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
Waves Soundgrid Studio System Audio Interfaces
Old 3rd August 2014
  #91
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

SoundGrid has already taken off in live sound and makes plenty of sense for large facilities. It offers a huge opportunity to third parties. It just isn't oriented or priced in the direction of keyboard-centric home music studios.
Old 3rd August 2014
  #92
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy View Post
It seems over on the DUC the moderator endorsed
1.Or to put it another way, if Avid is having problems attracting third party support for its state-of-the-art DSP solution then what chance Waves?
The simple reasons are that SoundGrid is not just a DSP, it's a wider networking solution (with no-server configurations as well) it supports all DAWs and many live mixing consoles. Also, it's significantly cheaper.

In the not so far future you will most likely see way more hardware and software developers that will want to connect to this network in some way. Even now it's available for Yamaha, DiGiCo and A&H consoles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy View Post
3. In the deeply flawed HDX world of swapping between DSP and native processing, Soundgrid latency WILL be above the figures Waves are quoting.
I'm no latency expert, but AFAIK if you use StudioRack with DSP it 'hijacks' the signal from the actual input so that you should be getting the exact latency quoted with no regards to the latency of the PT software (since the signal is not monitored through their software at all).
Old 3rd August 2014
  #93
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
SoundGrid has already taken off in live sound and makes plenty of sense for large facilities. It offers a huge opportunity to third parties. It just isn't oriented or priced in the direction of keyboard-centric home music studios.
That depends on the unit. Something like the upcoming IOX (a 1U non server 12-input, 6-output solution) could be a great solution for a home studio or even a a live band, since it serves as one interface for multiple computers, and also offers very high end I/O (and the option to the connect to other SG-compatible devices).
Old 3rd August 2014
  #94
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaySoul View Post
I know EXACTLY who you're talking about. Ridiculous, isn't it? Every time he posts I consider how he's abusing his "moderator" status. And to think I once thought this dude, rational...
I think we're talking about the same guy

ProPower wrote:
Quote:
IMHO....

- Waves HDX as in AAX DSP = Never - was never before - After soundgrid - Never again. The whining on that other place is almost unbearable :-)...
- Soundgrid for HDX users - hard to imagine selling many there! Very little gain for many $$ - Latency will never be as good as simple AAX DSP alternatives.
- Soundgrid for HD Native users - maybe - but there are a lot of questions unanswered here. Real latency for this lashup through AVID hardware is yet to be documented.
- Soundgrid for regular Native folks. This is the one that makes the most sense to me. Especially if you use their IOS.
- Third party?? All depends on how much woo Waves can pitch and how easy the port is from AU/VST/etc... is - and how much they are willing to help.
Apparently it's comparatively easy to port to Soundgrid. Being an Intel based platform, SG uses the same x86 instruction set the native DAW plug-in formats are already coded in.
Old 3rd August 2014
  #95
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy View Post
1. NI will NEVER support Soundgrid period....fact... end of story.
I don't think it is likely that NI will support SG but why are you so categorically sure?

Quote:
I suspect that most third party developers will also steer a wide birth unless Soundgrid takes off. But then Soundgrid won't ever take off without third party support...
Soundgrid has a VASTLY larger market than HDX. It works for all DAWs. The cheapest Soundgrid server starts at $450. That means that Waves can even tap in to the relatively low-end home producer market that might otherwise get a UAD card or something like that. Even the top of the range Extreme Server is only $2490.

Here is a blurb from the Waves site: "SoundGrid Extreme can run over 500 instances of Waves stereo SSL E-Channel or C4 Multiband Compressor plugins, with latency as low as 0.8 milliseconds!" If I was UA, I would be keeping a very close eye on how SG develops.

When it comes to understanding the market and what type of solutions make sense, Avid are utterly and completely clueless. Instead of adapting to the reality of the changing audio market they retreat into an ever decreasing niche market and try to force people into their overpriced, ill-thought out HDX / HD|Native products. It looks like these products were conceived in the 20th century and not relatively new products. It makes no sense.

Besides that, Soundgrid also has the whole live sound market to tap into. Waves are already partnering with DigiCo for the hardware. I'm not very familiar with the live sound market but if/when you have live consoles with seem-less integration of Soundgrid it becomes very interesting for 3rd parties.

EDIT: I see there are already fully integrated solutions for Yamaha consoles: http://www.waves.com/hardware/compact-combo-for-yamaha In other words, Soundgrid already has a larger potential target market than HDX plugins will ever have.

