Digi 004?

[benherron.rrr]

I like the idea of an attractive upgrade path, if AVID released an 004 i would be really tempted to trade my mbox3 pro for the next step up. I think Avid/digi hardware has got really bad press in the past just because people were forced to buy it in order to run Pro Tools, but my experience with my mbox has been great. Solid as a rock, sounds great, it has all the features I need as a solo artist, composer and engineer.

Just a thourght I had reguarding the idea of swift Pro Tools intergration:

It would be nice for the 004 (if indeed there is an 004) to have the abillity to be controlled digitally, and to go a step further if this ability had direct intergration into Pro Tools. For example: when you set the I/O for a track, in the mix window and edit window (if needed) there would be a box where you could set the gain/pad/soft limit etc. Much in the way that alot of interfaces such as the RME stuff do in their own mixer software, but directly into PT. If AVID wanted to go further, (even though I'm not an apple user) there could be and ipad/iphone or even android app so you could control the interface when your away from the computer/interface. This would be a great thing for people who record themselves, and even in bigger studios you can position mic's while leveling.

Hope this idea makes sence.

[Dism]

There are two things that I want from an 004:

1. Monitoring. Something with good D/A that does a good job in a studio. Something with a talkback button/mic, too, that could circumvent Pro Tools entirely. Avid doesn't really have anything in line with this, so you often see people getting a Central Station or something of the sort to fill in the gap.

2. A Control surface in line with the functionality of previous generations, but that I can also use alongside my LS56. No more of this, single-client CoreAudioManager nonsense. If I can't use it with Aggregate I/O, I am not buying it. Period.

Basically, I want something along the lines of an SSL Nucleus, but with better integration than HUI and more monitoring options.

[serio]

What kind of connection would be smart right now though? USB? Thunderbolt? FireWire?
I remember skimming over an article that mentioned FireWire suppirt being left out of Windows 8. If this is true, then it's something to think about. An Ethernet connecting interface might be cool.
I've been playing with an Mbox Pro (g3) and it sounds nice. But a more robust interface with adat and additional IO just seems inevitable. Maybe an Omni type deal that connects via a common protocol.

[hollaback06]

Originally Posted by serio

What kind of connection would be smart right now though? USB? Thunderbolt? FireWire?
I remember skimming over an article that mentioned FireWire suppirt being left out of Windows 8. If this is true, then it's something to think about. An Ethernet connecting interface might be cool.
I've been playing with an Mbox Pro (g3) and it sounds nice. But a more robust interface with adat and additional IO just seems inevitable. Maybe an Omni type deal that connects via a common protocol.

Can't say this is the definitive word but I was at AES and an Avid rep told me no 004. Said they r focused on euphonix as control surface

[chrisdee]

Originally Posted by serio

Maybe an Omni type deal that connects via a common protocol.

A little shameless promoting of my idea of an Omni Thunderbolt ?
http://protools.ideascale.com/a/dtd/...olt/80068-3779

[M-ManLA]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

Ish. I hate DB25's. Try working with something where they are worn out and you will hate them too. I'd much rather have something with XLR, even though they are bulky they are solid.

Yea true. I just want something that saves some space.

[serio]

Originally Posted by chrisdee

A little shameless promoting of my idea of an Omni Thunderbolt ?
http://protools.ideascale.com/a/dtd/...olt/80068-3779

I can dig it

[aka21stCentury]

I think wired firewire is nearly capute also. I am hearing Lightpeak with the new Ivy Bridge Chipset or new connector: USB-3 IF

What do you all think about mic pres? I suggest only a pair and each with dual DACs... software routed.

I would want a standalone mixer function (but no need for level adjustments for stand alone mode) but all 6-8 inputs for h-z Rhodes, Synths, Wuries, DI line level unbalanced or balanced T/R/S auto sensing. Again, unlike the 001, nearly all inputs should be hot in monitor mode, with mute buttons on all onboard mic pres (if any)... and individual phantom on/off for each pre (if built in unlike new mBox Pro) and MIDI routing set in software, stored in flash for standalone operation (same with clocks).

Maybe just two mic pres?

The old system EV employed with a separate 48v phantom power supply on the floor for a mic pres still excels for a hi-quality recording as the psu is Faraday Caged and removed from the pre, but this is fairly unrealistic. But to separate the transformer (AC-DC) from the converter or audio path (it can be then used as a field recorder with standard cam battery packs would improve the 004 conversion and usefulness).

(edit re 6 D-Subs for rack mounted pro modules I think better space utilization would be to use inserts IMHO)... if an onboard DSP mixer. The pro module rack with 6 D-Subs (is great) but they take up more space than t/r/s inserts.

IR remote control, mute, call in, speaker pairs a/b, talkback mic momentary and transport controls-- play/rewind/record/safe record/punch mode perhaps even a numeric keypad and enter key at the bottom of the AVID IR remote for spotting.

That one dial does all feature on the Travelor Mark III main/headphone level put me off, must have immediate hands on or IR dedicated button.

DSP integrated into PTs 11's mix window with a new AVID 004r or AVID mBox Pro would be great to add DSP loopback, so DSP interface users can access the extra onboard DSP for mixing...

I am convinced vinyl is coming back with pre-amps with increased headroom and bandwidth (5 hz to 100Hz) as an analogue signal path unrestrained by imposed brickwall filters near enough the audio range to cause phase damage, besides a dual or quad enclosure running from an HD DAC in PTs HD 11 (native HD or HDX) to send to a mastering facility for lathe cutting... rather than Blue Ray or DVDs.

So no low quality burners for DVD-R or DL+R, CD DAO as Blue Ray pits and bump errors ---> not all are corrected by CRC and some errors cannot be repaired. Regarding internet checksums (with 64 bit broadcast wave files the checksums are very large, but should be required by mastering engineers or dup houses).

Dual MIDI din outs are necessary, one for MTC or sys-ex, the other for timestamped MIDI... or both for MIDI data if large bandwidth is needed for multiple synths/samplers.

And is it true with non-DIGI/AVID interface, in Windows if hardware buffer is reset one has to reboot? Anyone?... hopefully that will be fixed in 10

DP 7.2 not playing nice with VE Pro currently via rewire. There have been MIDI problems over ethernet in the past.

Ethernet if you know anything about IT is not a realtime protocol, slow, and even UDP is a best effort attempt as is ethernet itself a best effort attempt. Packet collisions occur, the data is simply discarded (then resent if TCP but not resent by TFTP or less overhead UDP) so ethernet, even if direct NIC to NIC is n/g for realtime (NIC cards notrorious for causing DPC interrupts).

I personally would like to compare digital mixes with a great sounding turntable pre with the same signal path i.e. vinyl mixes I know that are good.
Turntable Pre. Here's a link for a standalone. I was disappointed the RCA's on the new Avid mBox Pro did not include a discrete hi-quality turntable pre. But, the simple solution would be to use a standalone NAD turntable pre to line level... or tube step up amp at to line level.

Anyone familiar with the original 'Got Meek'? VC-1. The dual outputs if using good hardware limiters and/or an exciter if one could record both feeds simultaneously, one with a hardware patched aural exciter and limiter, and the other dry (or a very good hardware tracking limiter), in software couple the mic pre input (controlled by software) to a pair of DACs (both with inserts) so two separate feeds are recorded independently wet or dry, or with any hardware fx required.

Even if only two mic pres where put onboard the vaporware 004r and this could show up in software as two inputs (each with DACs) having individual A-D to I/0 routing both DACs with enough level to record ribbon or low level condenser signals. But if this coupling is not needed on those two mic pres, then the second insert can become another line level input on each pre, totaling 8 analogue inputs.

Of course a T/R/S input to bypass any Avid mic pres each with inserts.

Plus CMUX lightpipe and Toslink, S/PDIF optical, RCA, and AES-EBU for broadcast facilities and word clock.

Sorry 'bout the long winded wish list, since the post guys are blasting AVID and usually most have AVID online systems in house all these upgrades for Post Houses take precedence. Please don't ignore songwriter/composers. I hope others post ideas about their own 004 wish list.

(ok-- so not all have 10k$ standalone Blue Ray Burners --- ck this excerpt from: http://www.rocketdivision.com/burn_sdk.html

"Network Burning: StarBurn is one of the few optical media SDKs with network burning support available. Your application would not require the presence of physical CD/DVD/Blu-Ray/HD-DVD burning hardware installed on the same machine where the application runs. You can "map" a remote device located on another continent (using an IP connection between client and server) and burn to the remote device with StarBurn as though it was real hardware attached to your computer. This means an expensive high-capacity Blu-Ray/HD-DVD burner or DVD autoloader could be shared similar to a network printer. This technology licensed from Rocket Division Software is used by Alcohol 120% CD/DVD emulator to burn to remote CD/DVD/Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drives."

[Cloud_9]

Originally Posted by Dism

There are two things that I want from an 004:

1. Monitoring. Something with good D/A that does a good job in a studio. Something with a talkback button/mic, too, that could circumvent Pro Tools entirely. Avid doesn't really have anything in line with this, so you often see people getting a Central Station or something of the sort to fill in the gap.

2. A Control surface in line with the functionality of previous generations, but that I can also use alongside my LS56. No more of this, single-client CoreAudioManager nonsense. If I can't use it with Aggregate I/O, I am not buying it. Period.

Basically, I want something along the lines of an SSL Nucleus, but with better integration than HUI and more monitoring options.

Absolutely. I am one of those guys who couldnt wait any longer and got a Central Station for monitoring and talkback, and a Furman HDS-6 for headphone distro.

I am finally starting to cater to clients now and needed a solution.

[hjorte]

Originally Posted by aka21stCentury

And is it true with non-DIGI/AVID interface, in Windows if hardware buffer is reset one has to reboot?

Restart Pro Tools, yes. This very issue is not often discussed, which puzzles me, and I think that most Mac users don't even know the hassle Windows users are facing, when dealing with third party interfaces.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but this is what I think is going on...

Pro Tools with third party interfaces.

On Mac you use Core Audio. Here you can switch between third party interfaces and change the H/W buffer size in Pro Tools without having to restart PT.

On Windows you use ASIO. Here you have to restart PT every time you change interface or H/W buffer size using a third party interface.

If third party interface developers were able to or allowed to (?) write Windows DAE drivers for their interfaces, Windows users wouldn't have this problem with having to restart PT. The Avid and M-Audio interfaces are proof of that. Their H/W buffer can be changed without having to restart PT for Windows.

The H/W buffer issue is why I can't be bothered to use a third party interface with PT on Windows. Exactly what Avid wants, I guess. Sure, PT9 opened up for third party interface support, yay! but you have to restart PT when you change the h/w buffer size, ugh! PT10 is the same.

I have a feeling that some third party interfaces (Focusrite?) do have proper Windows drivers to avoid the above issue, but I am not sure. As I said, I'm no expert on the subject, so please jump in and correct.