The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Pro Tools 10 & Pro Tools HDX
Old 26th October 2011 | Show parent
  #271
Lives for gear
 
pethenis's Avatar
 

Your answer is not clear to me. We are talking about the old PTHD phenomenon that you would lose a LOT of voices mixing TDM and RTAS plugins on the same track or Aux, right? My question was if that is still the case with a HDX-setup (mixing native and DSP-AAX plugins).

If you still say this will not be the case, can I ask where you got that information? Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
Running native (Host CPU DSP) plug-ins on HDX will have zero impact on the number of available voices as the audio engine as the HDX hardware DSP is used for audio and the CPU DSP is used for audio plug-in processing not voice allocation.
You still will have plenty of HDX DSP even with 256 voices allocated. The HDX card is very powerful.
Old 26th October 2011 | Show parent
  #272
Gear Maniac
 
Stéphane's Avatar
is the latency when tracking with hd native is lower with the new pt10?
Old 26th October 2011 | Show parent
  #273
Lives for gear
 
b-pole's Avatar
 

Quote:
Logic has a new plug in coming out that does!!!...
seems off-topic, but could we get the infos? You are a Logic beta tester?
Old 26th October 2011 | Show parent
  #274
Lives for gear
 
G-Spot's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Retinal View Post
As for the 64 bit, i really wonder how many companies purposely postponed the upgrade to 64 because they knew AAX was coming out..
good point...
hmmm... this release should have been: PTHD 9.99 for $10, instead of PTHD 10 for $999. heh
Old 26th October 2011 | Show parent
  #275
Lives for gear
 
CaptainHook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG_MYDUS View Post
If not then you have the best of both...ultra low latency for tracking when using dsp then switch to the native versions of plugins for mixing
Sure, HDX plus a powerful computer will always be better than just the computer, but if you already have a harpertown mac pro, add a new computer to the cost of HDX as well since harpertown (and i believe lower) wont work with HDX:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/7164677-post234.html

Also consider what kind of computer (or how many) you could get for the price of HDX. You could get a new computer now and set aside the rest for the next computer upgrade. Or get new mics, pres, etc etc.

For me i don't ever record through plugins and can just mute PT channels that are in record mode and monitor through my interface mixer for very low latency if needed.. but truthfully so far 32 or even 64 samples of buffer have been totally fine for me.

You either need HDX, or you don't. No big deal. (unless you do but find the cost prohibitive)
Old 27th October 2011 | Show parent
  #276
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainHook View Post
Sure, HDX plus a powerful computer will always be better than just the computer, but if you already have a harpertown mac pro, add a new computer to the cost of HDX as well since harpertown (and i believe lower) wont work with HDX:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/7164677-post234.html

Also consider what kind of computer (or how many) you could get for the price of HDX. You could get a new computer now and set aside the rest for the next computer upgrade. Or get new mics, pres, etc etc.

For me i don't ever record through plugins and can just mute PT channels that are in record mode and monitor through my interface mixer for very low latency if needed.. but truthfully so far 32 or even 64 samples of buffer have been totally fine for me.

You either need HDX, or you don't. No big deal. (unless you do but find the cost prohibitive)
The AVID compatibility notes say that the following are compatible with HDX...

Desktops
Mac Pro "Westmere" (all models, all speeds)
Mac Pro "Nehalem" (all models, all speeds)
Mac Pro "Harpertown" one or two Quad-Core 2.8, 3.0, 3.2GHz
Mac Pro "Clovertown" two Quad-Core 3.0GHz
Mac Pro "Woodcrest" two Dual-Core 2.0, 2.66, 3.0GHz
Old 27th October 2011 | Show parent
  #277
Lives for gear
 
otobianki74's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stéphane View Post
is the latency when tracking with hd native is lower with the new pt10?
curious about this as well. is this improved upon from version 9? would be a deal breaker if not, but if there's significant improvement then native might be worth considering.

thanks.

oto
Old 27th October 2011 | Show parent
  #278
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattrixx View Post
The AVID compatibility notes say that the following are compatible with HDX...