Quote:
Or to put it another way, if Avid is having problems attracting third party support for its state-of-the-art DSP solution then what chance Waves?
Did Avid release a new product while I wasn't paying attention? Oh you mean HDX. HDX is not state of the art. HDX is based on outdated technology from the get go. Avid should have gone with a much more powerful and cheaper Intel solution instead of outdated and expensive DSP tech. Besides being cheaper, much more powerful and much more scalable, it also makes plugin development much easier and cheaper. Avid is a dinosaur that understands neither modern technology solutions nor modern business and market realities.

Waves Soundgrid makes much more sense.

Quote:
2. Avid HDX owners don't want Soundgrid regardless of how good it is.... They simply want HDX versions of Waves' plug-ins.
There is a large post for TV market where decisions are not just made by owner-operators. Decisions are made based not just on what is easiest for the engineer but also on what makes financial sense.

Quote:
3. In the deeply flawed HDX world of swapping between DSP and native processing, Soundgrid latency WILL be above the figures Waves are quoting.
You can monitor at low latency directly from the Soundgrid server.

Alistair
Old 3rd August 2014
  #96
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
I don't think it is likely that NI will support SG but why are you so categorically sure?
Because Gilad Keren told me NI is NOT going to support Soundgrid.

Quote:
Soundgrid has a VASTLY larger market than HDX. It works for all DAWs. The cheapest Soundgrid server starts at $450. That means that Waves can even tap in to the relatively low-end home producer market that might otherwise get a UAD card or something like that. Even the top of the range Extreme Server is only $2490.

Here is a blurb from the Waves site: "SoundGrid Extreme can run over 500 instances of Waves stereo SSL E-Channel or C4 Multiband Compressor plugins, with latency as low as 0.8 milliseconds!" If I was UA, I would be keeping a very close eye on how SG develops.

When it comes to understanding the market and what type of solutions make sense, Avid are utterly and completely clueless. Instead of adapting to the reality of the changing audio market they retreat into an ever decreasing niche market and try to force people into their overpriced, ill-thought out HDX / HD|Native products. It looks like these products were conceived in the 20th century and not relatively new products. It makes no sense.

Besides that, Soundgrid also has the whole live sound market to tap into. Waves are already partnering with DigiCo for the hardware. I'm not very familiar with the live sound market but if/when you have live consoles with seem-less integration of Soundgrid it becomes very interesting for 3rd parties.

EDIT: I see there are already fully integrated solutions for Yamaha consoles: Compact Combo for Yamaha | Hardware | Waves In other words, Soundgrid already has a larger potential target market than HDX plugins will ever have.

Did Avid release a new product while I wasn't paying attention? Oh you mean HDX. HDX is not state of the art. HDX is based on outdated technology from the get go. Avid should have gone with a much more powerful and cheaper Intel solution instead of outdated and expensive DSP tech. Besides being cheaper, much more powerful and much more scalable, it also makes plugin development much easier and cheaper. Avid is a dinosaur that understands neither modern technology solutions nor modern business and market realities.

Waves Soundgrid makes much more sense.
When I said HDX was state of art I was being sarcastic. It obviously isn't and I should have made that more clear.

Quote:
There is a large post for TV market where decisions are not just made by owner-operators. Decisions are made based not just on what is easiest for the engineer but also on what makes financial sense.



You can monitor at low latency directly from the Soundgrid server.

Alistair
I'm talking about the latency incurred when you have plug-in chains where native or SG plug- ins follow HDX DSP processing. Never ideal but something that increasingly happens because of the dearth of HDX plug-ins available. You have no choice but to run many plug-ins natively because that's all that is available. You didn't really want for anything with TDM.
Old 3rd August 2014
  #97
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy View Post
Because Gilad Keren told me NI is NOT going to support Soundgrid.
Thanks for clarifying that!

Quote:
When I said HDX was state of art I was being sarcastic. It obviously isn't and I should have made that more clear.
Again, thanks for clarifying.

Quote:
I'm talking about the latency incurred when you have plug-in chains were native or SG plug- ins follow HDX DSP processing. Never ideal but something that increasingly happens because of the dearth of HDX plug-ins available. You have no choice but to run many plug-ins natively because that's all that is available. You didn't really want for anything with TDM.
Yes I understood that but isn't the monitoring signal tapped off before the whole PT HDX engine? So A/D -> Soundgrid -> Low latency processed signal to Cues plus clean signal to PT for recording.

Maybe I misunderstood how this works.

