Best AAX DSP reverb available?

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by LDS

There is a reason it appears in a lot of facilities, and it isn't because their owners are dim.

Originally Posted by LDS

if you ask me. If Avid released a cost effective UAD Apollo style interface with HDX functionality tomorrow, there would be a line forming around the block.

You are absolutely right. They would be lined up.

[TimNielsen]

What I find interesting in this discussion. I'm also a power user. I have a massive session for the a new show I'm working on. Like 700+ voices and tracks running on an HDX3 fully decked out Mac Pro.

But the Avid DSP is so massively inefficient, that 2.5 of my 3 cards are 100% eaten up simply running the mixer engine in 7.1.2 mode. It's insane. The ONLY reason I am forced to even run the HDX3 is for the voice count.

But when I switch over my system to native for example (even with only 256 voices) but still running ALL processing plugins, reverbs, compressor, EQ, Spanner, VisLM etc... now switched to native, the session runs BETTER than it does on the hardware DSP.

So yes, DSP isn't dying, it's DEAD already. At some point Avid will have no choice but to simply abandon, and open up additional voices on Native. I hope we're close to them making that decision. Even my aging Mac Pro could run 700+ voices in native with tons of plugins. And if we're really going to see a hot-rod new Mac Pro this year, then DSP will absolutely have no place.

The sooner we can burden ourselves from HDX cards as voice dongles the better. DSP was fine working in stereo. But for any type of film and surround work, they're not only useless, but a huge huge burden.

[TimNielsen]

Except you're wrong on one very important point here, there are times when an HDX+Native is WAY worse than a fully native. My case in point:

I'm on an HDX3. I have a massive session and am working in 7.1.2 mode. The DSP chips fill up so fast with multi-channel senses and routing, that I actually cannot run NEARLY as many plugins with sends as on a fully native system, where I would not have this limitation at all. I have fully maxed out my DSP chips, and when that is the case, I literally cannot add another send, hence I have to completely limit the amount of reverbs I could use.

If I could put my system totally native, I wouldn't have this limitation at all. In a fully native system I could run 20+ reverbs, instead of the 9 that I can get away with now in this session. The limitation is directly caused by the DSP at high track width sessions. Just adding one multi-channel send across my tracks might tie up 3 DSP chips...

In my case I would MUCH prefer a fully native system in every way. Except I need more than 256 voices. I need almost 700. And the only way to do that is to use an HDX3

What they NEED to do, is split the mix engine and the plugin. So in other words, run the mixer in native, and free up the DSP for actual plugins. That would be ideal...

Again, on an HD3, because of how many chip it takes just for the mixer, I have less than half of one card available for plugins, and I am completely hobbled when it comes to multi-channel sends to reverbs... In my case the HDX3 causes nothing but headaches. If Avid ever opens up voice counts on native, I am ripping these cards out and tossing them in the lake.

Originally Posted by MixerGuy

Tom you keep deflecting from what I am actually saying.

I am not talking about running a specific reverb plugin native vs HDX.

I am not talking about specific DAWs vs each other.

I am simply saying that for ProTools (my DAW) Native + HDX3 is more powerful, currently, than Native PT alone.

You can speculate / argue about Native vs HDX all you want. I am just commenting on what is available today, for ProTools Ultimate.

I never said anything about what you are commenting on.

I never said "HDX is more powerful than Native"

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by TimNielsen

What they NEED to do, is split the mix engine and the plugin. So in other words, run the mixer in native, and free up the DSP for actual plugins. That would be ideal...

Yes this is not the first time Avid has been said to have not fully implemented the best of their own hardware/software combos

This is sad also b/c they could totally cater to each situation if they decided to do so.

[Branko]

Originally Posted by TimNielsen

...Except I need more than 256 voices. I need almost 700. And the only way to do that is to use an HDX3...

What kind of a project is that? 700 tracks on a single machine?

