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
Digidesign Pro Tools Next Move Audio Interfaces
Old 23rd November 2009
  #301
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
Obviously, you've got a point. My point is that if I can tell a clear difference ABing hi rez and redbook versions of my own track in my own space, that's enough for me. Though, I've rarely demoed the difference for someone where they didn't appreciate it given the chance, I don't care if anyone can pick my track out from the pack as better. I know that I've contributed to more depth of beauty in the world. That's the reality that motivates me. Clearly, you relate to it differently, and I honor that. Like I said, each to his own. My only regret is that quality isn't promoted more, because I believe that if it was, we'd be living in a more beautiful world, with less of the destructive consequences of self perpetuating insensitivity. Maybe not your thing...
It's a noble aspiration, but the argument is flawed, as if you are saying by recording at a higher sampling rate you are "contributing" to the beauty in the world, and if you record at 44.1, one not only isn't, but is actually promoting banality and "destructive consequences." You need to get out more

Just kidding. If I could hear a big difference, to be honest I wouldn't care whether the audience could hear it or not either, so I do understand where you're coming from.

TH
Old 23rd November 2009
  #302
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
It's a noble aspiration, but the argument is flawed, as if you are saying by recording at a higher sampling rate you are "contributing" to the beauty in the world, and if you record at 44.1, one not only isn't, but is actually promoting banality and "destructive consequences." You need to get out more

Just kidding. If I could hear a big difference, to be honest I wouldn't care whether the audience could hear it or not either, so I do understand where you're coming from.

TH
heh I think you get it that I'm not saying that recording at redbook is not not contributing beauty....

As well as loving the "content" of music, just as with great instruments, I get inspired by the depth of the tone, etc. itself and I love the increased depth and subtlety that is captured by hi rez. So for me, more of that beauty is "contributed" by hi rez. To that end, I value equipment that has the resolution to reveal as much as possible. As it has been a major focus of mine, I'm well trained in my ability to hear nuances that many haven't payed any mind to. My feeling is that although the average person may not notice or care, it nonetheless all registers on some level.

BTW, I get out plenty although you'd never know it by how much I post here; something that's gotta stop! ;-)
Old 23rd November 2009
  #303
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
heh I think you get it that I'm not saying that recording at redbook is not not contributing beauty....

As well as loving the "content" of music, just as with great instruments, I get inspired by the depth of the tone, etc. itself and I love the increased depth and subtlety that is captured by hi rez. So for me, more of that beauty is "contributed" by hi rez. To that end, I value equipment that has the resolution to reveal as much as possible. As it has been a major focus of mine, I'm well trained in my ability to hear nuances that many haven't payed any mind to. My feeling is that although the average person may not notice or care, it nonetheless all registers on some level.

BTW, I get out plenty although you'd never know it by how much I post here; something that's gotta stop! ;-)
I definitely feel that way too, at times anyway. I think it's material dependent. I do think that if I were doing a Diana Krall album it would move me to want to use the highest sample rate I could, while if I were doing something by The Killers I would care less, not because I don't respect The Killers, just because I think that beauty you speak of would be better revealed in certain material.

Anyway you look at it, I guess I need to explore the higher sampling rates more. I've used it only a few times, on small stuff, a few acoustic guitars, bass, and drum and vocal things. It was definitely impressive, I THINK. Since I knew I was recording at the higher rate I instantly thought it sounded better. Not a fair test But I'm sure it does, at least in a control room environment.....

Tom
Old 23rd November 2009
  #304
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Not if you're composing using VIs in AU, VST or RTAS. We're miles still from "pretty close."

I see so many post that say Logic is in a league of it's own, or or PT is in a league of it's own or PT or Logic blows, etc. Very few seem to have the overall picture in front of them at all times...that the editor/mixer's needs on a TDM DAW is radically different than a songwriter's needs on a MacBook, both being "pro audio" professionals. As a composer, I couldn't give a toss about ADC, but as you know, I'm freaking for Freeze Track which would save me at at least a half day work per week in printing and writing all these posts. I bet you can live without Freeze. Of course this is related to the light vs dark GUI battle. All of these different tasks must be done with the same software. (and should be for workflow's sake.)

As far as storage space, that is one are where we're solidly "there." Videos aren't going beyond HD specs for years to come and audio is not going beyond 96k for years to come, but hard drives breath easier and easier every year. Seagate 1.5GB 7200 go for $80 sometimes. With Time Machine everyone can duplicate or triplicate everything with ease and little cost. In the storage arena, we're golden.

