a difference. Have you upped the native buffer size for the HD rig as well? that could also improve things (and won't affect latency for anything).

It does really depend, and HD doesn't always give advantages over a native system, but if you are comparing like to like, the HD rig shouldn't be giving you "errors" - unless it's really close to falling over natively.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by smack

So I have the Magma box and an HD2 Accel running on a retina MBP. Or I should say "connected to".

PT10.3.2 HD runs fine, but no part of the computer can see the PCIe HD Accel cards at all.

oh, and wow, I never saw PT launch so fast.

The new MBPs are astonishingly fast. Psychomonkey is probably right in the the HD software is up but the Avid drivers for the 3T box aren't supporting the TDM cars. HDX or HD Native only.