[wildplum]

I would like to better understand why it is that HD is considered better than “non-avid interface” Pro Tools for tracking.

Is it because the avid hardware (e.g., a 192 I/O) is faster at access information of the computer’s recording disc than a non-avid interface?
Is it because the avid hardware has faster converters than the non-avid interface/converter?
Is it because, when using plug-ins while tracking, the DSP on the avid interface provides better performance? Is this still true if you do not use plug-ins during tracking?
Or is it because of some other reason that I have no idea about- what is that other reason?

I am asking because I face that inevitable decision. After having used Pro Tools for tracking and editing for over 16 years (most of that in a TDM environment), I have to decide whether to spend big bucks on a new HD system or go with a non-avid interface version. I use Pro Tools for tracking and editing (and, on occasion, for sharing stuff with other studios). I mix analog (on rare occasions, I do mix ITB; but that is not often enough to factor into my decision) and I do not see that changing anytime in the near future.