And Kenny, yes, for editing, CPU wise, we're pretty much there and have been for a while. For mixing, we're pretty much there too if you have a multicore intel chip, TDM system or loads of I/O with outboard. In songwriting we're stressing over Freeze Track, VI efficiency, Receptors, running Logic in parallel, the VSL concept, Bidule, etc etc..it's still a serious nightmare.
Yes. But you're proving MY point. All the new cool virtual instruments are Native. So we don't need more DSP cards. We need faster computers. This takes Digidesigns "hardware" concerns out of the picture.

It's been proven that we don't need higher than 44.1, or anymore powerful EQ's and compressors. Even reverbs are good enough.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #305
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
Absolutely. And VIs/sample developers are just getting more and more adventurous.

The whole thing is like when your house is crowded with too much stuff and you say "Man, we need a bigger place." You know what happens. You get a bigger place, and now you have more room for more stuff. And on it goes.

TH
All very true but it goes back to my OP. Digidesign or Avid are now competing on an even playing field with other "creative software" solutions. The hardware dominance will cease to exist.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #306
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
All very true but it goes back to my OP. Digidesign or Avid are now competing on an even playing field with other "creative software" solutions. The hardware dominance will cease to exist.
I think Digi will still rule in the native arena because latency when recording in Native is still a problem. If you want to record with amp simulators, etc, it's a huge pain. HD takes care of this, and if I were a betting man I predict you will see a native PT LE system in the next few months that at the very least has enough DSP onboard to eliminate that problem. Using those built in mixers like on the RME etc, is not the same as just using the DAW in record mode with whatever you want on as a plug. This will, I predict, put PT at the head of the native game, especially once LE is optimized for all the VIs, which Digi has already stated they are working on.

TH
Old 23rd November 2009
  #307
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
I think Digi will still rule in the native arena because latency when recording in Native is still a problem. If you want to record with amp simulators, etc, it's a huge pain. HD takes care of this, and if I were a betting man I predict you will see a native PT LE system in the next few months that at the very least has enough DSP onboard to eliminate that problem. Using those built in mixers like on the RME etc, is not the same as just using the DAW in record mode with whatever you want on as a plug. This will, I predict, put PT at the head of the native game, especially once LE is optimized for all the VIs, which Digi has already stated they are working on.

TH
I have heard that the Eleven Rack interface has had great results with latency. Don't know how they do it.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #308
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Hi, here's a list of TDM latency values (from the old daw-mac list).

Maybe I misunderstand you, oceantracks, but are you suggesting that plug-ins in today's computers add more latency than the latency added by these old-ish TDM chips? Source?

Quote:
I paste the following without being able to verify the accuracy of the
info, but being from the Logic TDM list, I think it will be useful:

cheers,
aeon

------------------------------------

TDM Plugin Latency List:

the number following the plugin name represents the number of samples of
delay that the plugin causes to your audio sync with other tracks that
have no plugins on them. the numbers are additive: the more plugins you
add, the later your audio will play back. simply add the numbers together
and compensate accordingly by using another plugin (such as Waves TDM DLA
Plugin) or adjusting the timing of your individual tracks to suit.

Aphex Aural Exciter 2
Amp Farm 17
Autotune 1
Big Bottom 2
BNR 1537
D-Verb 2
Declicker 8193
Digi Dither 4
DPP-1 2
Drawmer ECL/GCL 6
Drawmer HPF/LPF 2
FilterBank 1
Focusrite D2 1
GRM Resonators 1
Hum removal 2
Lexiverb 2
Lo-fi 405
MDT 4
PAA 1
Pitch Doctor 3925
Pitch Blender 1
Procrastinator 1
Pure Pitch 5116
Recti-fi 2
Sci-fi 2
TC Chorus 1
TC Master X 135
TC Mega Reverb 1
TC Reverb 1
Timeblender 1
Truverb / PAZ 1
PS22 1
Q1 1
Ren comp 65
Ren EQ 1
C1 c/g 341
C1 comp/schain 341
C1 comp 1
De-esser 1
IDR 1
L1 65
MaxxBass 1


This info comes directly form the Logic TDM Users Group

For problems, unsubscribe etc: http://www.daw-mac.com

Most native plugins add zero latency, 0 samples. Some algorithms add latency, but the same algos also add latencies in TDM systems.



