Login / Register
 
Anyone using HD10 with a Native card and apogee symphony I/O?
New Reply
Subscribe
JoFo
Thread Starter
#1
17th November 2011
Old 17th November 2011
  #1
Lives for gear
 
JoFo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 546

Thread Starter
JoFo is offline
Anyone using HD10 with a Native card and apogee symphony I/O?

No word yet from Apogee on PT10HD, so just wanted to see if anyone was successfully using the Symphony I/O with an HD native card before I risk the update.
__________________
www.joelfountain.com
#2
17th November 2011
Old 17th November 2011
  #2
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
this is my setup. I have PT 10 HD with a native card running on my 2.66 8 core nehalem (8 GB of ram) mac.

running symphony i/o with one 8 channel a-d/d-a card (with additional 8 channels to an ai3 over adat).

the only problem I had was with the mac and setting the correct amount of cores to be used with pro tools (playback engine).

I've been running smooth as butter in both the mix and tracking world. had a session going yesterday with a bunch of drum edits and plug-ins (half mixed) and needed to record an accordion player. I set it to 64 on buffer size and was able to record her right into the session with no issues. I even had six channels being sent out to her for her cue on the hearback system. no latency detected on her end (at least audible enough to affect her performance).

this system seems really, really stable. and it's quite fast.

uri
JoFo
Thread Starter
#3
18th November 2011
Old 18th November 2011
  #3
Lives for gear
 
JoFo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 546

Thread Starter
JoFo is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by otobianki74 View Post
this is my setup. I have PT 10 HD with a native card running on my 2.66 8 core nehalem (8 GB of ram) mac.

running symphony i/o with one 8 channel a-d/d-a card (with additional 8 channels to an ai3 over adat).

the only problem I had was with the mac and setting the correct amount of cores to be used with pro tools (playback engine).

I've been running smooth as butter in both the mix and tracking world. had a session going yesterday with a bunch of drum edits and plug-ins (half mixed) and needed to record an accordion player. I set it to 64 on buffer size and was able to record her right into the session with no issues. I even had six channels being sent out to her for her cue on the hearback system. no latency detected on her end (at least audible enough to affect her performance).

this system seems really, really stable. and it's quite fast.

uri
That's great, thanks for the info.

BTW- what is the 'correct' amount of cores to set in PT's playback engine? I have an octo harpertown mac pro, should I not set it to use all 8 cores?
#4
18th November 2011
Old 18th November 2011
  #4
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
no prob!

I believe you should set it at 7 cores. all but one, with it being allocated towards any additional processing outside of PT.

oto
#5
21st November 2011
Old 21st November 2011
  #5
Gear nut
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 144

alligator is offline
Okay guys here's what I Got going on. A symphony I/O as my HD Interface (8 analog i/o, 8 optical i/o, s/pdif i/o module) I have been running my HD 2 system with PT HD 8, 9 and 10. I also have a native HD card and it works fine with the symphony i/o however and this really perplexes me, pro tools HD 10 crashes ALL THE tIME every 5 minutes. But I hook my HD Core and HD Accel up and it did the same thing so its a software issue I think. I do have a 12 core processor 8 gig ram so my computer is well suited for this. So yeah HD native will work fine with symphony i/o. However I was thinking why not get the symphony 64bit PCIe Card instead and use that to run PT 10 (not HD but the LE version) since you can use any audio interface with the regulator PT software. Right now I am in a crisis I put ALL My cards ---------> HD CORE PCIe CARD, HD ACCELL PCIe CARD, HD NATIVE PCIe CARD up for sale on ebay mainly just to see if anyone is interested.
JoFo
Thread Starter
#6
26th November 2011
Old 26th November 2011
  #6
Lives for gear
 
JoFo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 546

Thread Starter
JoFo is offline
Just curious, what OS are people finding the most stable?

10.6.7 is pretty good here (PT9HD) but before I upgrade was wondering if that is what people are using, or LION?
#7
27th November 2011
Old 27th November 2011
  #7
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoFo View Post
Just curious, what OS are people finding the most stable?

10.6.7 is pretty good here (PT9HD) but before I upgrade was wondering if that is what people are using, or LION?
still on 10.6.7. stable.
JoFo
Thread Starter
#8
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #8
Lives for gear
 
JoFo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 546

Thread Starter
JoFo is offline
thanks.

I took the plunge in upgrading and I regret it. I'm having a lot of issues now.

is anyone else getting this error (attached)? As soon as this happens the native card will not work (or show up) and I have to restart in order to see it. Then as soon as I open a session it happens again.

I have two modules installed. Do you have one or two installed?
Attached Thumbnails
Anyone using HD10 with a Native card and apogee symphony I/O?-protools-error.jpg  
#9
1st December 2011
Old 1st December 2011
  #9
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
I only have one module, and an ai3 coming in via adat. no prob.

can you unplug one cable and just test one card in the symphony i/o first?

uri
JoFo
Thread Starter
#10
2nd December 2011
Old 2nd December 2011
  #10
Lives for gear
 
JoFo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 546

Thread Starter
JoFo is offline
Yes I could try that.

