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 > Legacy Products > Pro Tools 10

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-08-2017, 07:17 AM
dtmprod dtmprod is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 433
Default Upgrading from HD to HDX

I'm late to the party, but finally getting around to switching from HD to HDX. Because I'm still using a Procontrol, need to stay on the PT 10 HD platform til I get a newer controller. Had several questions for those having done upgrade:
1) Do you find that the HDX system is more stable just using AAX plugins? As opposed to intermingling TDM/RTAS on the older HD platform?
2) I currently have an HD-6 system. Would 1 HDX card keep up or would I need to get 2?
3) All my verb plugins are currently TDM. I'll probably have to switch to native based verb units in AAX land. Even tho I have a 12 core machine, I'm concerned that it'll keep up using 3-4 native verb plugins.
4) Slate VRM isn't particularly stable on an HD system. So I'm still using the older RTAS versions. Does that improve on an HDX platform?
Appreciate your looking & any possible comments/observation. Thx
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-08-2017, 08:15 AM
peterle peterle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Berlin , Germany
Posts: 440
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

3) All my verb plugins are currently TDM. I'll probably have to switch to native based verb units in AAX land. Even tho I have a 12 core machine, I'm concerned that it'll keep up using 3-4 native verb plugins.

AVID Space (former TL Space) and Revibe are AAX DSP , you
can get them astonishing cheap s/h , btw the older TDM Licenses
are also valid for the DSP AAX versions.

1) Do you find that the HDX system is more stable just using AAX plugins? As opposed to intermingling TDM/RTAS on the older HD platform?

you mean DSP aax with native aax mixed?
regarding the stability it depends much on the quality of the native plugins
, at least you dont loose that much voices when mixing native and dsp
plugins like in pt10hd land...
i use mostly only dsp plugins and it is fairly stable.
Crashes or instability mostly with VI , which are all native.

2) I currently have an HD-6 system. Would 1 HDX card keep up or would I need to get 2?

i had a HD Accel2 which i pushed often on its limits , same sessions on HDX need less then 50% dsp power ,
but it depends much on the plugins and how good they are optimized for dsp aax , if they are available as dsp aax....
to replace a HD6 you may need indeed 2HDX cards..

regards
__________________
foley artist , soundeditor
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-08-2017, 10:12 PM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 16,903
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtmprod View Post
All my verb plugins are currently TDM. I'll probably have to switch to native based verb units in AAX land. Even tho I have a 12 core machine, I'm concerned that it'll keep up using 3-4 native verb plugins.
You will be amazed how many native verbs you can have
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-09-2017, 12:50 AM
Matt Hepworth's Avatar
Matt Hepworth Matt Hepworth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Utah
Posts: 423
Default Upgrading from HD to HDX

HDX definitely underperformed in comparison to our HD4 Accel it was supposed to replace. The optimization was dreadful, too. For example, a particular plugin might take 33% of an HDX chip for a single instance, but the you can put 20 more on the same chip. If you're mixing different AAX DSP plugins the DSP gets eaten up really quickly.

Let's not overlook the fact that nearly all of your TDM plugins don't exist in AAX DSP land. Choices are very few.

Also, some perform way better than their TDM counterparts, but others are much worse.

You also won't have 18 DSPs for processing. Plan on 14, since the others get eaten up by the mix engine (like TDM, only you have WAY less chips to sacrifice with HDX).

Latency is also usually 3-10 times as high with HDX. For example: SSL Channel TDM is 4 samples latency. Any channel strip plugins (outside of the boring AVID one) are 33–34 samples latency. Substantial. Even the AVID one is 9 samples.

I have a partial chart of latency and instance counts you're welcome to. PM me your email, if so.

Lastly, the HDX fan is LOUD and on all the time if you're using up more than a couple DSP.

Machine room is a must.

We returned HDX and stuck with Accel, but also use native HD12 for mixing.

If you're not going past PTHD10 yet there is absolutely no reason in the world to step down to HDX.