About using TDM in Venue:
Live Sound: TDM Plug-Ins: Effective Live Sound Tools - Pro Sound Web
Quote:
At 48K, the console’s sample rate is 0.02 milliseconds. In addition to the latency of each plug-in, there are 3 samples of DSP chip delay, plus 2 samples for each instance.

A plug-in with 5 samples of latency will add 3 + 5 + 2, or 10 samples for 0.2 milliseconds of added delay. A channel with two plug-ins, one with 25 samples and another with 16 samples, will add 3 + (25 + 2) + (16 + 2), or 48 samples and add 1.0 millisecond of delay.

With no plug-ins, the console has less than 2.8 ms of latency. Low-latency plug-ins won’t affect latency critical applications, such as in-ear monitoring.
2.8 milliseconds is pretty much what you get in a good native system like eg. Aurora Lynx.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #309
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
Muscle muscle muscle. That's not the ideal road. Like is so often the case, the best solution lies outside of the box, with brain, not brawn.

Like I first said, it needs to be more and more about THE DAW SOFTWARE from here on out.

It doesn't need to be about expensive hardware cards or Eleven racks or Receptors, clusters, 16 core computers, rewriting VIs to be super efficient, native vs dedicated DSP, blah blah blah.

The CPU struggle can be won with improvements in software workflow methodology. Most computers that we use can push at least 60-180 tracks of audio. You spend a bit more for 180 tracks. Fine, we're good there.

The trick is to turn demanding plugins like reverbs and compressors etc and VIs into audio, automatically, seamlessly, painlessly, quickly and automatically deactivate the plugin and without the huge hassles of printing chaos, making twice as many tracks, deactivating tracks hiding etc etc nightmare of old school printing. And then back again in a split second when you need to edit the track or plug in settings. We have audio rendering already in PT, it's called Audiosuite, but the seamless workflow is not there with Audiosuite. But this workflow has been made nearly perfect on most other major DAWs and it's called Freeze Track. You render CPU intensive plugins into simple audio tracks. YOU'RE plugin and VI count is ONLY LIMITED BY YOUR AUDIO TRACK COUNT. TDM systems can't even do this. When your CPU is loaded down, you don't buy Accel cards or a Receptor, or an RTAS rack, you Freeze in 15 seconds and unfreeze in 1 second.

Maybe there's a better solution than Freeze track in the future…the point is, we don't need to have a 100 plugins running at once, we only need the one or even the 20 that we're editing active at once. All the rest should be audio tracks. Make plugin>audio track>plugin rapid, seamless, automatic and easy in THE SOFTWARE.

Now, why hasn't simple common sense taken the lead at Avid? Maybe because they depend on us to need powerful dedicated hardware.

But the battle is already won.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #310
Lives for gear
 
synthoid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
I think Digi will still rule in the native arena because latency when recording in Native is still a problem. If you want to record with amp simulators, etc, it's a huge pain.
Not as much of a pain as not being able to use the amp simulator at all because it's not available in TDM format.

It's expensive to develop plug-ins for TDM format. You have to use different compilers, work in different arithmetic formats, etc. Lots of things that are easy to do and that perform very well on a modern Intel processor with its SSE extensions are difficult or practically impossible to do on a Motorola 56K. On top of that, the number of units you can expect to sell in that format is falling every year. The net effect is that it's harder and harder to sell 3d party developers on the idea of releasing TDM versions of their new plug-ins.

Once you have just one or two critical plug-ins that you need to run on the host while tracking, the whole TDM equation changes. You have no choice at that point but to take up the fight against native latency. And once you do that, you end up with a system that can run all the plug-ins natively, not only the one or two critical ones that aren't available in TDM format.

-synthoid
Old 23rd November 2009
  #311
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Muscle muscle muscle. That's not the ideal road. Like is so often the case, the best solution lies out of the box, with brain, not brawn.

Like I first said, it's going to be more and more about THE DAW SOFTWARE from here on out.

It doesn't need to be about expensive hardware cards or Eleven racks or Receptors, distributed system nodes, 16 core computers, or rewriting VIs to be super efficient etc etc.

The CPU struggle can be won with improvements in software workflow methodology. Most computers that we use can push at least 60-180 tracks of audio. You spend a bit more for 180 tracks. Fine, we're good there.

