Too much latency with HDN at 44.1

[Matt Hepworth]

I just got HDN to check it out and see if it works as a possible replacement for TDM.

At 32 buffer I'm getting issues on my 8 CPU (16 cores in PT) Mac Pro. CPU errors every few seconds tracking.

HD I/O interface.

At 64k buffer it just has too much latency. Sounds weird and phasey. 1 EQ and 1 Comp plugin. Delay comp confirms 0 samples latency.

I run 44.1. Just not working. Too much latency. LLM sounds right, but no plugins.

Plugs used were Ren EQ6 and VComp.

Latency chart - http://www.waves.com/support/tech-specs/plugin-latency

Zero plugin latency. Too much actual latency. 64 buffer. 44.1. HDN. HD I/O.

Any advice?

[albee1952]

Maybe you missed some system tweaks? In theory, HDN at the 128 buffer SHOULD have lower latency than a firewire interface at the 64 buffer. I run a DIGI003(firewire) and record at the 64 buffer(usually at 48K, but sometimes at 44.1K) and have rarely heard any mention of latency, unless I space out and leave delay comp ON to do a quick overdub, while the session is using high-latency plugins. Wish I had more insight

I suggest checking your routing. Make sure nothing is double-bussed anywhere and if you route things thru AUX tracks for sub-grouping, maybe try with all your tracks assigned to the main outputs(I have heard of AUX tracks not being correctly compensated for).

[Southsidemusic]

Exactly what Dave said above this post

We started with HD Native bundle with an Avid HD 8x8x8 i/o and used that on Mac pro 12 core with very impressive results. We even tracked and recorded a few of the billboard top 10 songs this past summer. That system and had a minimum of 100 tracks and arleast 75 plugins after bouce-ing down the VI's so we could apply the best plugins as the audio tracks makes a better workflow for us. If you have that kind of latency and issues there is something else going on with your setup, not the Native card.

We upgraded to a HDX2 in august and we LOVE that setup except the longing for more AAX-DSP plugins.

Best Regards
Christopher

[Matt Hepworth]

Hmmm....

No auxes. No other plugins. While I agree that it's less latency than FW, I can't imagine trying to track with it in a band situation.

I run an HD3 system normally. HDN just plain sounds WEIRD trying to track with. Latent and phasey.

I really hope I'm doing something wrong.

[Matt Hepworth]

The lack of AAX DSP (particularly Waves) is why I don't have any plans on going the HDX route.

Right now I'm thinking REALLY hard about staying with HD3.

[Southsidemusic]

The lack of DSP plugins in PT11HD is somewhat sad but we managed to find alternatives for the Waves plugins and we also found a whole bunch of awesome Native Plugins we use nowadays so HDX 2 works for us but I read other posts like you said where they are disapointed and I can understand that completely.

Why not hang on to the TDM system for now if it works for you, the HD4 worked VERY well for us until we had to change that out and I have to say it was one of the more stable configs we ever used from Avid

[propower]

Although I understand and agree with all the above responses --- I also totally agree with the OP. I only run at 96kHz/64 buffer for this reason. Performance is now solidly better and less latent than my old HD2 system.

----------------------
First the latency thing.....
Old HD system latency (assuming no plug ins are adding in) 2.4ms

HDN is:
96kHz I/O RT
64 samples ---- 1.80ms
128 ------------- 3.12ms
256 ------------- 5.8ms
512 ------------- 11.12ms
LLM ------------- 0.47ms (regardless of Buffer)

44.1kHz I/O RT
32 samples ----- 3.35ms
64 --------------- 4.80ms
128 -------------- 7.68ms
256 -------------- 13.52ms
LLM -------------- 1.9ms (regardless of Buffer)

SO: 44.1/64 is ~2X the latency you are used to. I find the world divided into two camps with virtually no overlap - either it bugs you or it doesn't.

-----------------------

Now the problem with Waves AAX64. I tested for a month and went around the park with Waves - I can not make them work at 96/64 or 128. CPU errors and play/rec stops. Ren Comp almost works - but note it adds its own 128 samples! If you go high enough buffer Waves works a lot better. Can't speak to 44.1 though! Since I went Waveless - no more CPU issues...

--------------------------

Things that work for me at 96/64

ALL AVID plug ins. I now have most and they are working and sounding great and all have low CPU footprint.
Softube (Classic, TLA and FET) - the new versions work very well with low CPU footprint.
Exponential Reverbs
Surprisingly -- NI K9 !!!
A few other choice plugs -
The message here is don't expect all AAX64 plugs to perform well at low buffers.

----------------

Lastly - to run low buffers at 96kHz I have to turn hyperthreading OFF (via preferences in Apples Xcode). I also find for lo buffer work Speed trumps cores. I use a 3.5GHz Late 2013 imac. - a side note - no usb hard drives - even usb3 was a problem for this system...

-------------------

I can't tell you I am right in your case (I have Thunderbolt you are likely PCIe -- I have Haswell imac you are MP - I have Blackmagic Thunderbolt hard drive dock - yours are internal -- etc...).
but this has taken me two months to sort out and I am finally error free! Back to working with my system rather than on it

[Drew Mazurek]

Try dropping the # of cores down to 15 or 7.

[YYR123]

Hard drive speed is something to consider as well -

[RyanC]

Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth

Hmmm....

No auxes. No other plugins. While I agree that it's less latency than FW, I can't imagine trying to track with it in a band situation.

I run an HD3 system normally. HDN just plain sounds WEIRD trying to track with. Latent and phasey.

I really hope I'm doing something wrong.

Hey Matt-

What is the rest of your monitoring signal flow and hardware? Phasey as in by itself or it's phasey when the cans blend with the sound happening acoustically in the room?