Once you're ready to drop your Pro Control and settle for the crummy new controllers you'll have the benefit of commit and freeze with PT12 (plus Offline bounce, if you're not using outboard), which will greatly extend the ability of HDX.

For us, an HDX 1 did not have sufficient resources to track a full band with typical routing and processing at 44.1kHz.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-09-2017, 07:19 AM
dtmprod dtmprod is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 433
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth View Post
HDX definitely underperformed in comparison to our HD4 Accel it was supposed to replace. The optimization was dreadful, too. For example, a particular plugin might take 33% of an HDX chip for a single instance, but the you can put 20 more on the same chip. If you're mixing different AAX DSP plugins the DSP gets eaten up really quickly.

Let's not overlook the fact that nearly all of your TDM plugins don't exist in AAX DSP land. Choices are very few.

Also, some perform way better than their TDM counterparts, but others are much worse.

You also won't have 18 DSPs for processing. Plan on 14, since the others get eaten up by the mix engine (like TDM, only you have WAY less chips to sacrifice with HDX).

Latency is also usually 3-10 times as high with HDX. For example: SSL Channel TDM is 4 samples latency. Any channel strip plugins (outside of the boring AVID one) are 33–34 samples latency. Substantial. Even the AVID one is 9 samples.

I have a partial chart of latency and instance counts you're welcome to. PM me your email, if so.

Lastly, the HDX fan is LOUD and on all the time if you're using up more than a couple DSP.

Machine room is a must.

We returned HDX and stuck with Accel, but also use native HD12 for mixing.

If you're not going past PTHD10 yet there is absolutely no reason in the world to step down to HDX.

Once you're ready to drop your Pro Control and settle for the crummy new controllers you'll have the benefit of commit and freeze with PT12 (plus Offline bounce, if you're not using outboard), which will greatly extend the ability of HDX.

For us, an HDX 1 did not have sufficient resources to track a full band with typical routing and processing at 44.1kHz.
Hi, sent you a pm with email address. Go ahead & send me ur chart pls, thx
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-21-2017, 08:11 AM
fm_xtk fm_xtk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: London, U.K.
Posts: 170
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth View Post
HDX definitely underperformed in comparison to our HD4 Accel it was supposed to replace. The optimization was dreadful, too. For example, a particular plugin might take 33% of an HDX chip for a single instance, but the you can put 20 more on the same chip. If you're mixing different AAX DSP plugins the DSP gets eaten up really quickly.

Let's not overlook the fact that nearly all of your TDM plugins don't exist in AAX DSP land. Choices are very few.

Also, some perform way better than their TDM counterparts, but others are much worse.

You also won't have 18 DSPs for processing. Plan on 14, since the others get eaten up by the mix engine (like TDM, only you have WAY less chips to sacrifice with HDX).

Latency is also usually 3-10 times as high with HDX. For example: SSL Channel TDM is 4 samples latency. Any channel strip plugins (outside of the boring AVID one) are 33–34 samples latency. Substantial. Even the AVID one is 9 samples.

I have a partial chart of latency and instance counts you're welcome to. PM me your email, if so.

Lastly, the HDX fan is LOUD and on all the time if you're using up more than a couple DSP.

Machine room is a must.

We returned HDX and stuck with Accel, but also use native HD12 for mixing.

If you're not going past PTHD10 yet there is absolutely no reason in the world to step down to HDX.

Once you're ready to drop your Pro Control and settle for the crummy new controllers you'll have the benefit of commit and freeze with PT12 (plus Offline bounce, if you're not using outboard), which will greatly extend the ability of HDX.

For us, an HDX 1 did not have sufficient resources to track a full band with typical routing and processing at 44.1kHz.
Thank you very much for your post. Like the OP I, too, am in TDM land with ProControl and had been debating whether it'd be worth it to go to HDX but stick with PT10 software. You have confirmed to me that this is not the way to go.

