HD Omni ... Wow!

[DAWgEAR]

This past week I installed my newly purchased HDN/Omni system and it is replacing the Lynx Aurora/AES16 that I have been using with Cubase, REAPER, and, lately, Pro Tools 10, for the past 7 years.

Everything else is the same: room, acoustic treatment, monitors, cabling, mics, preamps, DAW. The Lynx system was a very noticeable step up from the M-Audio Delta I used before that; in a similar way, the Omni is a further step up from the Lynx Aurora. The clarity is amazing! And the reliability, low latency, and rock solid tight timing of the HD Native card are also welcome improvements.

Just wanted to share my excitement.

[groundcontrol]

Rock on!

[guitardom]

I found the upgrade from the Aurora to the HD I/O to be subtle yet interesting. The only real difference I felt were in the midrange. The Aurora felt scooped to me in comparison. I find translation is better in this area. I have less trouble seating vocals and less time spent thinking when coming back to a mix if I like them or want to tweak them. I was surprised by the difference there. I still think the Aurora holds its own and is still a great converter, but would definitely prefer to monitor through the HD I/O!

Tracking though with the HDN is a seriously noticeable difference from a native based system.

[Benoni]

Originally Posted by DAWgEAR

This past week I installed my newly purchased HDN/Omni system and it is replacing the Lynx Aurora/AES16 that I have been using with Cubase, REAPER, and, lately, Pro Tools 10, for the past 7 years.

Everything else is the same: room, acoustic treatment, monitors, cabling, mics, preamps, DAW. The Lynx system was a very noticeable step up from the M-Audio Delta I used before that; in a similar way, the Omni is a further step up from the Lynx Aurora. The clarity is amazing! And the reliability, low latency, and rock solid tight timing of the HD Native card are also welcome improvements.

Just wanted to share my excitement.

Cool Man. HDN looks really great. Ive been wanting it since it came out, one of these days I'll save up enough for it.

Have fun with it!

[DAWgEAR]

Originally Posted by guitardom

I found the upgrade from the Aurora to the HD I/O to be subtle yet interesting. The only real difference I felt were in the midrange. The Aurora felt scooped to me in comparison. I find translation is better in this area. I have less trouble seating vocals and less time spent thinking when coming back to a mix if I like them or want to tweak them. I was surprised by the difference there. I still think the Aurora holds its own and is still a great converter, but would definitely prefer to monitor through the HD I/O!

Tracking though with the HDN is a seriously noticeable difference from a native based system.

guitardom, in light of your comments, I think it is the midrange I am noticing. I just seem to be able to hear more details, more depth front to back. Subtle changes in panning seem more obvious. There is more clarity and separation. I was pretty happy with the sound of the Lynx and I was not expecting there to be much of a difference, but I am pleasantly surprised.

[guitardom]

Originally Posted by DAWgEAR

guitardom, in light of your comments, I think it is the midrange I am noticing. I just seem to be able to hear more details, more depth front to back. Subtle changes in panning seem more obvious. There is more clarity and separation. I was pretty happy with the sound of the Lynx and I was not expecting there to be much of a difference, but I am pleasantly surprised.

yes, i agree on the space. it all seems in the mids to me though. the lows and highs i dont find much different. makes quite a difference though!

it took about 2 months after ordering to get the new system in. i was hoping to get it in before i started mixing a particular album. i had no choice but to start. i was quite a ways in and started tracking another project when the system arrived. i waited a couple weeks to finish tracking and installed the new system even though i was in the middle of the mix. i spent hours over a couple days just listening to stuff before i jumped back in mixing. this is where i found the differences quickly. i had to go back and tweak vocal levels mainly and a bit of guitars and snare. everything else seemed to hold up. but it seemed i could trust my initial judgement on these levels instead of wanting to tweak them everytime i came in. also with the client there, they always wanted the vocals louder than what i knew would mix well. that issue seems to have resolved itself for the most part. that is a great feeling. again though, the difference for me was subtle, but just enough.

[chrisdee]

Originally Posted by DAWgEAR

Just wanted to share my excitement.

Welcome to the club.

It's nice to not worry about audio quality anymore.

[DAWgEAR]

Originally Posted by chrisdee

Welcome to the club.

It's nice to not worry about audio quality anymore.

Thanks, chrisdee, and others who have posted comments.

It is nice to not worry about audio quality.

What is "worrying" me at the moment is studying the Omni Guide document and trying to wrap my head around the various paths that the Omni supports and, in particular, the Monitor path and the Cue/Headphone path. The following comment appears in the Omni Guide:

With HD OMNI, Delay Compensation is not supported on assigned monitor outputs. Delay Compensation is only supported on physical outputs not assigned to a Monitor path.

The November 2010 Sound on Sound review of the HD Omni states:

"One ‘feature’ of the Omni that’s briefly mentioned in passing in the documentation is that “Delay Compensation is not supported on assigned Monitor outputs”. This could raise a few eyebrows, but Avid confirmed that it refers only to the hardware path within the Omni, not to plug‑ins or mixer channels routed to it. Obviously, if you choose to define an output as a Monitor output, that suggests you’re not going to be using it in a role where compensation for hardware delays is crucial, so this shouldn’t cause problems in practice."

This has me puzzled as to its implications for tracking. My inclination would have been to listen to the Monitor output while performing overdubs. Does anyone have any insight or experience regarding this? Is the delay significant or only a few samples? Has this already been covered before on this forum? I have tried searching the forums, but I am not sure what term(s) to search.

If anyone has any suggestions, please point me in the right direction.

[nst7]

I think you're misinterpreting this.

It doesn't mean you don't hear the delay compensation in your monitors and headphones.

All they are saying is that whatever you designate as monitor outs, delay compensation won't be working for that output.

So, for example, if you choose output 1-2 for your monitoring, then you can't suddenly decide to use it as an insert for your hardware. Because you've chosen it as a monitor path. You must de-select it as a monitor path, which converts it back to a normal line out, and delay comp will then work.

It's not an issue because if you've chosen a certain output as the monitor path, then you won't be using it for anything else at that time.


If there's any other questions about paths, cue output, etc., we'll be happy to help.

[mykhal c]

Originally Posted by nst7

I think you're misinterpreting this.

It doesn't mean you don't hear the delay compensation in your monitors and headphones.

All they are saying is that whatever you designate as monitor outs, delay compensation won't be working for that output.

So, for example, if you choose output 1-2 for your monitoring, then you can't suddenly decide to use it as an insert for your hardware. Because you've chosen it as a monitor path. You must de-select it as a monitor path, which converts it back to a normal line out, and delay comp will then work.

It's not an issue because if you've chosen a certain output as the monitor path, then you won't be using it for anything else at that time.


If there's any other questions about paths, cue output, etc., we'll be happy to help.

exactly as nst7 has stated. to add...the paths will be 'unavailable/unassignable' for anything else as long as they're assigned to the stereo monitor path.