The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Pro tools HD vs Mix 24 888 system Digital Converters
Old 15th February 2009
  #31
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahamnesik View Post
Ok thanks.

Narcoman are you talking about MIX or HD system?
mix is 48 bit. HD systems are (essentially) 56bit.
Old 15th February 2009
  #32
Gear Nut
 

Okay, thanks. So the truth is that Mix is 48 bits up to 59 mono tracks summed. Then it is 24 bits. This is what the Digidesign states in the manuel.
Old 15th February 2009
  #33
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahamnesik View Post
Okay, thanks. So the truth is that Mix is 48 bits up to 59 mono tracks summed. Then it is 24 bits. This is what the Digidesign states in the manuel.
?? really? not seen that......
Old 15th February 2009
  #34
Gear Nut
 

Yes, what I understood is that Mix system cannot keep a full 48 bits from one DSP chip to the other (HD does). So above 59 mono tracks (you can read the manual from page 600) it is dithered to 24 bits. Here's a quote from someone from digi on the DUC forum:

Quote:
5. Is the more tracks you have degrading the master fader-for example, if I had 32 Audio tracks and 24 Aux tracks on one song and on the second song I had 64 audio tracks and 64 Aux tracks, can the Master fader handle all those tracks with no problem or is it better not to take the system to the limit?

It depends on the system. Oh HD, no. Large numbers of tracks can be mixed with no loss of quality or precision. With Mix systems, larger mixes can have some of the tracks mixed to 48-bits while others will be mixed to 24-bits. The magic number for Mix systems, by the way, is more than 59 inputs for the stereo mixer. 59 and fewer inputs are mixed at 48-bits of precision. Beyond that requires an internal sub-mix. The differences in sound quality that we're talking about here are extremely minute, by the way, but then we have a flock of great engineers out there with some of the best "test equipment" in the world on the sides of their heads.



Am I wrong??
Old 15th February 2009
  #35
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

wow. Glad I left Mix behind a long time ago then !!
Old 15th February 2009
  #36
Gear Nut
 

I don't know what to think. Since I don't have the money for an HD system, maybe I should go LE... I'm not sure which one is cleaner: Mix or LE?...

What do you use now?
Old 15th February 2009
  #37
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahamnesik View Post
I don't know what to think. Since I don't have the money for an HD system, maybe I should go LE... I'm not sure which one is cleaner: Mix or LE?...

What do you use now?
got two HD rigs and three LE rigs. LE certainly hasn't got in the way of doing jobs - especially now in PT8. Mix also never stopped me earning - but I guess that was then and this is now and there is a certain impetus to stay "on top".

I'd be inclined to go down the "modern mac pro" and PT8 LE route..... only got HD because I've had them a while - since before native was a serious option - which, let's be truthful, is only just becoming a reality.
Old 15th February 2009
  #38
Gear Nut
 

Yes, I agree. The problem in LE is the latency... But you can compensate, it just takes more time to deal with.

I think Mix is excellent for tracking and LE ok for mixing. There are some really cool TDM plugin though

Or maybe it's just hype... The question is can we actually "hear" a difference between Mix , HD and LE summing bus quality.

Have you ever tried and made a comparison?
Old 16th February 2009
  #39
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahamnesik View Post
Yes, I agree. The problem in LE is the latency... But you can compensate, it just takes more time to deal with.

I think Mix is excellent for tracking and LE ok for mixing. There are some really cool TDM plugin though

Or maybe it's just hype... The question is can we actually "hear" a difference between Mix , HD and LE summing bus quality.

Have you ever tried and made a comparison?
not yet - but i did offer to do one!! I might do a "summing" test this week actually. stay in touch !!
Old 16th February 2009
  #40
Gear Nut
 

Excellent! Please don't forget to do it if you have a chance to! Even if just 30 seconds. I look forward to hearing! Let's keep in touch!!
Old 16th February 2009
  #41
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
An le system using a current generation computer will run rings around the biggest mix systems in almost every respect other than the number of simultaneous channels you can record. The Intel dual and quad core CPUs have really changed everything.
Except that on the LE systems, you can't monitor what you're tracking in real-time without using an external mixer. That is, the old TDM system still has a built-in mixer with (virtually) zero latency, and the new LE system still doesn't.

One thing both systems have in common is that there's no automatic delay compensation for plug-in latency.

JSL
Old 16th February 2009
  #42
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
Except that on the LE systems, you can't monitor what you're tracking in real-time without using an external mixer. That is, the old TDM system still has a built-in mixer with (virtually) zero latency, and the new LE system still doesn't.

One thing both systems have in common is that there's no automatic delay compensation for plug-in latency.

JSL
Not surprising on the old TDM system - since the latency compensation on ALL older systems is ropey.

As for latency - you can pretty much do it on a modern native system (real time tracking that is)....it's fine....
Old 17th February 2009
  #43
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
As for latency - you can pretty much do it on a modern native system (real time tracking that is)....it's fine....
I don't recommend "pretty much" doing anything. From what I've seen, it still takes a dedicated hardware mixer to produce a professional tracking session that conducive to getting good music down.

JSL
Old 17th February 2009
  #44
Lives for gear
 
RedWallStudio's Avatar
 

Its been said earlier in this thread, but it bears repeating... the 888s suck. Also the 96's are not much more than an 888 with a cosmetic upgrade. If you want really good sounding converters from Digidesign, the 192s are a must..... even if you track at 96k.

An HD system is a no-brainer... especially if you need to be compatible with other studios.
Old 17th February 2009
  #45
Lives for gear
 
logicll's Avatar
 

6 card Mix system with Apogee AD8000SE converters, love it. And don't forget the 2".....hehe
Old 17th February 2009
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Stitch333's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louie View Post
Waves API, Waves SSL plug-ins on my mix system without any problems
seriously?
This I didn't know.

Tho I did find out at the DUC that many MIX users have G5s running their rig. Not supported but runs great anyways...
Old 18th February 2009
  #47
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
I don't recommend "pretty much" doing anything. From what I've seen, it still takes a dedicated hardware mixer to produce a professional tracking session that conducive to getting good music down.

JSL
yer preaching to the wrong guy babe....heh

Put it in perspective with what's being asked. Yes - I agree, I've not done an ochestral soundtrack session yet without a mixer.... but I COULD do with with a TDM system. I'd probably even be able to do it on a native system - not that I ever have, but my confidence is increasing .....
Old 18th February 2009
  #48
Here for the gear
 

Narcoman, I'd be very interested in hearing that summing test you're thinking about doing. If you need a Mix version, I'd be glad to help out with that. It sure would be fun to compare the same mix with all the same settings in HD vs. Mix. vs. LE.
Old 18th February 2009
  #49
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

i'll try and do it today
Old 21st February 2009
  #50
a3n
Here for the gear
 

summing test LE vs mix

not to steal your wind, but I did this 4 years ago and LE won.
The session was 24 tracks wide stereo, and contained some very high dynamics and lush top end, I.e. a good classical orchestra recording.
The difference was definitely there, more punch and impact in the lows better stereoimage and top end definition in the highs. All in all a more 'connected' sound in the mix done on LE.
Old 21st February 2009
  #51
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
not to steal your wind, but I did this 4 years ago.
you did? great. i wonder what the result was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
LE won.
that's that settled then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
The session was 24 tracks wide stereo
curses, if only i'd known about this magical "wide stereo" earlier

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
and contained some very high dynamics and lush top end
levels are low or high, dynamic range is wide or narrow. oh i see, you must've put that in your "wide" stereo. grass is lush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
I.e. a good classical orchestra recording.
yeah, i bet it was brilliant

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
The difference was definitely there.
i'm convinced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
more punch and impact in the lows
how much more punch? a bowlful? and did it really kick you in the balls?

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
better stereoimage and top end definition in the highs.
newsflash: highs have more top-end definition

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3n View Post
All in all a more 'connected' sound in the mix done on LE.
it's not fair if you only plug in yer 003. everyone knows that pt mix hardware works best when it's connected. i deem your test, inconclusive, or possibly made up.
Old 21st February 2009
  #52
Gear Nut
 

Interesting... PJPlayer, have you ever made such a comparison?
Old 21st February 2009
  #53
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahamnesik View Post
Interesting... PJPlayer, have you ever made such a comparison?
a made up one? i suppose i could. hold on.....

blimey, he's right! LE sounds way better: punchier lows balls impact higher highs with brilliance wide-grin-face-stereo.
Old 21st February 2009
  #54
Gear Nut
 

Got you.

What about a real comparison??

Let's say a 24 tracks bounce on each system? With and without plugins. I'm sure many people would love to hear something real instead of subjective statements.
Old 21st February 2009
  #55
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahamnesik View Post
Got you.

What about a real comparison??

Let's say a 24 tracks bounce on each system? With and without plugins. I'm sure many people would love to hear something real instead of subjective statements.
i actually could do this (well, m-powered 7 vs mix), if anyone gives a ****, post here and i'll bouncarama.
Old 21st February 2009
  #56
Gear Nut
 

Yep, I'd definitely love to hear it. Also, if can try with more than 32 tracks on the Mix system, even if you insert blank tracks. I've heard that Mix starts to suck above 32 tracks.
Old 21st February 2009
  #57
Gear Addict
 

i get the feeling that you're the sales manager asking the intern to polish the pie charts with that last request, but i guess adding blank tracks would be quite easy. so far i've just played my 25 (well, including 2 auxes and a master fader) mix back in pt 6.4.1 (TDM I'LL HAVE YOU KNOW!), no idea if it'll even open in m-powered 7....

edit: gah, i'll tell you what does suck about pro tools 6, i have to use it on a G4 with no usb 2.0 ports so the project will be on my usb key in a nippy 10 minutes.
Old 22nd February 2009
  #58
Gear Nut
 

It doesn't if there's not the blank tracks in the m-powered session. This is just to hear how the mix system compare with the LE above 32 tracks.

Actually, there should also be an interesting test with the Mix by using more than 59 tracks.

Because this forces the system to use 2 DSP and this is when Mix dither to 24 bits and thus doesn't provide a full 48 bits resolution on big mixes.

My feeling is that MIX is the best choice for tracking and not as good as LE for mixing.
Old 22nd February 2009
  #59
Lives for gear
 
logicll's Avatar
 

Mix system > Fulcrum summing mixer, insert a 2-bus comp feeding into a decent pre...boosh!
Old 22nd February 2009
  #60
Lives for gear
 
sleeper1400's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
An le system using a current generation computer will run rings around the biggest mix systems in almost every respect other than the number of simultaneous channels you can record. The Intel dual and quad core CPUs have really changed everything.

agreed.
also, to the poster who said "forget protools".
LOL
i got a good chuckle from the sillyness of the idea.
thanks for the giggle!heh
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Bennyb_jokickass / So much gear, so little time
2
logicll / Music Computers
43
dsoukup / Music Computers
0
Steamy Williams / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump