Waves AAX DSP: Ask if you want to get it!

[ejwells]

Oh, maybe it should be a "one hat trick moose" then?

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by ejwells

Oh, maybe it should be a "one hat trick moose" then?

Like take off, eh!

WAVES is doomed if they do not port to AAX.
They are too ubiquitous in the big rooms. All the major players will go AAX (dsp) if they want to survive.

kasper

[mattrixx]

Originally Posted by Kasper

Like take off, eh!

WAVES is doomed if they do not port to AAX.
They are too ubiquitous in the big rooms. All the major players will go AAX (dsp) if they want to survive.

kasper

That's a big call... They've already said they are considering it.
But it's a little alarmist to think that if they don't support Protools, it's game over.
Also, to think that there's any real advantage to supporting AAX DSP, rather than just native AAX for something like WAVES, is kinda strange.
It's an interesting time and an interesting platform in AAX. Both native and DSP based architecture.
Anyway, time will tell and it doesn't surprise me that a large company with a large user base would want to see how the dust settles before leaping into the unknown.

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by mattrixx

That's a big call... They've already said they are considering it.
But it's a little alarmist to think that if they don't support Protools, it's game over.
Also, to think that there's any real advantage to supporting AAX DSP, rather than just native AAX for something like WAVES, is kinda strange.
It's an interesting time and an interesting platform in AAX. Both native and DSP based architecture.
Anyway, time will tell and it doesn't surprise me that a large company with a large user base would want to see how the dust settles before leaping into the unknown.

Times are a changin', that I will give you. But still, every major studio, film, record, TV show (insert what you will) is edited/mixed in Pro Tools.
So yes. Every major player supports PT. Be it TDM or RTAS (at present) There are no plugs that are non-Pro Tools that are of any consequence in the marketplace.

Presently, native is a growing option, but DSP will still rule the big mix rooms, and edit suites that need to be compatible.
The cost to go HDX is still very small for most pro shops, especially with the trade-in allowance.
It's not unknown, they (developers) know the cost. And for someone like WAVES, it's small potatoes.

Now, something may be up at WAVES despite my beliefs. They are abandoning iLok for their own auth system. So who knows what other strange tricks they may pull. And I thought they would perish with WUP (how wrong I was) so who knows.... but PT support is a must for ANY company to be taken seriously.

kasper

[NewdestinyX]

Originally Posted by AxeDye

I would like AAX native support first. Problem is Avid wont release 11 unless the plug in market is decent. They are dropping RTAS and TDM so I really hope that there is enough out there for Avid to get rid of those formats. Either way once Pro Tools goes 64 bit I doubt DSP will be the feature that everyone craves. HDX will offer more IO capabilities, HD Native will probably offer thunderbolt solutions and standard will be for third party interfaces. Overall they will all have impact on the industry and be a reasonable option. If DSP fades away they could easily make the cards smaller similar to what native is now, offer it for cheaper but still have the option to say run 3 cards for additional IO. I am looking forward to see where things go either way.

I am so glad you spoke up! Why the heck anybody is developing anything for DSP is beyond me. CPUs are way faster than the chips they use for DSP. Let's leave HDX for what it's best for. More I/O. Let plug-ins run in native. The plug-ins don't sound any different in DSP so why do we need DSP anyway for running plug-ins? Calm down, Grant. (Don't get me started) :-/

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by NewdestinyX

I am so glad you spoke up! Why the heck anybody is developing anything for DSP is beyond me. CPUs are way faster than the chips they use for DSP. Let's leave HDX for what it's best for. More I/O. Let plug-ins run in native. The plug-ins don't sound any different in DSP so why do we need DSP anyway for running plug-ins? Calm down, Grant. (Don't get me started) :-/

cpu is faster but runs more than just plugins. While dsp's run plugings/mix engine. Both are good, but some prefer (myself included) to leave the cpu to do the tasks without touching the plugins as much as possible.

[WernerF]

Not to mention the fact that only a DSP based system can recreate, in an uncomprimised way, an analoug workflow. No workarounds. Until Native can do that it will not be 100% a pro alternative. For many it is just fine, but not for all when put to this test.

[Marsdy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29XQ...layer_embedded

This is pretty depressing. It sounds like Waves hasn't yet decided wether to even do a DSP version of AAX. Presumably work hasn't even started then? They haven't even decided WHEN they're going to make a decision on making a DSP version. Jeez!!!!!

It's going to be LONG time before I upgrade to HDX by the sound of it. If Waves DON'T do a DSP version then I doubt I ever will.

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by mattrixx

That's a big call... They've already said they are considering it.
But it's a little alarmist to think that if they don't support Protools, it's game over.
Also, to think that there's any real advantage to supporting AAX DSP, rather than just native AAX for something like WAVES, is kinda strange.
It's an interesting time and an interesting platform in AAX. Both native and DSP based architecture.
Anyway, time will tell and it doesn't surprise me that a large company with a large user base would want to see how the dust settles before leaping into the unknown.

See this from Russ at Air Users Blog (and NAMM):
http://www.airusersblog.com/home-pag...-concerns.html

AAX native is definitely in the works but they don't know when AAX dsp will happen (or as it seems to me if I understand what was said right if it will happen at all). The way the Waves guy was talking it seemed AAX dsp is not a priority for them.

edit: Marsdy: it looks like you and I were typing at the same time.

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by NewdestinyX

I am so glad you spoke up! Why the heck anybody is developing anything for DSP is beyond me. CPUs are way faster than the chips they use for DSP. Let's leave HDX for what it's best for. More I/O. Let plug-ins run in native. The plug-ins don't sound any different in DSP so why do we need DSP anyway for running plug-ins? Calm down, Grant. (Don't get me started) :-/

It's become apparent you don't like dsp plugs so why do you post in dsp threads? It's best that one lets chips do what they were designed for - cpu for general computing and dsp for application specific stuff like audio work. Speed doesn't always enter into the equation but rather what a chip can do best with something.