[BScout]

Originally Posted by Branko

What kind of a project is that? 700 tracks on a single machine?

An ATMOS tent pole feature film will eat up 700 voices easily. (voices not tracks)

[YYR123]

I still believe it would be nice for users to decide

I would personally like it all to run on the Chips, mixer plugs everything

But I am a simple music man

But it would be cool for someone else to simply choose where to run his mixer to benefit from other things

[reichman]

Except you're wrong on one very important point here, there are times when an HDX+Native is WAY worse than a fully native.

THIS^^^^

I have sessions where I truly do need all those sends and they completely choke on HDX. Switch to native, and I can run all the sends and mixing I need. We need PT Ultimate native to run 768+ voices.

[MixerGuy]

Hi Tim

I can only speak from my own experience, and for me, mixing stereo, 5.1 and 7.1 - music only - HDX3 + a souped up cheese grater is very powerful, and works very well for me.

I don't recall saying that Native + HDX is *always* more powerful than Native.... perhaps I was unclear. I apologize for not being more clear. I'm only speaking about my experiences and how things work for my workflow.

I am sorry that ProTools while working in 7.1.2 chews up your DSP. I had heard that from someone else who was working in 7.1.2
Perhaps this is a serious software efficiency that needs to be addressed? I'm speculating.

Originally Posted by TimNielsen

Except you're wrong on one very important point here, there are times when an HDX+Native is WAY worse than a fully native. My case in point:

I'm on an HDX3. I have a massive session and am working in 7.1.2 mode. The DSP chips fill up so fast with multi-channel senses and routing, that I actually cannot run NEARLY as many plugins with sends as on a fully native system, where I would not have this limitation at all. I have fully maxed out my DSP chips, and when that is the case, I literally cannot add another send, hence I have to completely limit the amount of reverbs I could use.

If I could put my system totally native, I wouldn't have this limitation at all. In a fully native system I could run 20+ reverbs, instead of the 9 that I can get away with now in this session. The limitation is directly caused by the DSP at high track width sessions. Just adding one multi-channel send across my tracks might tie up 3 DSP chips...

In my case I would MUCH prefer a fully native system in every way. Except I need more than 256 voices. I need almost 700. And the only way to do that is to use an HDX3

What they NEED to do, is split the mix engine and the plugin. So in other words, run the mixer in native, and free up the DSP for actual plugins. That would be ideal...

Again, on an HD3, because of how many chip it takes just for the mixer, I have less than half of one card available for plugins, and I am completely hobbled when it comes to multi-channel sends to reverbs... In my case the HDX3 causes nothing but headaches. If Avid ever opens up voice counts on native, I am ripping these cards out and tossing them in the lake.

[MixerGuy]

p.s. kind of bummed that Sonnox AAX DSP reverb is regularly at a street price of about $500, and yet is stereo only. No 5.0 No 4.0

It is also 10 years old.... so I am unsure if it will be soon abandoned.

Originally Posted by audioman1973

This is in reply to Mixerguy's question above on Sonnox AAX DSP reverb plugin and how is it for music. I recently bought it during their last sale. It is a great sounding reverb and has highly tweakable parameters. Only one problem that I didn't realize until after I bought it. Apparently it is only set up AAX DSP for post work because it only operates at 48 kHz in this mode. If you want any other sample rate you have to run it as a Native plugin. Since I mostly record my audio at 88.1 or 96 kHz unless it will be for video I was very disappointed to discover this after buying. You can't even run it DSP at 44.1! It requires a full DSP chip at 48 kHz which is to be expected from a good complex reverb. The only place you will find information stating 48 kHZ only in AAX DSP mode is in the user manual specs. I didn't see it in any advertising info. So be aware of this if you plan to use it for only mixing music. If somehow I am completely wrong about this I would love someone to correct me. However after installing it only shows up in the Pro Tools DSP plugin menu if your session is set to 48 kHz.