Top Studios Use HDX/HDN/TDM?

[Drew Mazurek]

Originally Posted by Barry Johns

Maybe I'm not doing a good job of making the point.

I understand the point you're trying to make perfectly (I believe). I just think you're trying to use the wrong people/places as your barometer. Highend studios are ALWAYS "behind the curve" in terms of technology acquisition.

And I do believe you have a point, but it's in the mid level studios and one man operations like mine. I didn't do HDX because it launched with not enough plugins on board to make me jump. Glad I didn't. My gut was right. I went HD Native and couldn't be happier. Sure, I've had to make a few modifications to my workflow, but it's all good now.

Where I disagree with you is the supremacy of TDM. My current rig runs circles around the TDM rig I used to have.

[Bob Olhsson]

I wouldn't assume that information is up to date. For example Abbey Road put out a joint press release with Avid about upgrading everything to HDX. On the other hand I know somebody with a hit on today's charts that was mixed in Pro Tools 7 on a G5. I also have a friend who is tickled to death with the PT 11 HD native rig that he replaced his HD5 system with.

I'd suggest taking a look at what all Avid does other than Pro Tools to understand where 12 fits in. Different people have different needs.

[Stereo Missile]

Isn't the point here that there is virtually no major studio that DOESN"T use protools? Do you think they are suddenly going to dump backwards compatibility of their old projects? And what system would they move to that makes them compatible with the majority of their clients requirements, and other studio's sessions?

I'm doing a movie mix down in Sydney in a couple of weeks at the biggest post mixing room in town, they are running 6 x HDX rigs in tandem on Mac minis.

No big studios that I can think of who are not using protools. Not all of them are wringing every last drop out of their legacy hardware.

[Craig F]

Studios will update the who has been in recently way more often than the gear list
now if they were to pick up some rare vintage gear they will that update that, like if Capital sold the U47s that the legends used there over the years and someone else pick them up or original Helios or ISA-110 modules

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by Craig F

Studios will update the who has been in recently way more often than the gear list
now if they were to pick up some rare vintage gear they will that update that, like if Capital sold the U47s that the legends used there over the years and someone else pick them up or original Helios or ISA-110 modules

... Capital sold the U47s that the legends used there over the years and someone else pick them up or original Helios or ISA-110 modules ...

You mean all of that old stuff is worse something?

Guess I better dig around in the bottom of my closet and see what else is in there...

[Craig F]

Originally Posted by Bill Denton

... Capital sold the U47s that the legends used there over the years and someone else pick them up or original Helios or ISA-110 modules ...

You mean all of that old stuff is worse something?

Guess I better dig around in the bottom of my closet and see what else is in there...

...if...

[Bookerv12]

I jumped to PT 10 HD Native from an HD4 Accel system running 7.3.
Like Drew, I was stunned at the performance increase. Didn't really need to go HDX.
Running 2 HD Native systems, one on Mac pro, one on Hack pro.

Having said that, we plugged in the old HD4 system in for a large tracking session last week at a different studio.
It worked flawlessly on an old G4, recording 32 tracks at a time.

I like the updated features of PT10 on a screaming machine, looking forward to 11.
But, the old HD4 machine seems a little bit easier to record large track counts with minimal latency.

After thinking about it, we started building that system in about 2003 after using a mix system for a few years before that.
It made us a lot of money.
An HDX system with 3 cards would be quite a bit cheaper than the Accel system now, but is still pretty pricey compared to other options.

If I was still running a commercial facility, I would probably still be on an HD4-7 system, especially now.

It makes sense for us, the little guys to go ahead and upgrade as we see fit.
But in real life, an Accel system is hard to beat.

PT 12 is just not the slightest bit interesting to us right now

How's that for a random collection of useless info?

[Drew Mazurek]

Not random at all!! You fit quite a lot of your history there!!

[Chief Technician]

Originally Posted by Barry Johns

how long has TDM a been out?

HD (Process) was introduced in Q1 2002. HD Accel was introduced in 2003 or 2004.

Originally Posted by Barry Johns

How long has HDX been out?

HDX was introduced in Q4 2011.

The facility I work at went from MIX|Plus systems installed in G4s with v6.4.1cs4 (last version for MIX) to HD|2 Accel systems installed in G5s with v7.1 in 2006. We effectively waited 4 years before upgrading to HD. Most of those systems stayed at OS X v10.4.11 and v7.4 until they were replaced with Mac Pros at OS X v10.6.8 with v9.0.5.

The next upgrade those systems received was v10.3.4 software with their HD|2 Accel hardware. I know some people mocked us for waiting so long to upgrade to 10. Those people who mocked us also had to deal with various automation bugs. v10.3.4 was, practically speaking, the first release of v10 whose non-new functionality acted the same way as v9.0.5.

As part of that v10.3.4 software upgrade, we found some TDM DSP bugs that were not publicly documented. These bugs were such that if you hammered your HD|2 Accel system as hard as possible with v9.0.5 that your sessions would not open with v10.3.4. You would see the SWOD, DSP shuffles, out of DSP, out of memory, etc. As far as I know, those bugs were never fixed. It was these TDM DSP bugs that were the driving force in my employer upgrading to HDX. The upgrade to HDX solved our DSP issues. Sessions now move between 11 HDX systems without DSP errors of any sort.

I work in post, not music. It was only with the release of v10.3.10 and v11.3.1 that I think now is the time to upgrade these systems to OS X v10.8.5 and do a co-install of PT 10 and 11. Every situation is unique. Upgrading to HDX wasn't without some bad feelings (SoundToys and WAVES), though technology marches on and sometimes you have to leave something behind.

[albee1952]

I also run a commercial studio(albeit a small one) and found roughly the same capabilities with a DIGI003 and a bunch of outboard pres as my friend's "Pro-built" HD3 system(in fact, I could crash his rig faster than my non-HD rig on any given day). Upgraded to HDN with dual HD IO boxes for bigger input count and left him in the dust in many ways. Now that I am on a newer 6 core rig, I'm doing stuff neither of us would dream of a year ago(and he still can't...) My 2 cents, but I think its a lot more about the room(and its history), the vibe and the people than it is about the gear I'm still working on the "history" part