Quote:
Originally Posted by
xmein
Wait what?!?!? I just checked that DOC. Am i missing something.
Is that their official document? Because it's missing more then half values, i mean like almost it's useless there is no DSP chart?
There is only one device covered. And there is zero technical description. What sample rate is being used for that device? Buffer size? This document can't be their official DSP chart?
wtf?
....nowhere does it say official...
Is a user made one since antelope didn't do one themselves. Also, those instance counts don't rely on buffer/etc because its all done on the hardware outside of the software buffer.
The instance counts are what the control panel shows is available. What Antelope fails at explaining, is what specific FX work on which part of the FPGA.
For example, if I load up 15 instances of one of the vintage compressors like the Liverpool, I am left with only 1 mono instance left on that part of the FPGA. BUT, if its a VCA160 or a X903, I still have another 16 mono instances available to use.
Unlike UAD and others which just take over whichever processor is available, antelopes has dedicated sections of the FPGA for the specific plugins. You aren't able to load up only instances of a 670 compressor and have it use ALL of the fpga, just not designed that way.
NOW, why I think antelope are adding the ARM chips, is because currently offline rendering does not work with the way the FPGA is implemented. The FPGA treats the audio in the analog realm, not in the digital realm (correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure thats how it works) With many users workflow relying on offline rendering, to make the AFX2DAW a viable/competitive option compared to competitors which already allow offline rendering.
I would love to hear what Sam Antelope Audio's thoughts on this. Again, take this with a grain of salt since I don't work for Antelope (Although I wouldn't mind if they need someone to do this kind of tech explaining so they can actually get more customers, Sam, you got any open spots over there??).
The doc isn't supposed to be definitive of anything, just a quick reference to see what it is available with what. It is definitely a work in progress since I am asking users who have those interfaces to list their numbers...really something Antelope themselves should take the 30 minutes to do and add to their support page.