Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Hardware > Pro Tools HDX & HD Native Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-28-2014, 10:34 AM
michael c michael c is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: LA CA 90027
Posts: 1,073
Default Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

We have only used ProTools with TDM (since 1997). As we transition to new MacPros and HD10 (and possibly 11HD) we are thinking of moving to HD Native since we still have ProControls and our biz plan may not make sense to go HDX. We have heard so many stories on how HD Native would be fine, others complain about the latency. We need to deliver 48k/24 bit and never record more than 4 live sources at a time these days. But we do build our mixes with VI's as we move to the end of the project and this means we need to do live overdubs at the end of a project. This is where we are concerned with the latency issue.

Does ProTools deal with this latency as well as Logic, Digital Performer, Cubase, Nuendo et al? Since so many composition studios use these other DAWs and they don't use DSP cards, are they doing something different than ProTools or dealing with the latency more elegantly? Or are all DAWS the same when dealing with latency.

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-28-2014, 10:37 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 16,885
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

HD|Native latency can be very close to TDM. Here is a chart (half way the page, click "compare latency").
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-28-2014, 01:24 PM
propower propower is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 2,202
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

At 48kHz the lowest HDN latency you can achieve is 3.2ms (1.5X your current HD system). This will only be achievable with much carful selection of plugs and VI's. 4.8ms is much easier to make work well (44.1/64buffer). Only you can say whether this is OK for you. There is a low latency monitor method in PT but this will mute all plugins in the record path.

No software is "better or worse" at this than PT. The hardware is critical as is the connection path (TB/PCI way better than FW/USB).

You may want to seriously look at the UA Apollo family - RME and MOTU. All have built in dsp low latency in the record monitor path.

Search - latency - on this forum for many recent relevant threads.
__________________
2017 27" iMac 3.8GHz i5, 1TB SSD
Logic ProX, Studio One V4, PT2019.x Orion Studio 2017, Apogee Ensemble TB
Musician: http://www.ivanlee.net/
Design Engineer: http://www.propowerinc.com/resume.html
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-28-2014, 01:59 PM
michael c michael c is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: LA CA 90027
Posts: 1,073
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

Quote:
Originally Posted by propower View Post
There is a low latency monitor method in PT but this will mute all plugins in the record path.
.
By this, do you mean any plugs on tracks you are recording to? Or does this mean all plug-ins in the session.

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-28-2014, 02:48 PM
PeterB PeterB is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London UK
Posts: 118
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

Michael if you are trading in your TDM system then go HDX no doubt about it.
I spent a long time debating which way to go, HDN or HDX and the live tracking with a full mix incorporating VIs was a big worry for me too. In the end, the difference on cost between trading in my HD3 and going the native route was negligible over say 3 years, so I traded in to HDX.
I couldn't be happier it's been fantastic so far.

Peter
__________________
TechnologyWorks Mastering
http://www.technologyworks.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-28-2014, 02:57 PM
dimf dimf is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 17
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterB View Post
Michael if you are trading in your TDM system then go HDX no doubt about it.
I spent a long time debating which way to go, HDN or HDX and the live tracking with a full mix incorporating VIs was a big worry for me too. In the end, the difference on cost between trading in my HD3 and going the native route was negligible over say 3 years, so I traded in to HDX.
I couldn't be happier it's been fantastic so far.

Peter
Could not agree more +1
latency wise I am happy with HDX compared with TDM system (HD)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-28-2014, 03:13 PM
propower propower is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 2,202
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

Quote:
Originally Posted by michael c View Post
By this, do you mean any plugs on tracks you are recording to? Or does this mean all plug-ins in the session.

Thanks.
Only the plug ins on the track you are recording to get muted. But the workflow is all different. You need to set up a LowLatency pair of outputs as well. I was HD 1998 to 2011. Listen to your HDX brethren. I make HDN work but it is a beast that must be fed on a session by session basis if you want Low Latency. HDx will just pick up where you left off (minus a bunch of now unsupported plug ins in DSP format).
__________________
2017 27" iMac 3.8GHz i5, 1TB SSD
Logic ProX, Studio One V4, PT2019.x Orion Studio 2017, Apogee Ensemble TB
Musician: http://www.ivanlee.net/
Design Engineer: http://www.propowerinc.com/resume.html
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-28-2014, 05:06 PM
michael c michael c is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: LA CA 90027
Posts: 1,073
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

The fact that we are forced to replace our ProControls as well, makes the HDX card seem SO more expensive for our business model. Plug-ins seem to be abandoned as far as HDX 'plugs' go, so it is mainly the latency issue that seems like a benefit. In the days of falling budgets, it is hard to get excited about HDX for me at this point? Not sure.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-28-2014, 05:22 PM
propower propower is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 2,202
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

Quote:
Originally Posted by propower View Post
You may want to seriously look at the UA Apollo family - RME and MOTU. All have built in dsp low latency in the record monitor path.
__________________
2017 27" iMac 3.8GHz i5, 1TB SSD
Logic ProX, Studio One V4, PT2019.x Orion Studio 2017, Apogee Ensemble TB
Musician: http://www.ivanlee.net/
Design Engineer: http://www.propowerinc.com/resume.html
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-28-2014, 08:14 PM
Barry Johns Barry Johns is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 3,567
Default Re: Better dealing with latency: PT, DP, Cubase, Nuendo

I agree with some others, HDX can be a hard pill to swallow for many these days, but a no brainer for others. HDN along with one of the UA Apollo I/O's can give the best of all worlds. You would only need to invest in a few UA Plugins that you need for tracking purposes only, then do everything else in HDN.
__________________
HD Native Pcie, PTHD 11, PT12 Vanilla, Omni, Lynx Aurora 16, 192 I/O (16 in/8 out), 24 Fader D-Command, lots of preamps and compressors.

MacPro 5.1 (12) Core (2009 MacPro 8 Core Upgraded to a 12 Core MacPro), 56 Gig Ram, SSD System & 3 - 2TB Drives, OSX 10.9.5, Windows 10 Via Bootcamp
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
cubase and nuendo to ptools? blankpro General Discussion 0 03-17-2011 03:14 PM
OMF export from Cubase/Nuendo henrikas 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 0 04-08-2008 12:33 AM
Pro Tools Vs. Cubase or Nuendo... DamaZoneProductions 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 5 11-30-2005 04:53 AM
How does LE compares to Nuendo or Cubase? mrdosun 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 8 09-07-2003 01:43 PM
cubase or nuendo to pt billy the kid 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 8 05-19-2003 02:43 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:00 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com