Alistair
Old 3rd August 2014
  #98
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Innervisions View Post
That depends on the unit. Something like the upcoming IOX (a 1U non server 12-input, 6-output solution) could be a great solution for a home studio or even a a live band, since it serves as one interface for multiple computers, and also offers very high end I/O (and the option to the connect to other SG-compatible devices).
There's no question that audio over IP is the future.
Old 3rd August 2014
  #99
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy View Post
Apparently it's comparatively easy to port to Soundgrid. Being an Intel based platform, SG uses the same x86 instruction set the native DAW plug-in formats are already coded in.
This is a key point and if proved to be true (by wide adoption of SG format PI's by 3rd party) will bode very well.

I also agree with the person who sees the HDX/HDN lines not keeping up with the times. HDX is firmly entrenched at the hi end of post and music and in Pro Tools land is the ONLY way to get more then 64 i/o.

If I were buying a brand new studio set today - SG would be a strong contender on paper. SG for studio is still brand new. Will be very interested in how reviews and 3rd party support develop.
Old 4th August 2014
  #100
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdy View Post
I'm talking about the latency incurred when you have plug-in chains where native or SG plug- ins follow HDX DSP processing. Never ideal but something that increasingly happens because of the dearth of HDX plug-ins available. You have no choice but to run many plug-ins natively because that's all that is available. You didn't really want for anything with TDM.
[/Quote]

That is correct unfortunately. At least for now, monitoring using non-SG compatible plugins in the chain would mean bringing the signal into the DAW for monitoring, and getting the same latency you get right now.

However you can certainly have non SG compatible plugins in the chain, and still use StudioRack as your monitoring chain with low latency, without removing your non SG plugins. The entire chain with both SG and non-SG plugins will be playable during PB (without changing anything), and during recording only the StudioRack chain will be heard.
Old 4th August 2014
  #101
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Yes I understood that but isn't the monitoring signal tapped off before the whole PT HDX engine? So A/D -> Soundgrid -> Low latency processed signal to Cues plus clean signal to PT for recording.
That is accurate.
Old 4th August 2014
  #102
Lives for gear
So for HD Native using DLS what is the latency of this chain at 44.1kHz?

Mic --> AVID i/o --> PT11 with StudioRack with 4 zero latency Waves PI's running off of dsp in DLS --> AVID i/o --> Headphones?

Is it
AVID A/D time +
0.8 ms DLS in/out +
AVID D/A time?

1.9ms + 0.8ms = 2.7ms

So the Session buffer with HD Native has no impact - right?

-----

I also understand we must be careful that many Waves PI's are NOT zero additional delay (like CLA vocals 193 samples = 4.3ms -- or -- Ren Comp 64 samples = 1.45ms - or - Kramer HLS channel 161 samples ... etc...)...
Old 4th August 2014
  #103
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProPower View Post
So for HD Native using DLS what is the latency of this chain at 44.1kHz?

Mic --> AVID i/o --> PT11 with StudioRack with 4 zero latency Waves PI's running off of dsp in DLS --> AVID i/o --> Headphones?

Is it
AVID A/D time +
0.8 ms DLS in/out +
AVID D/A time?

1.9ms + 0.8ms = 2.7ms

So the Session buffer with HD Native has no impact - right?

-----

I also understand we must be careful that many Waves PI's are NOT zero additional delay (like CLA vocals 193 samples = 4.3ms -- or -- Ren Comp 64 samples = 1.45ms - or - Kramer HLS channel 161 samples ... etc...)...
I'm no latency expert, so don't expect me for exact numbers, but from my understanding and experience that is how the system works.
Old 4th August 2014
  #104
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

I can't imagine there won't be VIs running on the waves servers and quite possibly even dedicated VI DSP servers. These things can all talk to each other. People are projecting '90s DAW technology concepts on something that's quite different and more powerful.
Old 11th August 2014
  #105
Gear Nut
 

it seems like all the talk about this is mostly speculation. has anyone actually been using sound grid studio in the real world yet (other than umit)? not talking just about studio rack which many peole have now but i mean the whole thing with the digigrid interfaces.

one thing in particular i’m trying to figure out is the difference between an interface with a built in server and those without. it seems cheaper to buy one without and get a server separately. is the main difference the amount of processing power or is there some other aspect to it? or are the separate servers more for live use?
Old 11th August 2014
  #106
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