The trick is to turn demanding plugins like reverbs and compressors etc and VIs into audio, seamlessly, painlessly, quickly and deactivate the plugin and without the huge hassles of printing chaos, making twice as many tracks, deactivating tracks hiding etc etc nightmare of old school printing. And then back again in a split second when you need to edit the track or plug in settings. We have it already in PT, it's called Audiosuite, but the seamless workflow is not there with Audiosuite. But this workflow has been made nearly perfect on most other major DAWs and it's called Freeze Track. You turn CPU intensive plugins into simple audio tracks. YOU'RE ONLY LIMITED BY YOUR AUDIO TRACK COUNT. TDM systems can't even do this. When your CPU is loaded down, you don't buy HD cards or a receptor, or an RTAS rack, you Freeze in 15 seconds and unfreeze in 1 second. The workflow is superb and there is no printing chaos, making twice as many tracks, deactivating tracks hiding etc etc nightmare.

Maybe there's a better solution than Freeze track in the future…the point is, we don't need to have a 100 plugins running at once, we only need the one or even the 20 that we're editing active at once. All the rest can be audio tracks. Make this seamless, quick and easy in THE SOFTWARE.

Now, why hasn't simple common sense taken the lead at Avid? Maybe because they depend on us to need powerful dedicated hardware.

But the battle is already won.
I agree on Freeze, but somebody better get it working consistently. Sometimes in Logic is fine, other times there are artifacts and you spend more wasted time hunting that down. Right now I'm using "Bounce in Place" a bunch and it's nearly as good. But yes we've all been pleading with Digi for ages for freeze. It's been met with the same reception the suggestion of having folders in the audio bin has

TH
Old 23rd November 2009
  #312
Lives for gear
 
C Heat's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Muscle muscle muscle. That's not the ideal road. Like is so often the case, the best solution lies out of the box, with brain, not brawn.

Like I first said, it's going to be more and more about THE DAW SOFTWARE from here on out.

It doesn't need to be about expensive hardware cards or Eleven racks or Receptors, distributed system nodes, 16 core computers, rewriting VIs to be super efficient, native vs dedicated DSP, blah blah blah.

The CPU struggle can be won with improvements in software workflow methodology. Most computers that we use can push at least 60-180 tracks of audio. You spend a bit more for 180 tracks. Fine, we're good there.

The trick is to turn demanding plugins like reverbs and compressors etc and VIs into audio, automatically, seamlessly, painlessly, quickly and automatically deactivate the plugin and without the huge hassles of printing chaos, making twice as many tracks, deactivating tracks hiding etc etc nightmare of old school printing. And then back again in a split second when you need to edit the track or plug in settings. We have audio rendering already in PT, it's called Audiosuite, but the seamless workflow is not there with Audiosuite. But this workflow has been made nearly perfect on most other major DAWs and it's called Freeze Track. You turn CPU intensive plugins into simple audio tracks. YOU'RE plugin and VI count is ONLY LIMITED BY YOUR AUDIO TRACK COUNT. TDM systems can't even do this. When your CPU is loaded down, you don't buy Accel cards or a receptor, or an RTAS rack, you Freeze in 15 seconds and unfreeze in 1 second.

Maybe there's a better solution than Freeze track in the future…the point is, we don't need to have a 100 plugins running at once, we only need the one or even the 20 that we're editing active at once. All the rest should be audio tracks. Make plugin>audio track>plugin rapid, seamless, automatic and easy in THE SOFTWARE.

Now, why hasn't simple common sense taken the lead at Avid? Maybe because they depend on us to need powerful dedicated hardware.

But the battle is already won.
Amen to that brother.

+ a trillion...
Old 23rd November 2009
  #313
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

"Now, why hasn't simple common sense taken the lead at Avid? Maybe because they depend on us to need powerful dedicated hardware."

Yep.

Until everyone accepts the fact that Digidesign is a hardware company these posts will go on and on and on.

Digidesign sells great software to go with their HARDWARE. They will never be an all native DAW. Never. Ever. Forget it. You will always be buying some kind of glorified dongle with them (and I say that with all due respect, I love Pro Tools) and one either has to accept that or move to Logic or Nuendo, et al.