Desktops
Mac Pro "Westmere" (all models, all speeds)
Mac Pro "Nehalem" (all models, all speeds)
Mac Pro "Harpertown" one or two Quad-Core 2.8, 3.0, 3.2GHz
Mac Pro "Clovertown" two Quad-Core 3.0GHz
Mac Pro "Woodcrest" two Dual-Core 2.0, 2.66, 3.0GHz
Apparently it's been refuted on the DUC, and the 2008 Harpertown will actually blank the card when doing firmware updates. Not good.
Old 27th October 2011 | Show parent
  #279
Gear Addict
 
Zooey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Retinal View Post
in 2 years new computers will eat HDX-3 system
I can say without exaggeration that I have been hearing this same argument since 1998 or earlier.
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #280
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
I can say without exaggeration that I have been hearing this same argument since 1998 or earlier.
Plus the fact that the card based system will always be more powerful, since it gives you the card PLUS the native power of your CPU.

Why do people keep missing this?

TH
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #281
Lives for gear
 
Silver Sonya's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
I can say without exaggeration that I have been hearing this same argument since 1998 or earlier.
Yes, that's roughly when it started to be true.

- c
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #282
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guybrush View Post
[email protected]# Avid!!

I just spent 50.000$ (50.000$!!!!!!) for a big Protools HD 9 system, 4 weeks ago.
Now the hardware is obsolete.
And no one told me anything.

The one that sold it to You,,,,I was supposed to do about the same,,,,they said,,,,just wait a little,,,,only some weeks. Bless them !!
You still have a GREAT system man.
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #283
Lives for gear
 
zak7's Avatar
 

Thumbs down What a big BS!

FROM AVID:

"Pro Tools HD 10 Upgrade Pricing -

First, let’s talk about the Pro Tools HD 10 upgrade. We believe strongly in the value of Pro Tools HD 10. It represents a significant step forward for our professional customers. The workflow improvements in Pro Tools HD 10 are substantial, and when added together, dramatically reduce the time required to deliver your best results. And while it may be difficult to put a specific price tag on features like Extended Disk Cache, Clip Gain, our premium AAX Channel Strip plug-in, and many other additions, if sold separately they could easily add up to much more than $999.


Avid Standard Support Plan for $599 -

Now, back to the Avid Standard Support plan. I spoke about this last week and we quickly saw there was a great deal of confusion. We really want to clear this up because this program is great for our customers. So currently, if you are on an Avid support plan, you receive a year of maintenance (tech support, etc.) and free upgrades from the time of purchase. So if you were on this plan when you originally purchased Pro Tools HD 9, you would be eligible for a complimentary upgrade to Pro Tools HD 10. What we realized quickly was that very few of our audio customers knew about it and therefore could not take advantage of it. Based on this, we wanted fix the problem and create an opportunity for you to get on this retroactively."


--------------
Please, how can you value an upgrade summing all the features? so then I have to say that Logic is a bargain because for $500 you get so many features!
Also , come on Cilp Gain it is the holy grail now, it is the latest innovation??? is a feature that is in so many other DAWs for at least 10 years...you took this from others!!!!! if Clip Gain was not added before because was hard to code or because you did not wanted to...that is not our problem!


Also if tou could give Avid Standard Support Plan for $599 - when could give you the upgrade to PT HD 10 for free plus 1 year of technical support, so why u can not give just the upgrade to Pro Tools 10 just for $299 ????

Really you Avid make no sense and I can feel the greed.

In this moment are so many that are not going to upgrade to PT HD 10, but also everybody will upgrade if you give it to us for example at $299 specially when PT HD10 THIS IS THE LAST UPGRADE FOR TDM USERS!
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #284
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
Plus the fact that the card based system will always be more powerful, since it gives you the card PLUS the native power of your CPU.

Why do people keep missing this?

TH
Well said,,,!!
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #285
Quote:
Originally Posted by zak7 View Post
In this moment are so many that are not going to upgrade to PT HD 10, but also everybody will upgrade if you give it to us for example at $299 specially when PT HD10 THIS IS THE LAST UPGRADE FOR TDM USERS!
Probably the exact reason why they are charging so much.
They realize many will stick with there 'old' HD systems & PT10 for years to come and they want one last chance to make some coin off these people. heh

These same people may never buy another AVID system.
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #286
Lives for gear
 
CaptainHook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattrixx View Post
The AVID compatibility notes say that the following are compatible with HDX...
That's lovely. But check the link i posted. It's Max, "Sr. Director, Audio Product Management for Avid" saying that they cannot qualify the cards with Harpertown.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/7164677-post234.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
I can say without exaggeration that I have been hearing this same argument since 1998 or earlier.
As a previous HD2 Accel owner and user of PT since 1999, i think it's fair to say that it's been true for at least the last 3-5 years.


Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
Plus the fact that the card based system will always be more powerful, since it gives you the card PLUS the native power of your CPU.

Why do people keep missing this?
They're not. Just on the last page i posted this:


Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainHook View Post
Sure, HDX plus a powerful computer will always be better than just the computer, but if you already have a harpertown mac pro, add a new computer to the cost of HDX as well since harpertown (and i believe lower) wont work with HDX:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/7164677-post234.html

Also consider what kind of computer (or how many) you could get for the price of HDX. You could get a new computer now and set aside the rest for the next computer upgrade. Or get new mics, pres, etc etc.

For me i don't ever record through plugins and can just mute PT channels that are in record mode and monitor through my interface mixer for very low latency if needed.. but truthfully so far 32 or even 64 samples of buffer have been totally fine for me.

You either need HDX, or you don't. No big deal. (unless you do but find the cost prohibitive)
Old 28th October 2011
  #287
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlackDog View Post
Aaaah but does it make the lyrics to the song better???..Logic has a new plug in coming out that does!!!....On a more serious note anything that makes PT sound better is great in my book, just feel sorry for all those people who have just bought new systems before Oct 1...they must be stewing

Woof
Yea that's me, 2 weeks before and I'm not happy to say the least, im working on getting the upgrade or avid will most likely loose a good customer.
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #288
Lives for gear
 
zak7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anguswoodhead View Post
Probably the exact reason why they are charging so much.
They realize many will stick with there 'old' HD systems & PT10 for years to come and they want one last chance to make some coin off these people. heh

These same people may never buy another AVID system.
You are right, but I do not think that everybody will stick to their TDM systems.

Also they should contemplate that piracy will be there too, specially with the anger, many will love to crack PT 10.

So is better to just put a fair price and make a lot of sales.
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #289
Lives for gear
 
b-pole's Avatar
 

Quote:
I can say without exaggeration that I have been hearing this same argument since 1998 or earlier.
One of the best statements so far.heh
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #290
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
I can say without exaggeration that I have been hearing this same argument since 1998 or earlier.
That 'argument' has been said since long before 1998, about PT, PTIII, PT24, PTHD etc, but not about HDX. And as we now, similar 'arguments' haven proven themselves true as well. Not only are fast computers much faster than old, dedicated DSP-based systems, but the phones we use have more DSP power than the old DSP based systems we had. 8-core Macs, for instance, have offered more than enough DSP for most DAW users for several years now. And the newest MacBook Pros and MacMinis are as fast as my 2008 8-core Mac....

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
Plus the fact that the card based system will always be more powerful, since it gives you the card PLUS the native power of your CPU.

Why do people keep missing this?
I don' think anyone misses that. It's just that even today, and for some time now, loads of DAW users don't need that extra DSP, so that's not an 'argument' either.

If your car needs four wheels, it doesn't get any better if you have 8. And if you aren't allowed - or need to - drive faster than 85 mph, investing in a car that lets you drive in 120 mph only means more expenses. And that's not an 'argument' either.

Whatever floats your boat - but the 'argument' isn't 'in two years' anymore. It's 'two years ago' (actually, more than two years ago).
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #291
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
Plus the fact that the card based system will always be more powerful, since it gives you the card PLUS the native power of your CPU.