My understanding is that it interfaces with Pro Tools exactly the same way any piece of networked hardware would.
Old 12th August 2014
  #107
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
My understanding is that it interfaces with Pro Tools exactly the same way any piece of networked hardware would.
in that case i guess the benefit of getting the interface with built in server is its the most processing power? i'm not running a full facility, just a modest setup and if we're talking about pro tools then when looking at the pricing for those boxes it seems like the DLI and one of the separate servers for $400 or 700 is a better deal. even with the $1400 server it comes out to almost $500 less than buying the DLS.

the other question i have is if i'm using both cubase and pro tools native what is more fitting - the DLS/DLI or the IOS? they both seem to work with everything. i don't need the input/preamps in the IOS so is that the main difference or is there something else to it? i like the idea of networking with different DAWs but it's a little confusing if one DAW acts as the main one and you need to have a certain interface for that, or it doesn't matter? on the website they say that the DLS/DLI is for pro tools and the iOS is for native DAWs, but then they say they all work with every DAW.
Old 12th August 2014
  #108
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

I'd hold off until we know more details. You'd be running Pro Tools in ASIO or Core Audio mode if you use IOS.

DLS or DLI along with a server and switch are for use with HD hardware.
Old 12th August 2014
  #109
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew AE View Post
one thing in particular i’m trying to figure out is the difference between an interface with a built in server and those without. it seems cheaper to buy one without and get a server separately. is the main difference the amount of processing power or is there some other aspect to it? or are the separate servers more for live use?
What problem are you trying to solve with SG/DG?
Old 12th August 2014
  #110
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
Why Digigrid is no go for me?
-There are plenty of great plugs today that are equal to better than what Waves are doing. Waves no long have a unique set of tools
-Loosing I/O on my HDX cards to use plug-ins does not working in my particular situation since each HDX only has 64 channels of I/O
-buying/upgrading more expensive sound grid plug-ins is lame.
-Digigrid only supports Waves Plug-ins
-DSP power is lame the Waves Extreme server is not all that I can stack up plugs all day long on my E5 2013 MacPro and my 2 x UAD Quad's and 2 x UAD Satellites.
Old 14th August 2014
  #111
Lives for gear
 
Stimmt's Avatar
 

I think I understand this technology a bit better now: The Vienna Ensemble has to be installed on both systems, the host and the one it streams from. BUT (!!!): Both sytems have to be OSX or Windows to have the streaming working over ethernet.

The DSP Box from Waves is an embedded Linux system though. So you MUST install an ASIO driver for it to be able to communicate with your host Operating System. As you can install only one ASIO driver (at least on Windows) you also have to use Soundgrid as your physical I/O Interface. Imperative! With Pro Tools HD being its own hardware system, they created a different box because the Soundgrid Plugins have to be streamed over the real physical HD I/O Hardware.

Bad News as I thought this technology would work like a UAD where you just offload Processing Power to a DSP but use whatever Interface you please.

Now this shows us one elemental discovery. It is not possible for an embedded system based on an Intel Cpu to work seamlessly like a realtime DSP. UAD cards work over PCI, so their drivers can easily work "within" an ASIO system. An external Intel box works over ethernet streaming, but it has to be the ASIO driver "itself", so to speak. This is cumbersome, and leads us to the question whether it will ever be possible to use a High Power Intel type CPU over a PCI type Protocol, just like a GPU, but especially designed for audio processing. I guess we will not see this day because the Pro Audio world is just too small for this to be developed. Would be great if Microsoft or Apple would come together with Intel/Nvidia to propose such a development, but does anybody believe this could ever happen? Guess not. So we are left with this powerful idea from Waves with a cumbersome implementation.

Now if AVID themselves would have designed Pro Tools HD around such a hardware it could have been a different story, maybe. But I guess the future of Realtime-DSP really lies in FPGA based solutions connected over High Speed PCI/TB.
Old 15th August 2014
  #112
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

FWIW UAD cards working over PCI have a massive amount of latency.
Old 15th August 2014
  #113
Lives for gear
 
