HDX vs Native
 

I know this has been discussed here before, elsewhere and endlessly but I thought I’d give it a go after the recent software update.

See below for my set up, I use this for film sound fx editing and design, which means I’m usually working within multiple 7.1 busses, multiple verbs and rarely any VI’s, maybe 1 every now and then because I do like playing with Chris Watson’s sonic couture Geosonics.

I was recently given session that was way over the my 256 available voices but worked fine on my colleagues native system and even in their tiny little MacBook. Their system doesn’t show voices, so I couldn’t see how many but I was short at least a couple of fx 7.1 busses and a couple of verbs. So I expect 40 tracks, give or take.

The question is, are there any good reasons why I should not sell my HDX card and buy the native setup instead, pocketing the change, or more likely spending it on more gear and plugins.

I know buying another HDX card would work very well. The Sonnet has SSD’s, for sessions and picture respectively, in the other 2 slots and that’s working great.

Bottom line - why does a native system allow so many more voices?

What’s the point in holding on to the HDX card for the work I do?

Thanks for any pointers or advice you can give me to help make my next purchase.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

There will be others with more information, but the main reason I went to HDX over Native is latency. I do lots of voice over recording and other live recordings in the studio and native was too unstable at low buffers to keep latency down. Otherwise editing, sound design and mixing at high buffers was stable and worked just fine. I do not use VI's.

If you don't do ADR or other voice over recording that requires low latency, native would be just fine imo.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

Because Avid development screwed up.

HDX with increased voices was supposed to be released at the same time as Native getting a bump in voices but they had some issues with getting a stable HDX card firmware for all cards out there. A percentage of cards were having an issue.

So they are working on that fix now.

If you wait, you'll get the bump on HDX too -- just in a later release.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

We've been doing VO with Native for years and haven't had any complaints about latency, though we don't run high buffers. Furthermore, the 2019.5 update allows for even lower buffers (32 samples has become very usable).

Re: HDX vs Native
 

Guys, native systems with up to 256 buffer have been good enough for two decades already.. it's just that DSP systems are more stable when you track thru plugins.

Of course it feels snappier bcs the plugin processing is done on card instead of CPU but it's not that DSP systems have zero latency (roundtrip can be more than native system).

Re: HDX vs Native
 

As mentioned above, we've been using Native for quite a long time in several of our studios, doing music and post in stereo and 5.1. The concern we had was not so much latency but CPU usage. Some of these multi-channel reverbs and eqs can be hogs, but if you're using a quick computer there shouldn't be issues. We have 12-core trashcans in a couple rooms and 6-cores in some others. Only the big music sessions (w/ VIs and several verbs etc.) bring CPU usage into the picture, and even those are manageable by bumping up the buffer to 256 or 512 if we're in mix-mode. DSP cards remain comfortably in our past.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

I started HD Native but HDX just felt more like TDM Acell systems (Familiar latencies).
As, tape deck with console, Native cards are more than enough.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

Are you sure you aren't chewing through voices in HDX by the inappropriate placement of native & DSP plugins? Particularly with surround channels, a poorly placed native plugin in relation to a DSP plugin might chew up as many as 12 to 16 voices alone. Obviously, the recent changes to voice counts in HD Native may play a role in what you are witnessing, but if the session you are using originated from an HDX2 system that could explain your issues.

HDX has by default had an additional 64 'hidden' voices to deal with this since HD11, but that might only reflect the voices used by four native plugins placed after DSP on 7.1 channels.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

Hey Sound01. I am a music editor for features. On final dubs I am used to dealing with insanely high 7.1 voice counts like you are encountering. I have an HDX2 in my 2012 cheese grater and a 2015 MBP as a mobile cutting rig.

Before 2019.5 and the introduction of voice packs, I would have advised upgrading to more cards to maintain compatibility with the dub stage. But let me tell you... as soon as I added my 2nd card some years back, the fan noise factor went through the roof. I'd imagine the same would happen in your Sonnet.

Since you, presumably, aren't doing a lot of live tracking and aren't feeding your system to the console with tons of I/O, I see no reason to hold onto the HDX system. Get an insanely fast computer, some USB 3.1 SSDs, a voice pack or two and call it a day. My MacBook Pro 2015 (aka a dinosaur already) handles a 2560x1440 monitor and a 1080p TV like a champ.

Re: HDX vs Native
 

I sold my HDX1 a while back for this very reason.
I found I could run larger sessions on my laptop using coreaudio than on
the HDX1 with a trash can.
Changed to HD Native instead and never looked back.
HD Native with a powerful computer seems to be around the HDX2 area and that was probably only limited by voices.

The extra voices and voice packs for Native have improved that position even more now.
HDX is getting a bit long in the tooth.
If you need super low latency or use hardware fx inserts or a separate board I can see the benefit of HDX.
If you work in the box Native is better, IMHO.