TH
Old 23rd November 2009
  #314
Registered User
 

has anyone mentioned how Protools LE does not have ADC, freeze, VCA's and limited tracks count yet. I think Protools LE should have all the same the same features of HD
That way all these whiner threads can move to the moan zone like with all the cry baby moaner threads
Old 23rd November 2009
  #315
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hipass View Post
has anyone mentioned how Protools LE does not have ADC, freeze, VCA's and limited tracks count yet. I think Protools LE should have all the same the same features of HD
That way all these whiner threads can move to the moan zone like with all the cry baby moaner threads
If you think HD has freeze, it causes me to wonder about the rest of your info.

Why don't you post the details (any details) of the next music system from Avid to give us something to chew upon. You claim to have seen it...
Old 23rd November 2009
  #316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey MTC View Post
Ummm .... right click on the bus number at a bus output or input point, select rename, type new informative name. I can't imagine it being much easier than that.



You've obviously never used one or seen a demo.
But you have to still route the input on the aux channel as well as the output from the routed track. it's still an extra step for both group bussing and creating fx sends. Right click? Maybe that's why you need that fancy Icon mouse, My mac mouse certainly has no right mouse button! Just messin wit ya I'm a PC user at my studio but use macs elsewhere all the time. I didn't know the right click thing, thought you had to go to IO screen to change the label.

about the icon: Ok maybe I was exaggerating about never spending that kind of money on a mouse, but I'd pretty much have to have alot of other really expensive gear first.

And that reminds me another area where Protools is lesser to me, is the numerical displays on the faders. They only have 1 decimal place. Cubendo has 2. Yes I can hear a difference between 2 or 3 hundreths of a db. I do use a control surface actually to get levels close (tascam us2400) and sometimes a little knob movement on the neve summing mixer but for the final final tweaking I, that's right, type in the numbers. Having 1/10th the level resolution is just less control and I'm an admittedly obsessive perfectionist.

Why do I type it instead of just move the Tascam's faders the smallest amount? The faders have less res than typing and like I said I can hear it. They give you the exact same res as moving a fader one pixel on screen does, which in Cubendo is about the same as PT. ( 1/10th a db give or take at levels near 0 because of the logarythmic db scale) I have long dreamed about a console that gives complete control of every parameter simultaneously of the software actually, I just think, for me anyway, $30-80 grand is just too much for that luxury. I'd have to be driving my V12 Vanquish to the studio where I have most everything else I want that really effects the sound. lol

I do respect your opinion. My opinion does, as maybe yours does too, come from a perspective of spending countless hours on PT, Steiny, Logic, and Sonar. I wont lie pro tools is easy, but IMHO easier to get started with, but slower to pull off some more advanced of moves. I can go on but don't need to. My point was just that PT with vrs 8 IMO is no longer waaaay behind Cubendo and Logic anymore. For clarification I didn't mean sound quality or reliability, just features and speed of layout.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #317
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicemix View Post
If you think HD has freeze, it causes me to wonder about the rest of your info.

Why don't you post the details (any details) of the next music system from Avid to give us something to chew upon. You claim to have seen it...
heh hipiss is just whining about the whiners whining LOL Classic
Old 23rd November 2009
  #318
Lives for gear
 
Mikey MTC's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarfishMusic View Post
Right click? Maybe that's why you need that fancy Icon mouse, My mac mouse certainly has no right mouse button! Just messin wit ya I'm a PC user at my studio but use macs elsewhere all the time. I didn't know the right click thing, thought you had to go to IO screen to change the label.
Even on the old skool one button Mac mice, you can still control-click on the area I mentioned to get the pop-up. This works on heaps of different areas around the Pro Tools interface (inputs, outputs, etc etc).
Old 24th November 2009
  #319
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyJeeBiv View Post
i'd love for something new that can sit between current LE and HD systems. partner with established companies and give us an interface with high quality pres and converters, maybe even DSP cards like nativeaudio suggested.
I don't really think they will put something equivalent to "DSP cards" in the interfaces, chips that can run RTAS or similar - but just enough DSP to monitor tracks that are being recorded. Or maybe not even that, since there's practically no difference in latency between TDM and non-TDM systems anymore, on fast computers.

They may of course produce a computer dedicated to running PT only, but the more I think of it, even that seems unrealistic, since computers become "obsolete" (not really obsolete, but you know what I mean) relatively fast.

As an old/ex TDM user, I sometimes visit the DUC to see what's going on there, and from what I can see, Digi has pretty much already said what kind of next move they are working on.

The Digi rep confirms that a lot has happened in the native world since HD was launched, and also that reduced HD sales (of course) were expected. He also talks about Avid really wanting to listen to customers. In another post he talks about what customers ask for: a 'middle' product without the HD prices/DSP cards, but with ADC, more efficient software instruments and so on.

Then some DUC'er indicated that he didn't like the sound of 'middle', whereas the Avid guy said that he wasn't "necessarily" thinking of 'middle' in terms of features, but in terms of price. Personally, I'll just pretend that the word "necessarily" wasn't there.... :-)

In other words: They are working on a native system with pretty much the same features as HD (and more), but without the HD price tag - and without the DSP cards of course (which partially explains the reduced price). If it has the same feature set as HD + real time bounce, freeze, support for interleaved files, proper ADC, dynamic DSP allocation, HD sales will keep fading out. Or more that that, they be discontinued in max. a few years.

The Digi guy also seemed to recognize that RTAS isn't as efficient/optimized as in other DAWs, but that they are working on it.

The thing they may struggle with is the timeline; with *when* they can release something along these lines - and of course, that other DAWs already are way ahead of Avid in terms of native development, and also working on their next updates.

He also talked about everyone being "up in arms". Pardon my non-native English, what does that mean?

Anyway - from what I've read, the discussion is more or less over - they are going high-end native, like "everyone else", and seem to have started that process around a year ago.

They may even [speculation:] launch their new system as a mid-range product at a mid-price point, and let people slowly discover that it's as good as PTHD (with or without some tiny DSP chips in the interfaces, for people who record on laptops etc)... and without really declaring that they'll go "highend native".
Old 24th November 2009
  #320
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
I don't really think they will put something equivalent to "DSP cards" in the interfaces, chips that can run RTAS or similar - but just enough DSP to monitor tracks that are being recorded. Or maybe not even that, since there's practically no difference in latency between TDM and non-TDM systems anymore, on fast computers.

They may of course produce a computer dedicated to running PT only, but the more I think of it, even that seems unrealistic, since computers become "obsolete" (not really obsolete, but you know what I mean) relatively fast.

As an old/ex TDM user, I sometimes visit the DUC to see what's going on there, and from what I can see, Digi has pretty much already said what kind of next move they are working on.

The Digi rep confirms that a lot has happened in the native world since HD was launched, and also that reduced HD sales (of course) were expected. He also talks about Avid really wanting to listen to customers. In another post he talks about what customers ask for: a 'middle' product without the HD prices/DSP cards, but with ADC, more efficient software instruments and so on.

Then some DUC'er indicated that he didn't like the sound of 'middle', whereas the Avid guy said that he wasn't "necessarily" thinking of 'middle' in terms of features, but in terms of price. Personally, I'll just pretend that the word "necessarily" wasn't there.... :-)

In other words: They are working on a native system with pretty much the same features as HD (and more), but without the HD price tag - and without the DSP cards of course (which partially explains the reduced price). If it has the same feature set as HD + real time bounce, freeze, support for interleaved files, proper ADC, dynamic DSP allocation, HD sales will keep fading out. Or more that that, they be discontinued in max. a few years.

The Digi guy also seemed to recognize that RTAS isn't as efficient/optimized as in other DAWs, but that they are working on it.

The thing they may struggle with is the timeline; with *when* they can release something along these lines - and of course, that other DAWs already are way ahead of Avid in terms of native development, and also working on their next updates.

He also talked about everyone being "up in arms". Pardon my non-native English, what does that mean?

Anyway - from what I've read, the discussion is more or less over - they are going high-end native, like "everyone else", and seem to have started that process around a year ago.

They may even [speculation:] launch their new system as a mid-range product at a mid-price point, and let people slowly discover that it's as good as PTHD (with or without some tiny DSP chips in the interfaces, for people who record on laptops etc)... and without really declaring that they'll go "highend native".
If you put LE in Low Latency mode all the plugs in the track you are recording are disabled. That's how they get "low latency." You don't have to do this on HD.

So there better some kind of DSP involved on the mid line product or I don't see what it will be offering besides more busses and other PT features unlocked, which will completely piss of the people who use LE and paid for the CPT, MPT, etc. to get some of those features (more tracks, busses, etc).