Why do people keep missing this?

TH
Others already replied to that, nobody is missing something
the point is computing power is *cheap* as opposed to a DSP card which
will become obsolete in term of power very fast, this is 2011 not 2008,
even an average computer has enough power to run a big audio project,
plus if we're considering PCs, hell I won't even go there..
You can upgrade your computer with spare change.

The point is PT has several other flaws imo that should be fixed instead
of concentrating on "new" cards for an old system, which to be honest
don't even look so powerful..
There was a time in which DSP were needed to run an audio project because even the hottest computer out there didn't have enough power,
that time is long gone.

To each is own tho'
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #292
Lives for gear
 
Benprogfuse's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
I don' think anyone misses that. It's just that even today, and for some time now, loads of DAW users don't need that extra DSP, so that's not an 'argument' either.

If your car needs four wheels, it doesn't get any better if you have 8. And if you aren't allowed - or need to - drive faster than 85 mph, investing in a car that lets you drive in 120 mph only means more expenses. And that's not an 'argument' either.

Whatever floats your boat - but the 'argument' isn't 'in two years' anymore. It's 'two years ago' (actually, more than two years ago).
Well said. I was just about to use a car analogy myself. And who wants to pay $6,999.00 per extra tire, if their car already gets up to 85 mph in seconds?
Old 28th October 2011 | Show parent
  #293
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benprogfuse View Post
Well said. I was just about to use a car analogy myself. And who wants to pay $6,999.00 per extra tire, if their car already gets up to 85 mph in seconds?
and the first four supreme tires cost about $ 2000 and include a whole new car heh
Old 26th November 2012
  #294
Then you look at the ProTools Thunderbolt Native, which is using the computer's CPU to run all the plugins etc.

In all honesty, dedicated DSP hardware is the wrong route. It would make more sense to be able to slave up a bunch of computer workstations.

If I was designing a DAW from scratch at this point, I'd first start off with the Linux kernel, the type they use for multinodal supercomputers, and build out from there. It wouldn't be an application running on an OS such as Windows, with all that overhead and unreliability, it'd be an embedded system more like RADAR which runs on its own motherboard(s), and hooks into a desktop PC platform. Run just the user interface on one computer, probably running a desktop OS, and do the heavy lifting on a bunch of dedicated motherboards, say 8 tracks per motherboard. The latency could get very low indeed if it was implemented properly, it's the memory management and process switching that tends to produce latency on CPUs, whereas it's possible to tune an OS to be very low latency, as iZ have done in the case of BeOS. One could also tap into the SIMD systems on graphics cards for doing processing tasks.
Old 26th November 2012 | Show parent
  #295
Running at 96k and using the Slate VTM I found my 8 core Mac Pro very quickly ran out of grunt on large sessions. (running Pro Tools 10 Native)
And I have a UAD2 Quad card.
I've gone back to tracking & mixing at 48k.

I'm a fan of HDX - been using it in a studio I freelance out of - very cool, and horsepower to burn.
Extremely low latency.
Old 26th March 2013
  #296
Here for the gear
 

Post Pro Tools 10 (Limiter)

Hello, I was wondering if a limiter or some kind of dynamic compression should be put in the Master Volume Track? There is some work that I am doing where the Master clips but just barely. but just barely.
Old 26th March 2013 | Show parent
  #297
Quote:
Originally Posted by jboaudioe View Post
Hello, I was wondering if a limiter or some kind of dynamic compression should be put in the Master Volume Track? There is some work that I am doing where the Master clips but just barely. but just barely.
Either drop the channels down a little to prevent clipping.
Or put some kind of brickwall limiter across the 2 buss to prevent overs.
Personally I do use a limiter but VERY gently.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 55 views: 20292
Avatar for IM WHO YOU THINK
IM WHO YOU THINK 13th October 2020
replies: 15929 views: 1491864
Avatar for Ragan
Ragan 11th January 2019
replies: 1296 views: 158718
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump