Does HD SOUND Better ?? LE forum guy needs advice

[danocaster]

Hey guys -

I sure would appreciate some advice. I run a project studio and make my living making mostly indie records w/ about $20K budgets. I'm currently using a 002 w/ the MP Toolkit and track count hasnt been an issue really. I have a Dual 2.7 G5 and power hasnt really been an issue lately either. I use an Apogee Rosetta going in and monitor back thru a Benchmark DAC-1.. OK , so thats what I have

My QUESTION is:

I have about $10K left from a record's budget and I am thinking about moving to HD but only if it SOUNDS significantly better. I could afford a basic HD2 non accel rig and want to do everything I can to provide a better final product. My clients - at THIS point at least - dont care what I'm using. They are coming to me for the production skills. But I wanna better myself AND my studio and would take the plunge and invest $10K if it SOUNDS better

Has anyone here made the move ?? Can you please share your experience w/ me

for what it's worth, I typically dont ever track a full band live here. If I need to - I go to a larger facility w/ better live rooms. Most of my stuff goes down a track at a time

thanks !!

[hemloc]

It's HD, of course it sounds better !!!

But seriously folks, unless you need to record at some seriously high sample rates(Higher than 96kHz), it won't sound any different than a 002. I tell you what, when I worked in a real studio, we used 001's and they worked just fine. That being said, in my little home studio, I made the jump from Audiomedia III to a Digi001, then from a 001 to a PT Mix^3, and finally to HD3 Accel, and I couldn't be any happier. The world of TDM is pretty nice, and gives you a lot of native processing room to play with(Especially if you use a lot of RTAS VI's, like I do)!! And there are always pretty good deals like Massive Pack plug-in collections for TDM users. Heck, if you buy an HD rig now, you can get another 002(Which is great for mobile recording, then bring back the session and import it into the HD rig) or expansion card for a 192 i/o. If you have the money and can't find a better use for it(LOL!), I say go for it!!

[bizzle]

Actually there seems to be a huge improvement in HD over LE in terms of the Aux Busses, Master Faders and summing. I know a few others may disagree and bring up the whole 32 bit float vs. 48 bit fixed debate, but to my ears HD is the clear winner, its even a noticeable improvement over the MIX systems of yesteryear. YMMV. However if you are asking whether you "should" get it, thats a whole other can of worms. You can always spend money to improve the quality of your system. But maybe your resources are better spent elsewhere? Personally, I went from a 001 to Mix3 to HD Accel 3, with never a regret in terms of ROI. LE to TDM is Hobby to Pro in my book.

Good Luck,
Andy Snavley

[ProTooler]

Auto Delay Compensation is worth the price of admission alone IMHO.

[jeff markham]

i would recommend going up to the sticky entries at the
top of this forum and read the white paper on the 48bit bus
in HD/TDM systems.

there are great (but dimensishing) benefits in TDM processing as compared
to CPU/RTAS .. but ... the HD 48bit pipeline makes *huge* difference sonic
clarity (imho) .. and that clarity magnifies with every summation point
in your mix.

i dig the additional functionality in PT-HD .. but the pipeline is
the killer for me.

jeff

[wolfman_rob]

Yes The Sound is Definitely Better. I agree with the Delay Compensation. It Tightens up Everything and makes sure everything is Focused. The way things seem to Sound when Panned seem like that there is More Distance in the Stereo Field From Hard Left To Hard Right. I have noticed that once i slightly Pan something i can start to tell it Right off the Bat without having to Over Pan Things. there is more separation I Guess.

And there is Definitely more Definition. EVEN AT LOWER SAMPLE RATES!!!!

Thanks,
Russell

[tomhartman]

If you have a chance to go TDM, don't even think about it. Everything about it is better.

TH

[Electrox]

I am not going to suggest that TDM is not BETTER, but what you seem to be asking is "where should I put my money? There are certainly other solutions to do recording with that are cheaper. And I don't really know what else you have. Yes, you will SPEND more for HD, and it MAY sound better, but there are way too many variables in a studio to really know if that 10k would be better spent on sound treatment, monitors, mics, pre amps, etc which may have a BIGGER impact on your sound. Try this - if you had 100k to spend, what would you buy? Next, try borrowing or renting a few of those pieces and see if they have a great effect to your sound. Next, look at ebay and see what you can find from what you tried. Remeber that ANY recording system you will buy will be out of date in about 2 years, and you will feel the need to replace THE WHOLE SYSTEM in 4 to 6 years. Now do you think you should spend that 10k?

[danocaster]

well I have a pair of old API 312s, an old 1272 , a distressor , a few 160s , a Sytek - enough good outboard to do drums here if I needed. But again - most of my stuff goes down a track at a time

Mointors are NS-10s very well amplified w/ a good sub and good room treatment, etc..


I guess I'm after that subtle clarity / resolution which results in greater width and depth. My mixes are actually pretty damn good but there IS an element of depth / resolution that I cant seem to achieve. I'm certain that part of it is skills yet unlearned but there's part of me that thinks that extra something something lies within HD....

HHHmmmmmmmm

[Matt_G]

there are great (but dimensishing) benefits in TDM processing as compared
to CPU/RTAS .. but ... the HD 48bit pipeline makes *huge* difference sonic
clarity (imho) .. and that clarity magnifies with every summation point
in your mix.

i dig the additional functionality in PT-HD .. but the pipeline is
the killer for me.

jeff

Just to play devil's advocate, the 48bit pipeline has 24bit kinks all through it. Anytime you add a plugin or hardware insert on a channel you are truncating your 48bit signal to 24bits. If the plugins have dither, then it's not a great loss but for the plugs that are single precision or have no dither on the output it's a lossy situation. Also whenever your audio goes to a physical interface output you are also being truncated to 24bits including the master fader output & auxillarys with physical outputs. So this isn't as good as we are led to believe, in fact LE is probably better as it's completely 32bit float right up until the master output where it drops to 24bits. for this reason it's harder to overload & maintains the higher resolution for longer.

I think there has been a big focus of late on 'High Resolution' lately & it's time Digidesign stepped it up a notch. I run a Pro Tools HD3 system here & for the most part I am happy with it as a mixing/mastering platform. HD's flexibility, quality plugins, ADC, physical I/O's & dedicated DSP is a great thing. But comparing the Pro Tool's audio engine to the likes of 'Sequoia', 'Samplitude' or the new Sonic Studio software 'soundBlade' it's obvious that Pro Tools has some weak links.

These mastering DAW's are built with the best quality sound in mind, with soundBlade running at 64bit floating point through the entire chain & Sequoia/Samplitude running natively on a PC at 80bit floating point end to end. This is how digital audio should sound, the openness, width depth & detail are maintained all the way through (no weak links). Pro Tools tends to sound a touch smeared, 2 dimensional & flat by comparison. We are only talking maybe a 5-10% difference, but every bit counts (pun intended).

I think Digidesign's HD systems are a good compromise between DSP usage & precision, they are designed for mixing large track counts so it's understandable that they had to drop the quality in some areas in order to keep the DSP usage lower to get the track counts & plugins higher. But I think it's time they had a listen to some of the competition & made some changes to the audio engine.

Matt