TH
Old 24th November 2009
  #321
Lives for gear
 
RonT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
If you put LE in Low Latency mode all the plugs in the track you are recording are disabled. That's how they get "low latency." You don't have to do this on HD.

So there better some kind of DSP involved on the mid line product or I don't see what it will be offering besides more busses and other PT features unlocked, which will completely piss of the people who use LE and paid for the CPT, MPT, etc. to get some of those features (more tracks, busses, etc).

TH
OT but.........I wonder will this work for Mellowmuse ATA? Hmmmmmm just put PTLE in low latency monitoring and the Ping with ATA...Hmmmmmmm ok back to making music!
Old 24th November 2009
  #322
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
He also talked about everyone being "up in arms". Pardon my non-native English, what does that mean?
You have a keen sense of humor, native. That's a classic sentence.

There's a good chance that your post is "right on the money." Know what that expression means?
Old 24th November 2009
  #323
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
If you put LE in Low Latency mode all the plugs in the track you are recording are disabled.
Sure, but the bottleneck still aren't the plugins as such, because plugins in general nowadays (except special algos) don't add much (if any) latency. 1 or zero samples is normal. I don't much about LE, but in Logic there's also a Low Latency Mode that disables plugins with more than a user defined amount of latency - maybe PTLE's LLM is different. In Software Monitoring mode, you'll still get the latency from the drivers/buffers/converters and all that (just like in PTHD). Adding a normal plugin won't make a difference in either system. Adding a high latency plugin will.... cause latency in both systems, often by 1 sample more in the TDM systems for some reason.

So - in both systems, latency is added even if you don't use plugins. PTHD has 105 samples of latency even without a single plugin added, and there's no direct mode available that bypass these 105 samples (but it is in native systems).

Good, PCIe based native systems have latency in the neighborhood of PTHDs 2.4 ms, but these numbers keep decreasing due to several reasons; OS optimizations, DAW optimizations, faster computers, faster converters and so on.

The difference between PTHD and Symphony or Lynx is less than a millisecond. As a reference, if you're a drummer, and hit a cymbal at the same time as you hit your snare, the cymbal will have circa "2 ms latency", if it's 2 feet further away from your ears than your snare.


Quote:
So there better some kind of DSP involved on the mid line
You can get the latency in the circa 2-3 ms range with native systems today, with plugins enabled, and without using Low Latency Mode. If you have a lot of CPU eating software instruments etc., you may want to increase your buffer, and then the latency will increase., but for normal audio work, that's not an issue. The thing is becoming the opposite of what it used to be: people who use a lot of virtual instruments etc may prefer TDM systems, while audio guys are OK with native systems.


Quote:
will completely piss of the people who use LE
Some people who jump on the LE>HD upgrade now, and possibly find that Avid are making their LE range just as good as their HD range shortly after they persuaded LE-users to go HD may of course be annoyed. But what can Avid do, knowing about the new Intel I9 processors (with up to 50% better performance than the i7 line) coming out next year and all that. They have to make some unpopular decisions, and keep producing something which customers want for more than just a year or two.

It's kind of interesting to see how skeptical some HD users on this forum is about host based systems, tracks counts/quality etc, while even Avid's marketing staff is describing the HD discount prices as being in line with other native workstations that "offer similar quality and track count". The Avid guys at the DUC talk about that there always will be new products that will replace existing ones etc., which at least some HD users here seem to deny the possibility of. :-)

So, maybe they won't make a PC-in-disguise box after all. Avid spend a lot of resources on having several, parallel products (Mac/PC/LE/HD etc). Maybe they'll just drop the PC platform instead, so they can speed up their development?
Old 24th November 2009
  #324
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

As soon as they remove the DSP aspect of the program, they are now in competition with programs costing $500.

That would be a big mistake and they know it. They've made an impact by controlling their piece of the pie. DAW features alone can be matched pretty quickly. And they would if they knew they could steal away all the Pro Toolers.

My guess would be some kind of box (like the Waves discontinued box) that provides extra DSP just for RTAS plugins. Then the LE guys could step up to TDM like power if they wanted while keeping the HD guys happy by allowing them to run both. They could even merge the software to be one version so the features would be identical.

Just add TDM or RTAS power as you go. No need to keep buying faster Apple hardware either.

Just a guess.
Old 24th November 2009
  #325
Lives for gear
 
DontLetMeDrown's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
If you put LE in Low Latency mode all the plugs in the track you are recording are disabled. That's how they get "low latency." You don't have to do this on HD.