Stimmt's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
FWIW UAD cards working over PCI have a massive amount of latency.
Absolutely. Therefore it would be best to have one solution platform for all developers (regardless of DAWs, Plugins etc) to work on.
But this solution could only be offered by Microsoft/Apple themselves in cooperation with Intel/Nvidia. Everything UAD/Waves/Avid/Fairlight etc are doing is trying to build a latency free dedicated system within a general purpose machine, making the shortcomings of the latter a little bit more workable/bearable. So e.g. you pick Pro Tools HD as your main system. Great! Now you want to use Waves Plugins latency free? Go buy their hardware. UAD Plugins? Go buy their hardware! A multitude of different proprietary solutions with different instruction sets, all adding to the complication of having a diverse Audio Eco System. Adding compatability issues and maintainance cost therefore. Some people say DSP is outdated, but now we can see that embedded CPU has its shortcomings too. There is not one good solution, except the big ones above are willing to bring it along and cooperate! Until then we walk on crutches with different coulors.
Old 15th August 2014
  #114
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Everything has shortcomings. I happen to think all DAWs have too much monitoring latency and highly recommend an analog signal path between their ear and their instrument or voice. This has been a real ear/eye opener for a number of friends. Latency starts screwing up performances long before it becomes identifiable as such to listeners.
Old 15th August 2014
  #115
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
For your situation it doesn't seem to bring much of interest to the table but bear with me as I don't quite understand some of your points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
Why Digigrid is no go for me?
-There are plenty of great plugs today that are equal to better than what Waves are doing. Waves no long have a unique set of tools
-Digigrid only supports Waves Plug-ins
This is currently true but when/if plugins from other manufacturers become available this argument loses weight.

Quote:
-Loosing I/O on my HDX cards to use plug-ins does not working in my particular situation since each HDX only has 64 channels of I/O
Maybe I am misunderstanding how the system works but don't plugin insert connections go over the Ethernet connection thus not losing any I/O? See this picture:



Quote:
-buying/upgrading more expensive sound grid plug-ins is lame.
How does it differ from paying extra for AAX DSP plugins?

Quote:
-DSP power is lame the Waves Extreme server is not all that I can stack up plugs all day long on my E5 2013 MacPro and my 2 x UAD Quad's and 2 x UAD Satellites.
Based on various HDX benchmarks and the performance claims of Waves, it seems to be more powerful than a HDX card and an Extreme server costs less than a HDX card. ( $7000 for the HDX card. $2500 for the Waves Extreme server). So I don't understand this point.

Alistair
Old 17th August 2014
  #116
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProPower View Post
What problem are you trying to solve with SG/DG?
the main things i like about SG/DG is being able to offload the processing to a server and the networking between different DAWs. be able to have a writing/recording session everyone can be on their own DAW and record with effects without latency. since i use mostly waves plugins i'm intrigued and for the few plugs that aren't waves i can wait until they come out in SG version. the question is how long it will really take them until they start adding more plugs from other companies but as i said most of my stuff is waves so it's not a deal breaker for me.
Old 17th August 2014
  #117
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
Why Digigrid is no go for me?
-There are plenty of great plugs today that are equal to better than what Waves are doing. Waves no long have a unique set of tools
-Loosing I/O on my HDX cards to use plug-ins does not working in my particular situation since each HDX only has 64 channels of I/O
-buying/upgrading more expensive sound grid plug-ins is lame.
-Digigrid only supports Waves Plug-ins
-DSP power is lame the Waves Extreme server is not all that I can stack up plugs all day long on my E5 2013 MacPro and my 2 x UAD Quad's and 2 x UAD Satellites.
you say Digigrid is a no go because it's only waves but you have UAD. isn't that the same thing as far as closing yourself into a system? at least Didigrid will support more companies later on. and i thought i saw that SG plugins are a free upgrade for TDM users (i could be wrong).
Old 17th August 2014
  #118
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew AE View Post
the main things i like about SG/DG is being able to offload the processing to a server and the networking between different DAWs.
These are excellent reasons to own SG/DG

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew AE View Post
be able to have a writing/recording session everyone can be on their own DAW and record with effects without latency.
Latency is variable and has different values and different workflows for exact hardware configurations. No digital system has "NO" latency.
Old 17th August 2014
  #119
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

When people talk about zero latency, they are really talking about zero additional latency to their DAW's buffer.
Old 28th August 2014
  #120
Could someone describe what I would need and how it would b configured to fit with my system in order to offload the processing of my plugins to a Soundgrid system. I am having trouble picturing the set up.

Gear:

Mac Pro
Orion 32 converter
16 channels of preamps

I record live bands, do tons of overdub sessions, and even more mixing. Surprisingly enough the DAW that I use is Ableton Live 9 for recording, mixing, and post production for film.

A lot of the band sessions end up with 180+ tracks, and I am definitely beginning to run into CPU load issues as I start stacking up plugins, so having a way to offload this processing to another machine would really make my life easier.

I appreciate any insight into how I would put a system together to fit my needs.
Topic:
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump