Cheapest possible way to get 64 HD A/D?

[TNM]

Originally Posted by LukeHoward

You're right, they are balanced (my bad). 96 should be reliable, perhaps not the most up to date or best sounding converters but you indicated that wasn't a problem. A single HDX card can support 64 simultaneous channels of I/O as it has two Digilink ports (each can carry 32 channels). Hope this helps.

This is starting to sound like an exciting and cheap solution.

They have fans and are noisy but i'll work around it for that money.

The really HQ balanced synths like integra, i will put into the focusrite adat anyway which i think has better specs.. then that's transmitted digitally.

SO.. yep.. 1 hdx card can take 32 ins per port.. BUT if the 96 i/o only has 16 ins max, i'd need four 96 i/os.. This is what I am saying.. i'd need 4 ports, i.e two cards for that, no?

or can two 92 i/os be daisy chained and connected to one hdx port?

Also, will they work with HDX12?

Finally, there are no headphone outs at all.. but there IS a monitor out..

i have a presonus HP4 which will take the monitor ins as well as 4 headphone amps.. do you feel this would degrade the quality further. and if so, perhaps a passive analog sub mixer with headphone outs?

thanks again

[LukeHoward]

Originally Posted by TNM

This is starting to sound like an exciting and cheap solution.

You should be able to pick them up for US$200-300 each.

They have fans and are noisy but i'll work around it for that money.

You can replace them - https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/hom...-or-hd-io.html

or can two 92 i/os be daisy chained and connected to one hdx port?

Yes.

Also, will they work with HDX12?

Unsupported, but will work.

Finally, there are no headphone outs at all.. but there IS a monitor out..

For monitoring, you might consider something with more a more modern D/A and feed that from the SPDIF out.

[albee1952]

Lots of info already and I don't wish to muddy the waters, but consider these 2 points:
1-Unless you get an HDX or HDN card, you cannot get around the 32 IO limit. Having said that, you seem to think HDX is the only way to go, and it isn't. HD/Native(the card or thunderbolt box) is quite nice and will handle your 64 IO. I have an HDN card in a purpose-built 6 core PC with 48 IO(pair of HD IO's and a 192) and track bands(usually 24-32 live inputs max on a record pass), while providing 6 stereo headphone mixes(from the session) and all at a 64 buffer(so latency is never an issue unless I screw something up).

2-If you want/need to track with UAD plugins, then you have a problem because outside of Apollo, UA plugins all have a lot of latency(too much to track with, anyway). This means an HD/Native setup is NOT going to allow UA plugins while tracking(I can't comment on an HDX system as the rig I work on that is HDX, does not have any UA cards or plugins).

Just want you to have as much info as possible before you spend any more cash. Having said all this, why do you feel the need of 64 IO? If its to save patching of external keyboards and sound modules, those could easily feed a mixer and be available in PT on a handful of stereo inputs

[TNM]

Originally Posted by albee1952

Lots of info already and I don't wish to muddy the waters, but consider these 2 points:
1-Unless you get an HDX or HDN card, you cannot get around the 32 IO limit. Having said that, you seem to think HDX is the only way to go, and it isn't. HD/Native(the card or thunderbolt box) is quite nice and will handle your 64 IO. I have an HDN card in a purpose-built 6 core PC with 48 IO(pair of HD IO's and a 192) and track bands(usually 24-32 live inputs max on a record pass), while providing 6 stereo headphone mixes(from the session) and all at a 64 buffer(so latency is never an issue unless I screw something up).

2-If you want/need to track with UAD plugins, then you have a problem because outside of Apollo, UA plugins all have a lot of latency(too much to track with, anyway). This means an HD/Native setup is NOT going to allow UA plugins while tracking(I can't comment on an HDX system as the rig I work on that is HDX, does not have any UA cards or plugins).

Just want you to have as much info as possible before you spend any more cash. Having said all this, why do you feel the need of 64 IO? If its to save patching of external keyboards and sound modules, those could easily feed a mixer and be available in PT on a handful of stereo inputs

I do appreciate it my friend but i've already considered all this, honest.

1)I believe PT 12 and up has a fatal flaw when trying to monitor with native FX through either core audio or HDN. On my macbook pro 2.8ghz quad core, enabling 32 inputs via core audio at 64 buffer causes all 8 cores to spike, that's without adding plugins. it makes it impossible to even add one Vi to it. it's identical on my windows7 laptop with asio. Then i had some friends do a massive HDN test for me.. 64 samples with all 64 ins activated for monitoring.. a modern computer still spiked all it's cores.. I really didn't think it was possible.. let alone to add some native fx to the monitor paths!

2)Of course i realise with apollo i have 32 input ceiling, this is the reason i will sell my apollos. Sorry if i didn't make that clear, i thought i had

3)AAX dsp will take the place of input monitoring duties, no more need for apollo console and analog mixer is the goal.. but i can still keep my UAD octo satellite to use some of the precious UAD plugins in a *mixing* situation. Sorry again if i hadn't made that clear.

4) I already have a 32 in analog mixer feeding 4 inputs via subs into the apollo. I specifically want to avoid this workflow.. no more apollo console, no more analog.. JUST hdx with protools as the mixer.. a one stop shop. Load a session and it's ready to go.. sends the patch changes to my synths, all volumes saved with patches.. i literally have to do nothing, it would be almost as integrated as a total virtual solution using only Vis, except i will be using 30 hardware synths

5) My template has been lowered from 150 synth outputs to 64, just the bare essentials.. I detest patch bays and this way i have access to those 64 sounds at all times, ready to go in my pro tools template

6) You are saying you can record 64 channels into Pro tools HDN, no jokes, at 64 buffer (what sample rate?) - and have other tracks like already recorded VI's also playing alongside it.. no problems? Wouldn't i need a 10 core monster to do such a thing? Point being the 10 core monster is as much as a HDX system.. with HDX i get guaranteed track counts and no native cpu loading unless i use a VI or native effect.

So i presume that all makes sense now?

cheers

[albee1952]

Re #1=this is likely a Core Audio issue. My rig runs probably 36-50 plugins while tracking(dozens of EQ's, Compressors, Console 1, at least 1 amp sim and some light-cpu VI's(MiniGrand, DB-33 and/or a Wurly) and 4-5 reverb plugins).

Re #2-understood

Re #5- 64 synths is the bare essential(and I'm with you on patchbays). My 32 mic preamps are all available, but my template session often has a dozen or more tracks that are inactive until I need them.

Re #6-Will you actually record 64 inputs in a single pass? My basic tracking of bands uses a maximum of maybe 30 inputs for basic tracks(drums, bass, acoustic(2 mics), vocal, at least 1 keyboard part(midi or Yamaha Motif or both) and Electric guitar(2 mics) and 4 talkback mics on AUX tracks(so players in each room can converse between takes). Then its on to overdubs, additional acoustic and/or electric guitars, more keyboards and usually4-6 tracks of vocals. All of this is done at a 64 buffer with maximum ADC(plugin latency compensation) of 11 samples, with 5-6 stereo headphone mixes done with aux sends in the session. This all happens on the PC in my signature below If HDX is the only way to fill your needs, go for it(but don't underestimate a well-tweaked HD/Native rig)

[TNM]

Originally Posted by albee1952

Re #1=this is likely a Core Audio issue. My rig runs probably 36-50 plugins while tracking(dozens of EQ's, Compressors, Console 1, at least 1 amp sim and some light-cpu VI's(MiniGrand, DB-33 and/or a Wurly) and 4-5 reverb plugins).

Re #2-understood

Re #5- 64 synths is the bare essential(and I'm with you on patchbays). My 32 mic preamps are all available, but my template session often has a dozen or more tracks that are inactive until I need them.

Re #6-Will you actually record 64 inputs in a single pass? My basic tracking of bands uses a maximum of maybe 30 inputs for basic tracks(drums, bass, acoustic(2 mics), vocal, at least 1 keyboard part(midi or Yamaha Motif or both) and Electric guitar(2 mics) and 4 talkback mics on AUX tracks(so players in each room can converse between takes). Then its on to overdubs, additional acoustic and/or electric guitars, more keyboards and usually4-6 tracks of vocals. All of this is done at a 64 buffer with maximum ADC(plugin latency compensation) of 11 samples, with 5-6 stereo headphone mixes done with aux sends in the session. This all happens on the PC in my signature below If HDX is the only way to fill your needs, go for it(but don't underestimate a well-tweaked HD/Native rig)

Well i can look into HDN a bit further but ultimately it's not *that* much cheaper than HDX...
I really like the idea of having 64 live channels going through a dsp mixer with zero strain on the computer.. I understand your points too, and thanks, it's food for (even more) thought.

Since I use, besides kontakt, only hardware synths in compositions, yes, i can have really big setups.. Whatever is plugged into the apollo i record in one pass, and then the mixer channels in 4 passes through the subs.
It's not unusual to be using 64 real channels of hardware synths in a song.

If i decided to bounce them to audio, then yes, i guess in HDX i'd do them all in one go, if i had enough inputs for it.