LE vs HD

[nate9]

I was thinking about upgrading to HD, does the the core card do all the processing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Darryl Ramm]

Why do you want HD?

And what HD are you talking about? Current HDX does DSP processing for AAX-DSP plugins and basic mixing on HDX cards, HD Native has no DSP processing. Legacy HD TDM systems process TDM plugins and do mixing in DSP. There is no support for TDM hardware or plugins after Pro Tools HD 10. And even if you have HDX or a TDM cards you only get to run plugins on the, that support that, otherwise they run native on the host CpU. You can also run Pro Tools HD with other interfaces for the extra software features.

If you have to ask questions like this you probably don't need HD. Folks that do need it tend to already understand the benefits and limitations, and importantly costs involved. Be especially careful of thinking this will just be "better". Tell us what problem you are trying to solve and what you do and folks here will be able to give you useful advice. Is tracking through plugins or latency the issue? General CPU load of plugins? System not stable? Running out of CPU running VIs? (DSP won't help you directly there). Etc.

Give detailed specs for your current system.

"core" generally refers to an old TDM card, if you are really interested in HD TDM legacy systems you are posting in the wrong forum section. HDX cards are generally just called that.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[treason]

[QUOTE=nate9;2444791]I was thinking about upgrading to HD, does the the core card do all the processing?

If your question stems from a search for additional horsepower to complete a session, then you're asking the right questions.

I use a 12 core MacPro, 2 HDX cards, 2 UAD Octo's and a second CPU tethered via VEP 6 to complete my sessions. Having HDX allows me low latency plugs (in my experience the lower the latency, the more stable the sessions) as well as offload the processing from the host CPU. UAD plugs sound fantastic, however they add a crazy amount of latency when used. Yet - I still fill 2 cards. It just means that I must plan my session as to which plugs to use on which platform. In other words, I look to replicate plugs on Native, UAD and AAX-DSP so I can move them around depending upon where the processing bottleneck is. I view each (AAX-DSP, Native and UAD) as a platform available to me to achieve the processing power I require.

I use lots of Plugin Alliance, Softube, and Sonnox, plugs which span all three platforms. I look for similar emulations (i.e Neve 88RS and bx_console_N) to achieve a particular sound (Neve in that example - even though the 88RS and the bx_ are different console models - the variation actually adds dimension to a relatively consistent Neve sound).

I love my HDX system ... and i flatly couldn't do what I'm doing without it (I mix and master in the same session - spitting out RAW, Mix and Masters for multiple targets - along with 21 submixes simultaneously). It's breathtaking and allows me a control I've dreamed about for decades.

ymmv

[guitardom]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Why do you want HD?

And what HD are you talking about? Current HDX does DSP processing for AAX-DSP plugins and basic mixing on HDX cards, HD Native has no DSP processing. Legacy HD TDM systems process TDM plugins and do mixing in DSP. There is no support for TDM hardware or plugins after Pro Tools HD 10. And even if you have HDX or a TDM cards you only get to run plugins on the, that support that, otherwise they run native on the host CpU. You can also run Pro Tools HD with other interfaces for the extra software features.

If you have to ask questions like this you probably don't need HD. Folks that do need it tend to already understand the benefits and limitations, and importantly costs involved. Be especially careful of thinking this will just be "better". Tell us what problem you are trying to solve and what you do and folks here will be able to give you useful advice. Is tracking through plugins or latency the issue? General CPU load of plugins? System not stable? Running out of CPU running VIs? (DSP won't help you directly there). Etc.

Give detailed specs for your current system.

"core" generally refers to an old TDM card, if you are really interested in HD TDM legacy systems you are posting in the wrong forum section. HDX cards are generally just called that.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

He has the basic specs of his system listed. Its not compatible with HDN/HDX, nor does the Pro Control work past PT 10.

He would have to search out some pretty old HD cards for slot compatibility (PCI-X?) and a license. Be much better off updating the entire system, though that would be quite expensive in comparison.

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by guitardom

He has the basic specs of his system listed. Its not compatible with HDN/HDX, nor does the Pro Control work past PT 10.



He would have to search out some pretty old HD cards for slot compatibility (PCI-X?) and a license. Be much better off updating the entire system, though that would be quite expensive in comparison.

All great points, but I asked because many systems listed on DUC are out of date and it's also not clear if say HDX would be considered in a new system (got a great budget?)

But let's start with the OP clarifying the most basic stuff with what he is asking about (i.e. HDX or TDM) and more importantly why and for what type of work. An idea of budget would be useful as well.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Barry Johns]

I continue to be a huge advocate of PTHD TDM for the home user that primarily does Audio and not much VI work.

It's amazingly powerful and you can use an older computer and completely forget about DAW ever again and focus on making music!

[nate9]

I take that back about upgrading, sorry about that! I was just wondering what the core card actually does!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by nate9

I take that back about upgrading, sorry about that! I was just wondering what the core card actually does!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well a HDX card or a old TDM Core card do DSP processing for DSP capable plugins and run the actual mixer. They are quite different in implementation TDM uses old fixed point DSP chips, the HDX uses floating point DSP. The cards also provide Digilink IO connectivity so you can connect Avid or third party Digilink Interface boxes. You must have that IO connected (e.g. An Omni would be a typical minimum) for the system to work at all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[nate9]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

All great points, but I asked because many systems listed on DUC are out of date and it's also not clear if say HDX would be considered in a new system (got a great budget?)

But let's start with the OP clarifying the most basic stuff with what he is asking about (i.e. HDX or TDM) and more importantly why and for what type of work. An idea of budget would be useful as well.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I was looking online (eBay) 96 I/O w/ core card


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Darryl Ramm]

So lets start with you are posting in the wrong DUC forum. This is for HDX and HD Native, not legacy TDM systems. That (for Mac) would be http://duc.avid.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11

So start by reading an old Pro Tools 10 or earlier reference guide and understanding how Pro Tools TDM voices work, how many tracks at what sample rate and how many plugins you can run in that one Core card, it's not a lot. Then work out what additional TDM cards you will also need to do what you want.. and what computer (with suitable PCIe slot count) you may need. And have a read though some of the stuff the correct forum section.

Make sure you are looking at PCIe not PCI-X cards.

Also read the 96 IO user Guide to understand that box. The 96 IO is not expandable with internal IO cards like the 192 IO or HD IO. But you can string on other Digilink IO boxes.

Barry has a point, TDM can be handy for tracking. But you have to get on top of and understand this stuff, it's benefits, limitations and complexity involved in building a TDM system.