Moving to HD Native from HD3 - Advice needed on tracking and system specs

[crazy_ow]

Hi,

I've been a Pro Tools HD user for a number of years now (HD3 accel system running PT8 HD) but the time has come to migrate over to HD Native. I was going to go over to HDx, but it's just too much money. What ever I go for will be Mac based with a HD Native PCIe card or Thunderbolt interface and my I/O will be through my Omni and 192.

My questions are around tracking with plug ins, headphone mixes/aux sends and what kind of track count / number of plug ins I can expect to get from a Native system.


Tracking with Native
When I record I'm used to tracking with a TDM SSL E Channel on every track, a few people I've spoken to have said they have no issues tracking with plugins, but how do you run RTAS plugs whilst a track is recording (In PT 8 HD RTAS plugs are bypassed when a track is record enabled)?

What's the latency like in Native with multiple sends for headphone mixes? I usually run a couple of headphone mixes through 2 aux's, which I then send to my headphone amps out of two stereo outputs.

How solid is Native at tracking up to 20 channels at once? Everyone I've spoken to so far has reported they've had no issues and they all regularly track between 16-24 at a time with no issues.

System Performance / Track Count / Plug In Count
My biggest worry about changing my setup is spending a load of money on a system that is going to be less usable than the one I have now. My main reason for upgrading is being able to take advantage of the extra voices when I install PT10.

Can anyone point me in the direction of any system tests showing how many tracks, plugs and voices I could expect to get from different Macs?

Unfortunately I don't have the funds to go for one of the new black MacPro's and I was planning on picking up a silver 2/3yr old MacPro, so it would be really useful to see some comparisons between different computers, so I can make an educated decision as to what will suit my needs.

A friend has suggested a Mac Mini and thunderbolt interface maybe a better option over a MacPro and PCIe card, but I can't really see any advantage.

[Drew Mazurek]

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=367104

Have you read through this thread?

[crazy_ow]

I didn't see that one, I've just had a read that doesn't sound too promising. I think I may have to loan a Native system and run a session to see how it works out.

[nst7]

For a more positive take, read this thread, particularly page 3:

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=344068&page=3

Keep in mind that the vast majority of people are totally fine with a buffer of 64 on ANY native system, including USB or Firewire. To most people that sounds like real time. But there are a few (as in the first thread you mentioned) that seem to be a little more sensitive to it.

Keep in mind that on TDM systems, using RTAS or native plugins actually add an additional delay not present in exclusively native systems, which may be why they go into bypass.

As for basic tracking with a few plugins going, most modern macs will handle this just fine at a 64 buffer. It's only when you have added many plugins that you may start to have a problem at that low buffer. In that case, it's easy enough (especially with offline bounce) to just bounce down to a few stems or a stereo track, or even just render individual tracks with high CPU plugins (such as amp sims). Then deactivate the original tracks until you are done adding all your overdubs.

Latency in headphone mixes is no different regardless of how many cue mixes you are setting up. It's still mostly about how many and what kind of plugins you've got going.

[crazy_ow]

Thanks, I'll check that post now.

[crazy_ow]

Just edited my original post as I guess this will make a difference.
I will be running HD Native on a Mac with a PCIe Native card or Thunderbolt interface with a Omni and 192 handling I/O.

[suicune]

Hey neighbour!

I've got a mid 2012 i7 MacBook Pro running a native version of PT10 over here at Mad Hat. I mostly use it for running VEPro and VIs so don't need it every day. If you wanted, I'd be happy for you to come over for a day, install your plugins on it and see if it could run one of your existing sessions natively. Might help you decide what route to go down, particularly in terms of the CPU power you're going to need.

If you're interested drop me or Mark a line and we'll set something up.

Sheena

[albee1952]

For me, HDN has been a major step forward in many ways. As compared to my friend's HD3 setup, I could "hit the wall" on his machine rather easily, but haven't FOUND "the wall" on mine yet. My usual band template is fully loaded with plugins, but any with latency above 7 samples are made inactive for tracking(the session comes up this way when I create it). But I still have Channel Strip on all drums, EQ/BF76 and Amplitube SVX on bass, all guitars(x4) have EQ III, all acoustics(x4) have BF76, all vocals(usually 5 tracks to start) will each have EQ III>BF76>SMACK!. Then the session will have 5-6 stereo AUX tracks with reverbs, bus compression for drums(The Glue), at least 2 instrument tracks(PianoTech and DB-33), plus my 3-track auto-talkback setup. Plus, I have 5 stereo AUX sends to feed headphone mixes. I run at the 64 buffer and almost never need to up it since moving to my 6 core build(signature)

[Barry Johns]

One thing that drives me nuts is people think that just because you have TDM cards that you have to rely on DSP plugins. The majority of my mixes have less than 20 percent of my plugins that are DSP!

Meaning that I get the benefit of both worlds!!!!!

Bottom line, if you track and do overdubs at all stages of a mix HDN is NOT for you, if you mix, it IS!!!

[crazy_ow]

Originally Posted by Barry Johns

One thing that drives me nuts is people think that just because you have TDM cards that you have to rely on DSP plugins. The majority of my mixes have less than 20 percent of my plugins that are DSP!

Meaning that I get the benefit of both worlds!!!!!

I have worked on a DSP system for years (mainly with TDM plugs) and the last time I worked natively computer processing wasn't fast enough to handle my sessions hence why I've come onto the forum to get some advice from real world users. My current MacPro would not be capable of running my sessions without DSP.

Bottom line, if you track and do overdubs at all stages of a mix HDN is NOT for you, if you mix, it IS!!!

You're the first person to say this and every other HD native user I've spoken to so far has advised with a newer mac it's also quite possible to track once mixing if required.