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
  #31  
Old 01-20-2020, 05:37 AM
basehead617 basehead617 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: California
Posts: 51
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Have something in mind? DSP version of AAX can be developed with same SDK than its native version, just that DSP has limitations that the developer need to be able to overcome. Developers don't like limitations, but that is just the nature of DSP.
I don’t know the technical details, just that people like the guy from Fabfilter have explicitly complained about the limitations and that it’s why they don’t have a DSP version.

I’m pretty sure everybody that makes AAX would release them as AAX DSP too if it was just as easy.

Last edited by basehead617; 01-20-2020 at 07:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-20-2020, 06:01 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 17,737
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by basehead617 View Post
I don’t know the technical details, just that people like the guy from Fabfilter have explicitly complained about the limitations and that it’s why they don’t have a DSP version.

I’m pretty sure everybody that makes AAX would make AAX DSP if it was just as easy.
There is 16MB ram per chip for starters, maybe just need more and no go.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-20-2020, 12:56 PM
corp corp is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 581
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
There is 16MB ram per chip for starters, maybe just need more and no go.
Hence, time for new cards.....

Still running older Macs with older PTHD...... purchased a new MP7.1 and presently debating on old HDX. Not waiting another year or two, three... for Avid. I would of thought that Apple announcing the new release years ago that Avid would of started on some type of update/upgrade when the new MP releases but nope....Avid behind the ball as usual. MTRX Studio, another HDX card carrier..... Just sell the company.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-20-2020, 04:25 PM
corp corp is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 581
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Why would you install 6 cards if you got the same out of 3 cards? Of course people are expecting that technology moves forward. HDX is +8 years already.

For comparison, Original HD cards only lived 2 years until there was HD|accel, and another 2 years and the HD Core card got a speedbump in its PCI-e incarnation. Generation before that (MIX) only lived 4 years. Original TDM cards lived 4 years before that.

So yes, card upgrade is way overdue.
Bingo

I heard a rumor that maybe Steinberg might introduce a PCIe card.....would be interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:41 PM
LDS LDS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 699
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Have something in mind? DSP version of AAX can be developed with same SDK than its native version, just that DSP has limitations that the developer need to be able to overcome. Developers don't like limitations, but that is just the nature of DSP.

If that is the case, Avid must have really borked the implementation of AAX-DSP given the number of TDM plugins that never made it to HDX.
__________________
littledevilstudios.com.au
Pro Tools Ultimate 2019.6. OSX 10.14.6. HDX. Avid Omni. MacBook Pro 2018. 6 Core i7. 32Gb. 4x mSata SSD Drives + 4x HDD. Blackmagic Intensity PCIe. ATI RX580. Sync HD
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:45 PM
LukeHoward LukeHoward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 813
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDS View Post
If that is the case, Avid must have really borked the implementation of AAX-DSP given the number of TDM plugins that never made it to HDX.

I'm not a DSP programmer but, I imagine it's as much market forces at work, as the nature of the industry has changed (and native has become much more powerful than it was at the time of TDM's introduction). I suspect Avid would have actively had to subsidise developers to make AAX DSP plugins – and I wish they did, in which case I would be contemplating buying another HDX card rather than a UAD Octo. Instead, pushing the voice count at high sample rates is the only thing that would make me consider adding another card.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-20-2020, 07:46 PM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 17,737
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDS View Post
If that is the case, Avid must have really borked the implementation of AAX-DSP given the number of TDM plugins that never made it to HDX.
Back in the day, there was no alternative. TDM is what you did if you wanted to do business. Now there are alternatives in the Native-land, so DSP plugins are not a necessity for plugin vendors anymore.

From what I have read and heard, coding AAX-DSP (with C++) is a whole lot easier than coding TDM (with assembly). But the nature of DSP as a restrictive platform never goes away.

Real problem here is Waves screwed DSP business by dropping DSP development and therefore DSP plugin prices by 50%, or in other words, today plugin vendor cannot double the price when they have DSP available.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-21-2020, 05:35 AM
LukeHoward LukeHoward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 813
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Here’s an idea given Avid seems to be OEM’ing a lot of hardware these days. License the UAD cards and put a TDM bus connector on them. Instant plugin ecosystem and low latency (because it would avoid round-tripping to the CPU). They can still sell you a HDX card to run the mixer and other AAX DSP plugins.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-21-2020, 06:51 AM
RyanC RyanC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 652
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Have something in mind?
If it was going to interest me, they need a new DSP system where the standard SDK developed plugins don't have 34 samples of latency or more.

I don't know that much about DSP, but if two (quality) inserts have more latency than the 32 sample buffer, then the money is better spent on a faster computer for my workflow.

Make a new card with more power, get someone like Bricasti to make a high end verb for it, something that wouldn't be practical in native land, get the latencies down to below what can be done with native...In other words make something to where there is an actual advantage to having the DSP.

Otherwise put a fork in it, put the resources into developing a better audio engine, add 2x and 4x buffer settings for VI's and develop some native hardware that is at least as good (if not better than) other companies.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-21-2020, 07:00 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 17,737
Default Re: NAMM new HDX or nothing!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
If it was going to interest me, they need a new DSP system where the standard SDK developed plugins don't have 34 samples of latency or more.
It all comes down to how far the developer wants to tune the plugin. Avid "standard" latency is 10 samples, and more if the algorithm needs that (f.ex Pro Subharmonic 394 samples).

Don't know why the new DSP is "slower" than TDM, which had 4 samples "standard" latency. For comparison ReVibe TDM had 4 sample latency but ReVibe AAXDSP has 66 sample latency. There must be some timing issue with how AAXDSP addresses its memory, compared to TDM. Only explanation I can come up with.

Theoretically you always need one sample for reading in, one sample for processing, one sample for writing out. So those old 4 sample TDM plugs were pretty damn awesome -- only one sample shy from perfect.

So yes, AAX-DSP XL or whatever it would be called is way overdue. I cannot see myself putting my money into these +8 year old cards today because either the cards are going to be updated or going away soon, and neither scenario encourages me to invest.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
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
11R at NAMM musicman691 Eleven Rack 35 02-18-2013 03:37 PM
Namm broken81 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 6 05-11-2010 12:51 PM
NAMM 07 MiamiMusicMan Virtual Instruments 3 01-18-2007 10:50 AM
NAMM '07 - What do you want? dts.music 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 26 01-16-2007 03:40 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:04 PM.


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