So there better some kind of DSP involved on the mid line product or I don't see what it will be offering besides more busses and other PT features unlocked, which will completely piss of the people who use LE and paid for the CPT, MPT, etc. to get some of those features (more tracks, busses, etc).

TH
This post kinda sounds like you've been stuck in PTLE land for a while. Welcome to 2009. Using Sonar on an i7, I monitor in realtime with a buffer set at 64 with UAD1 and Soundtoys plugins. I don't have it open now, but I think it is 2.7 ms of latency. There is no perceivable latency that I or any of my clients notice. I really don't like to monitor with FX personally, but I had a client last week that wanted wet vocals. We were able to pull that off even after tracking the entire band + overdubs + reverb and delay sends. Everything went great. No math, no sliding, just makin music.

I have an mbox2mini and MPToolkit for drum editing, but I've tried mixing in LE and there's no way in hell I could do that. Building a mix is hard enough without having to do constant nudges. I want my bands to sound tight, and I don't need one more thing to risk fvcking up. When I add a plug-in or new bus in Sonar, I don't calculate jack. The ADC is out of sight, out of mind. Besides I want to monitor through my Aroura, not through the mbox (or digi192). I would prefer to mix in Pro Tools so I am all in if "nativeaudio" is right. If I could use the Lynx LT-HD card to somehow connect to PTHD or PTLE WITHOUT a DSP card, that would be killer and they would still have everyone locked in their "system". Just give us a simple interface so we can plug-in the digi-link cables that replaces the current DSP cards.

I'd buy that for a dollar!
Attached Thumbnails
Digidesign Pro Tools Next Move-buyfordollar.jpg  
Old 24th November 2009
  #326
Lives for gear
 
lozion's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
My guess would be some kind of box (like the Waves discontinued box) that provides extra DSP just for RTAS plugins.
I think we can look into PT's future based on Digi's latest product, Eleven Rack.
DSP chips embedded in the interface, scaled the way UA does with the UAD-2 card.
Want more power? Then get the "duo" or "Quad" chip version.
Question is what would be the protocol to connect to the host computer.
PCI-E would limit users to Mac Pro's. Digi wouldnt go that route if it wants to cater to their LE/MP user base. Expresscard is out of question too since Apple's recent brilliant decision to limit the expansion bus to the 17" Macbook Pro.
Firewire 400 is showing its age and is being phased out by Apple.
Firewire 800 is still around but I'm not sure it has enough bandwith for external DSP+Lo latency mixer. That leaves us with Ethernet or USB...
Light peak is not there yet and I dont think Digi will wait that long to release a new product.
Old 24th November 2009
  #327
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
Copy/Pasteville From the DUC earlier:


Thankfully, they aren't going to force P.I.T.A. RTAS boxes upon us. That would really blow.

Says DigiTechSupt:

re:External DSP is NOT the CPU Solution Either...Please!
Old 24th November 2009
  #328
Lives for gear
 
PMoshay's Avatar
 

If you ask me, i'd like to go to one manufacturer and get a kick ass upgradeable system (like Digi, Apogee, etc)
I don't wanna keep depending on what Apple is doing, then Waves, Then Antares, etc.
There's too much inter-dependency already.

There's also way too much updating, i'm not even sure why i need all this stuff sometimes.......... i've become addicted like many others and i'm ready to go to music software rehab and kick the habbit.
Hell, i made some great records on Adat's and Akai 1212's.


Run out of power? - bounce some tracks and save time & money....... commit & move forward. Thats what i've been doing
Old 24th November 2009
  #329
Gear Maniac
 
Fred Pearson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotstuff View Post
Hey, zacheus83

ADC = Automatic Delay Compensation
or
PDC = Plugin Delay Compensation,

The lack of this is going to be the deal breaker!

Hotstuff
I was getting SO confused then, I honestly thought people were talking about Analog to Digital Convertors and was wondering what Pro Tools systems these people were using haha?!?!

Peace
Old 24th November 2009
  #330
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaman View Post
Think about ethernet based core systems which handle like 48 I/Os standard
I think ENet has too much latency to handle audio properly, EG the now discontinued Protools HD chassis.
Also the Waves APA unit were ethernet and they had a lot of Latency as well.
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
xirvi / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
cajonezzz / So much gear, so little time
9

Forum Jump
Forum Jump