MTRX = new software recording 384k/DSD
 

Looking at the new MTRZ specifications and wondering if the future of PT will support recording at 384k and DSD?

MTRX Supports 44.1 kHz–384 kHz, as well as DSD 64/DSD 128 with high precision internal clock and PLL

Re: MTRX = new software recording 384k/DSD
 

Wouldn't that be awesome? I'd love to see Avid get outta the '90's and get beyond 192kHz.

I'm running HORUS with ProTools, and I've been planning my exodus from ProTools application software because of this very thing. I've invested many, many years getting fast and efficient in ProTools and it's a shame to chuck it aside and start from scratch in Pyramix (not exactly graceful but necessary) in order to work at 384kHz (DXD) and/or 11.2MHz DSD.

Probably way down the priority list though. I can't imagine the board of directors at Avid are serious enough about high-res audio to risk the (relative) stability of the ProTools software application on it yet, although I'm prepared to be surprised.

In all likelihood, you'll have to build a PC and install Pyramix software and use the AES67 Driver to use your MTRX at sample rates above 192kHz.

Cheers, eh??

Re: MTRX = new software recording 384k/DSD
 

I've personally not experienced any benefit beyond 44.1.

Re: MTRX = new software recording 384k/DSD
 

Noise floor diminishes amplifiers/components transparency.
(25db), I'm at 37-47db.

In my case an age factor arises it's own identifiable noise floor.

(different type of digital storage Store-Restore quickly without DSP penalty from running 44.1Khz)

Re: MTRX = new software recording 384k/DSD
 

A small correction, DXD is not 384Khz fs but 352.8 kHz/24bit.

As far as audio definition goes, yes, it would be interesting if AVID would make PT able to record in DXD/DSD, although DXD was developed by Merging, the makers of Pyramix.

My guess is that it is not a priority for AVID. The MTRX, made by DAD for AVID, is a complete gateway box for PT, to address immersive sound and broadcast interfacing, due to it´s extensive I/O implementation and routing capabilities which features DAC/ADC, MADI, AES/EBU and Dante in a single box (card dependent), thus allowing a high I/O, needed for Atmos for instance.

In practical terms, I thing that post people won´t bother working at more than 48 or 96 Khz, as higher sampling rates will also need more system resources to handle track counts, plugin processing etc. And the finished product will be downsampled for distribution anyway, so no much gain there IMHO. DSD is out of the question in post too, due to it´s limited editing capabilities.

The main use of DSD/DXD, is for music recording and there yes, you can clearly hear the diference in terms of sonic quality and what a converter like the MTRX could make if capable of interfacing PT in those formats. Of course that the in the box summing engine and DSD implementation in PT would need to be great too, as not all coding is the same.

Although I´ve been using PT more lately, due to working freelancing most of the time in post, I´m also a Pyramix user and I did some recordings in both DXD and DSD in the past using a Sphynx converter (not in production anymore), which is also a DAD made converter under Merging´s specs.

In a way, Merging could have also manufactured a high end converter for AVID, as they manufacture the also excellent Horus and Hapi converters, that some PT users already use by installing a digilink option card. It´s at the same level of high end conversion as the MTRX, AX32, Prism etc.

The DAD choice may have lied on the fact that Merging has Pyramix as a software solution that competes with PT (although in a small scale due to market reasons) and DAD it´s only on the hardware business. The AoIP implementation is also diferent as Merging uses Ravenna and the MTRX uses Dante, which may also have contributed, as Dante is more widespread.

Anyway, nothing like trying and hearing, as everybody´s needs and tastes are different.