I also cannot do a 64 buffer at 88.2khz anymore. Was fine in PT9.

Not sure why but my system didn't like this upgrade
#11
2nd December 2011
Old 2nd December 2011
  #11
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
keep us posted please.
#12
6th March 2012
Old 6th March 2012
  #12
Gear interested
 
gsonsstudio's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 8

gsonsstudio is offline
[QUOTE=JoFo;7281276]thanks.

I took the plunge in upgrading and I regret it. I'm having a lot of issues now.

is anyone else getting this error (attached)? As soon as this happens the native card will not work (or show up) and I have to restart in order to see it. Then as soon as I open a session it happens again.

I have two modules installed. Do you have one or two
#13
6th March 2012
Old 6th March 2012
  #13
Gear interested
 
gsonsstudio's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 8

gsonsstudio is offline
Did you fix proble?
Im having it now??
#14
6th March 2012
Old 6th March 2012
  #14
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
[QUOTE=gsonsstudio;7637892]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoFo View Post
thanks.

I took the plunge in upgrading and I regret it. I'm having a lot of issues now.

is anyone else getting this error (attached)? As soon as this happens the native card will not work (or show up) and I have to restart in order to see it. Then as soon as I open a session it happens again.

I have two modules installed. Do you have one or two
do you have the latest symphony i/o driver and update? if so, you'll get this error. go back one version and you'll be fine. this happened to me. apogee isn't officially compatible with PT 10 yet.
#15
7th March 2012
Old 7th March 2012
  #15
Gear addict
 
rashadrm@hotmai's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 362

rashadrm@hotmai is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by otobianki74 View Post
this is my setup. I have PT 10 HD with a native card running on my 2.66 8 core nehalem (8 GB of ram) mac.

running symphony i/o with one 8 channel a-d/d-a card (with additional 8 channels to an ai3 over adat).

the only problem I had was with the mac and setting the correct amount of cores to be used with pro tools (playback engine).

I've been running smooth as butter in both the mix and tracking world. had a session going yesterday with a bunch of drum edits and plug-ins (half mixed) and needed to record an accordion player. I set it to 64 on buffer size and was able to record her right into the session with no issues. I even had six channels being sent out to her for her cue on the hearback system. no latency detected on her end (at least audible enough to affect her performance).

this system seems really, really stable. and it's quite fast.

uri
It looks like i'm going to get the same setup, Apogee Symphony I/O and PTHD Native, Question, with the HD Native card are you able to set the buffer at 256 and track, or does it have to be 64, i keep the buffer on my HD3 rig pretty much at 256 and never touch it, so since the HD Native card is close to TDM in the latency specs I thought 256 would be acceptable.

Just did a mix and clip gain is amazing, PT10 is still king of the mix world. Just my opinion.
#16
7th March 2012
Old 7th March 2012
  #16
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by rashadrm@hotmai View Post
It looks like i'm going to get the same setup, Apogee Symphony I/O and PTHD Native, Question, with the HD Native card are you able to set the buffer at 256 and track, or does it have to be 64, i keep the buffer on my HD3 rig pretty much at 256 and never touch it, so since the HD Native card is close to TDM in the latency specs I thought 256 would be acceptable.

Just did a mix and clip gain is amazing, PT10 is still king of the mix world. Just my opinion.
you can track at 256, it's just a matter of whether or not it feels like there's too much latency for you personally. it's definitely stable at that setting. I've been tracking at 64 and mixing with the buffers set to max (as well as delay comp).

uri
#17
7th March 2012
Old 7th March 2012
  #17
Gear addict
 
rashadrm@hotmai's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 362

rashadrm@hotmai is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by otobianki74 View Post
you can track at 256, it's just a matter of whether or not it feels like there's too much latency for you personally. it's definitely stable at that setting. I've been tracking at 64 and mixing with the buffers set to max (as well as delay comp).

uri
I just checked my buffer on the mix Im doing and its 256, my delay comp is max, disc cache 8 gigs , timeline 100% about 109 tracks including aux's and lots of plugs with about 48% cpu using rosetta 800 firewire.

I'm just getting back into native after 10 years so I need to ask, what are the drawbacks of not turning the buffer all the way up when mixing, I'm not having any issues so far...
#18
7th March 2012
Old 7th March 2012
  #18
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,133

otobianki74 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by rashadrm@hotmai View Post
I just checked my buffer on the mix Im doing and its 256, my delay comp is max, disc cache 8 gigs , timeline 100% about 109 tracks including aux's and lots of plugs with about 48% cpu using rosetta 800 firewire.

I'm just getting back into native after 10 years so I need to ask, what are the drawbacks of not turning the buffer all the way up when mixing, I'm not having any issues so far...
well, with some CPU intensive plugs, or mixing with VIs, a lower buffer setting might create buffer errors. maxing it out at mix time is just my way of ensuring that my system is set to run as efficiently as possible.
#19
23rd April 2012
Old 23rd April 2012
  #19
Gear maniac
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Posts: 173

musicminister187 is offline
Anyone else using this combination? How is the work flow?
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.