HDX Benefits?

[Darryl Ramm]

I am not angry, but you are one of a long list of folks that come here asking repeat questions about HDX-DSP and who for whatever reason can’t find answers here or elsewhere themselves.

And I am not seeing hard facts here that make you a likely HDX user.

I am not sure who you are planning on calling at Avid. But Sweetwater or Vintage King both have sales teams who can help you configure a HDX system. Don’t expect them to spend lots of time with you unless they can qualify you as a likely customer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brianjanthony]

Most folks who need to track thru plugins (I'm one of em) usually need the standard EQ/compressor chain. FX like verbs and delays should be no issue if using a bus/aux sends, even on weaker system.

On my mid 2012 MBP I can use Slate VMR with 0 latency (other than buffer of system) across a ton of audio tracks. That gets you EQ, compressor, verb all the usual channel stuff. It also translates flawlessly to my HD setup in main studio.

True, you may need to bump up to 128 if mixing on laptop. But I can run a full tracking session here at the house with the MBP and Slate on every channel. No, I can't run all my gadgets and Waves candy, but it is certainly possible to track with decent latency (bass/vocals etc) at a 64 buffer.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by asounds

Why are you getting so mad about this? LOL?

I never came here saying I need to buy a HDX setup, I was just wondering how it works.

I can afford the $10-$20k setup, but even if I couldn't, am I not allowed to ask about it here?

I don't have a 18i20. I have a 18i8.

You not even reading my posts..... I'll just call Avid tomorrow.

Make no mistake your posts are being read, it is the meaning of your words that is not clear.

I think Darryl is just trying to get you to cough up enough clear specific info about your situation and needs, to try to give some kind of targeted answer as opposed to just general info which may or may not be of any help
And consider while your posts may seem clear to you, they are actually sufficiently vague enough to be pretty ambiguous.

For example: in your OP you state 1. "I understand it will assist with AAX-DSP plugins, but does it also assist running Pro Tools HD? (Otherwise I why not stick with UAD?)"
The logical assumption from that statement is that you already have UAD in order to actually be able to "stick with it" ...Where if you would have said something more clear like "or should I just get UAD" then there would be no confusion and less wasted time.

For example: if your system was already listed like mine is in my sig line, that way when I ask a question, much of things Darryl is asking you about is already answered, so those trying to help can quickly get more specific and targeted

For example it is not clarified if you are recording just yourself ( where in reality you do not really need to use autotune to track with or any plugs for that matter) or commercially recording other people where if the singer is so bad that it is a distraction, then you might want to track with it.

Anyway instead of being defencive try being more clear and informative, as it will benefit you in the long run.

[albee1952]

Hmmm, much to consider here, so here are some random thoughts:
1-recording with autotune seems to me like playing guitar while somebody tweaks the tuning keys, or playing a synth while some keeps moving the pitch wheel. Autotune is a process better left till after recording.

2-HDX is capable of near-zero latency. BUT, toss in a handful of native plugins and all bets are off. I track bands on HD/Native(the PCIe card) at a 64 buffer and have no issues with latency, all the while running several dozen plugins. The worst culprit being my bass amp sim plugin(7 samples) and softube Console 1(4 samples, for a total of 11 samples of ADC). I have yet to hear mention of latency in 4 years of using this rig(unless I do something wrong)

3-I work on a friend's HDX system and have way more issues with latency, because many plugins that report 0 on my HDN rig will actually report hundreds of samples on the HDX rig. I can't explain this, but its something to be aware of for anyone considering HDX.

4-UAD plugins are a "love/hate" thing for me. I love the sound quality, but hate that I can't use them while tracking as every one of them causes 1100+ samples of latency on my rig. Using an Apollo interface, with UA's software interface is the only way I know of to use their plugins while tracking(and I usually recommend Apollo as the best choice for anyone that uses lots of UAD plugins). So I have roughly $1600 invested in a quad card and plugins that see very little use here

Food for thought

[Dan IceWood]

Ignore the angry trolls they are living everywhere nowadays.

UAD apollo with it's console app is the only alternative for ULTRA low latency with plugin monitoring, that said I still don't think it's quite as low also it is more convoluted to use as it's another layer upon Pro Tools or any other DAW you are using it with.

I was a Pro Tools HD NATIVE user from the first month of it being released.
I loved it, powerful, solid and gave me a high analog input + output count.
That said, tracking was always just a little off.
Using the lowest buffer setting at 96K still had a discernible offset and once the session started to get large with multiple VI, large track counts and lots of plugins the playback buffer ALWAYS had to be raised which made the recording with low latency impossible without using an external analouge mixer multed from the preamp.
Trying to get delay based timing fx working in tandem with the performance was a **** show.
Yes there were ways around these issues, but none of them are acceptable to a client in the middle of a session.

All that said, every pro studio I worked at that had an HDX system was a delight to use. FAST, SOLID, seemingly crash free and monitoring with plugins and using multiple headphone feeds was ALWAYS SUPER low latency. I refuse to work with autotune with a live tracking singer so that has never been an issue - but that's another conversation.

Anyway long story short I got a deal for 2 HDX cards in a Sonnet TB chassis for 3K - bargain so I went ahead and have never looked back.

Every issue I had with a native based system is no more an issue.
There are DSP plugins for everything I want to do EQ, Dynamics, Reverb, Echo/delay, There's even convolution verb available.

My point is that the people who bitch about there not being enough good DSP plugins are probably not HDX users themselves.
And for ME, the only things that have ever crashed a session have been Native plugins.

Using Purely DSP means I never even consider there being a crash - because there never is.

There are so many good deals on used HDX cards and plugin developers are always having sales on software, the price of entry these days is low.

There was 9 years between HD and HDX. Many HD TDM systems are still in use for tracking - 15 years later.

I doubt - for tracking and mixing that anything in the immediate future is going to come along to knock HDX away - at least not in the next 3 years ;-)

Buy used and get on with a solid system that sounds good and is tried and proved, and using DSP plugins only you will beat the RTL of native based systems including Pro tools HD NATIVE.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Dan IceWood

Ignore the angry trolls they are living everywhere nowadays.

UAD apollo with it's console app is the only alternative for ULTRA low latency with plugin monitoring, that said I still don't think it's quite as low also it is more convoluted to use as it's another layer upon Pro Tools or any other DAW you are using it with.

I was a Pro Tools HD NATIVE user from the first month of it being released.
I loved it, powerful, solid and gave me a high analog input + output count.
That said, tracking was always just a little off.
Using the lowest buffer setting at 96K still had a discernible offset and once the session started to get large with multiple VI, large track counts and lots of plugins the playback buffer ALWAYS had to be raised which made the recording with low latency impossible without using an external analouge mixer multed from the preamp.
Trying to get delay based timing fx working in tandem with the performance was a **** show.
Yes there were ways around these issues, but none of them are acceptable to a client in the middle of a session.

All that said, every pro studio I worked at that had an HDX system was a delight to use. FAST, SOLID, seemingly crash free and monitoring with plugins and using multiple headphone feeds was ALWAYS SUPER low latency. I refuse to work with autotune with a live tracking singer so that has never been an issue - but that's another conversation.

Anyway long story short I got a deal for 2 HDX cards in a Sonnet TB chassis for 3K - bargain so I went ahead and have never looked back.

Every issue I had with a native based system is no more an issue.
There are DSP plugins for everything I want to do EQ, Dynamics, Reverb, Echo/delay, There's even convolution verb available.

My point is that the people who bitch about there not being enough good DSP plugins are probably not HDX users themselves.
And for ME, the only things that have ever crashed a session have been Native plugins.

Using Purely DSP means I never even consider there being a crash - because there never is.

There are so many good deals on used HDX cards and plugin developers are always having sales on software, the price of entry these days is low.

There was 9 years between HD and HDX. Many HD TDM systems are still in use for tracking - 15 years later.

I doubt - for tracking and mixing that anything in the immediate future is going to come along to knock HDX away - at least not in the next 3 years ;-)

Buy used and get on with a solid system that sounds good and is tried and proved, and using DSP plugins only you will beat the RTL of native based systems including Pro tools HD NATIVE.

Excellent post except for the illusion that there any trolls, angry or otherwise replying, in this thread unless trying to relate reality is trolling

[Dan IceWood]

Troll comment was a joke - always lost on any text communication ;-)

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Dan IceWood

Troll comment was a joke - always lost on any text communication ;-)

Yes indeed the pitfalls of the internets. Not to mention the complexity of the numerous possible variables at play in different individuals specific situations.