Currently am running a HD2 on my old MacPro (Pro Tools 8) as an extension to my main rig (HD7 w. chassis). It's a great way to offload processing and makes it possible for me to avoid having to buy into the new license plan and upgrade to (seemingly) inferior hardware for top dollar.
__________________
2x Hackintosh X79

HD7 Accel PCIe, Magma EB7 chassis
PT 10.3.10 Mac OS 10.9.5
SSL Delta Link HD 160 I/O

COCKOS REAPER (latest)
RME MADIFX (192 I/O)

ProControl (32 channel)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-21-2017, 02:18 PM
Dizzi45Z Dizzi45Z is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UT, United States
Posts: 1,723
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

Man! I too have had a difficult time moving to HDX for all of the reasons listed here. For me, it is also difficult because I use so many WAVES plugins and I don't want to lose all of my DSP options with them when I go HDX. The problem is that things are going obsolete here in Mountain Lion land. Not even Google Chrome is supported anymore.

I honestly think that there just was never, nor will there ever be a better DSP system than Pro Tools HD. I have looked at all other DSP options I can find, UA, Waves, Slate, etc. and all of them get too complicated with additional mixers and forcing you to use only their plug-ins and then adding tons of latency or limited plug-in count while mixing. :-(

Add to all of this, it is difficult to know what to do computer wise. Will Apple release a new Mac Pro? Even if they do, I hate the idea of having 4 hard drives, a chassis and any other previously interior computer hardware spread across my desk. Are iMacs or MacBook pros going to be the future of running a Pro Studio?

So many challenging decisions to make. All of them expensive with little improvement (or stepping backwards). Unfortunately, I don't know how much longer I can walk the route of staying in Mountain Lion.
__________________
recording.guru : FREE Pro Tools Tips and 19 Video Basic Training Course
Pro Tools 12.8.3 HDX Mac OS 10.12.6
Mac Pro Quad 3.2 Nehalem with 32 GB RAM
Noisebox Studios -Utah Recording Studio
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-21-2017, 03:36 PM
bonfi64 bonfi64 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Milan italy
Posts: 148
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

I'm very stable with PT 8 HD2 since 7 years, i read that most of people who upgrade to HDX still have problems in performance and stability, Avis is also asking 7/8 grant to switch to HDX (cards and new interface) talking about plugins, maybe you wait 2 seconds less inserting a AAX dsp plugin, but comparing to time waist in upgrading and stability fix that's nothing, i Have also a PT HD 10 partition on my Macpro 1.1 running Snow Leopard (best osx from apple since 10 years) in the years i expand my old blue 192 with other in & out AD/DA cards for nothing, thinking to buy a used core card to expand my rig, simply i don't trust AVid with new software policy and notice every day people complaining here about bugs on PT 11 and 12, my suggestion is symply DON'T !!!!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-22-2017, 05:23 AM
musicman691 musicman691 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Soprano State (NJ)
Posts: 16,551
Default Re: Upgrading from HD to HDX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizzi45Z View Post

Add to all of this, it is difficult to know what to do computer wise. Will Apple release a new Mac Pro? Even if they do, I hate the idea of having 4 hard drives, a chassis and any other previously interior computer hardware spread across my desk. Are iMacs or MacBook pros going to be the future of running a Pro Studio?
Given the current state of Apple computers you're going to have that same h/w mess no matter what Mac you go to. Apple abandoned the concept of everything (except screen) in one box with the iTrashcan. No more internal cards or multiple drives like in a cheesegrater MacPro. I know it sucks but with a little forethought and some cabinet work all the extra stuff can be hidden quite nicely. And you needn't spend big time to do it or be Norm Abram in the carpentry department either
__________________
Jack
See profile for system details
iMac dead & retired as of 11/4/17

QAPLA!
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
Upgrading from pt9 to pt11 and upgrading macbook pro daylomusic Pro Tools 11 0 12-20-2013 02:35 PM
Upgrading to PT10HD without upgrading to HDX Epik Productions Pro Tools 10 4 10-21-2011 10:50 AM
Upgrading Venta 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 9 04-12-2010 09:34 AM
Upgrading interface without upgrading software? michaelkevin 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 3 09-16-2008 09:37 PM
Will upgrading OSX necessitate upgrading ProTools? OBwan50 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 4 02-27-2006 01:24 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:38 PM.


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