Considering going from HDN to HDX - Any downsides?

[arche3]

Originally Posted by Will Russell

hi,



I mix all day everyday on HDX with both DSP and native plugins and totally love it! I also appreciate the low latency tracking and easy ability to overdub into a fully developed mix.

Agree

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[BScout]

Originally Posted by Will Russell

hi,

I mix all day everyday on HDX with both DSP and native plugins and totally love it! I also appreciate the low latency tracking and easy ability to overdub into a fully developed mix.

Agree

[Ghost In The Attic]

Originally Posted by Will Russell

hi,

I mix all day everyday on HDX with both DSP and native plugins and totally love it! I also appreciate the low latency tracking and easy ability to overdub into a fully developed mix.

Me three, four, what are we up to?

[clonewar]

Originally Posted by Farhoof

The internal mixer is always DSP, so using a native plugin on an aux will cause an added delay compared to your native setup. Even without mixing dsp plugs with native plugs, there is always a switch from dsp to native (when used on an aux, tracks are ok).
IIRC the delay is the length of your hardware buffer (settings).

Good to know, thanks. I don't think the additional delay would be an issue for mixing as long as it's properly compensated for, which I believe it should be?

[clonewar]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Hi, welcome to the community.

First check your computer has enough power for the HDX cards

Thanks for the welcome! The HDX cards would be going into one of my HP Z820 workstations, which have a lot of available power. I think they are (or were when they were current) on Avid's approved workstation list.

[clonewar]

Originally Posted by albee1952

Maybe the better question is: What's the upside? If you need more than 64 IO, then you have to weigh things out, but if 64 is enough IO, I'd stick with HDN. My last commercial studio had 48 IO and I never actually used it all up, even tracking 6-7 piece bands

Really the only upside for me right now is access to more than 64 I/O. I have a very smooth running HDN system now, and honestly it's kind of a bummer that I'll have to go to HDX2 to be able to use more I/O, but that's where I'm at. Assessing my I/O usage to stay on HDN is definitely one of the things I'm looking at. (printing hardware inserts, etc)

I could also move to Nuendo for mixing, I already have an RME MADI FX card and could add more MADI I/O, but I prefer mixing in PT and don't want to give up my D-Control.

[clonewar]

Originally Posted by Will Russell

hi,

I mix all day everyday on HDX with both DSP and native plugins and totally love it! I also appreciate the low latency tracking and easy ability to overdub into a fully developed mix.

Originally Posted by arche3

Agree

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by BScout

Agree

Originally Posted by ghostwriter

Me three, four, what are we up to?

Thanks guys, I've read some negative things about HDX (negative is usually what comes up in forum/internet searches) so it's good to read the positive!

[Farhoof]

Originally Posted by clonewar

Good to know, thanks. I don't think the additional delay would be an issue for mixing as long as it's properly compensated for, which I believe it should be?

Yes and no, the delay will be compensated, but that will also introduce some fader lag, depending on where the delay is originating and where your mixing faders are.

Let's say you have some tracks you want to mix, and some aux plugin chain coming _after_ the tracks. Extra delay is added to the auxes. The delay compensation will actually play the audio track ahead of time to compensate the delay in the aux so the sound will reach the output in time. Your fader movement however (hand & ears) are responding to the sound output and written into the track that was played ahead of time. Protools obviously cannot see into the future so it can not initially playback the track including the mix decisions you are making on the spot. What you hear while mixing is your fader movement applied _after_ the compensated delay. When you stop the playback, your fader movement is also compensated and is now placed at the exact spot where you heard the sound, so when you playback the track again, including your just written fader movement, it will sound different though probably more like you intended.

E.g.; there is a quiet track with 1 short loud sound. There is 12.000 samples delay on the aux. You know when the loud sound is coming and you duck the track fader at exactly that sound. On your first run writing the fader movement, you will still hear the loud sound and will hear the quiet sound (12.000 samples after the loud sound) ducking. When you stop playback and the red fader movement is written into the track, you will see the ducking movement on exactly the loud sound. Next time you playback you will hear the loud sound ducking because Protools is now able to compensate your fader movement along with the track.

So it's really dependent on your session setup, your plugins, your mix workflows, etc, whether you are better off with fully native, hdx with native plugs or hdx with dsp plugs.

Personally I'm running HDX2 because I need the voices, and voice packs didn't exist back then. I don't need the IO (maybe at some point going Dolby Atmos). I prefer using dsp plugins on auxes but I have a bunch of native plugins running also. Even with native plugs my delays are not that terrible so I have no issues with fader lag. However, I would not invest into dsp anymore, I don't see any future in it the way things are right now.