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 Software > AAX Plug-ins

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 07-26-2014, 12:52 PM
Emcha_audio's Avatar
Emcha_audio Emcha_audio is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Montréal, canada
Posts: 6,752
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by meric View Post
SR plug-in is existe on DSP... So you just insert SR plug-in then you can use any waves plug-in on SR(DSP)... Or you can just route your Channel out like
Drum buss: out of Channel(PT) DLS1-2 to eMotion Mixer Channel in 1-2
Voices buss : out of Channel(PT) DLS3-4 to eMotion Mixer Channel in 3-4

Etc etc you can use SR and eMotion as like that... I use UA Mixer but it's not the same and I honestly love eMotion idea And I hope it'll be wonderful with 3rd parties and SG version2.

Cheers

Ümit
Glad you're liking it, but I find the mixer very very restrictive compared to mixing within pro tools (automation wise). Also only having 4096 samples of delay comp vs the 16383 (at 44.1k) samples of PT can have quite an impact. Also please clarify this for disambiguation, when you are saying that the SR plugin is hosted on the DSP chip (HDX) you do mean that the plugin to route the audio from the SoundGrid server to the HDX card, but all the processing is actually done on the SoundGrid server. The HDX card does not process the Waves plugins what so ever. Basically, you could simply host the SR plugin natively within your session and you would get the same result, since the processing of the audio from the plugins that are within SR are done on the SoundGrid server and not within the DAW.
__________________
Manny.

Wave-T.com
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 07-26-2014, 12:54 PM
propower propower is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 2,202
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by meric View Post
If you have any question or need any information please just ask me...

Cheers

Ümit Ceyhan
Yes-

1) Please detail the roundtrip analog to analog monitoring latency with 4 Waves Plugins through one of the Soundgrid I/O boxes and PT11.

Mic --> SG I/O --> 4 plugins --> SG i/O --> Headphones (DAW = PT11 Native with buffer set to 512)
AT:
1A) 44.1kHz
1B) 96kHz
Please include any buffer settings from the Waves SG system.

2) Also is there any latency difference between different SG I/O boxes (DLS and IOS for instance)

3) Lastly - if one wants to use a NON-SG plugin for monitoring - forcing one to go THROUGH PT and not straight through the LowLatency waves path - what would be the total latency for --

Mic --> SG I/O --> 1 PT11 AAX Plugin --> SG i/O --> Headphones (DAW = PT11 Native with buffer set to either 44.1/32 or 96/64)
__________________
2017 27" iMac 3.8GHz i5, 1TB SSD
Logic ProX, Studio One V4, PT current version, Apogee Ensemble TB
Musician: http://www.ivanlee.net/
Design Engineer: http://www.propowerinc.com/resume.html
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-26-2014, 12:57 PM
Shan's Avatar
Shan Shan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 13,579
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by propower View Post
Please detail the roundtrip analog to analog monitoring latency with 4 Waves Plugins through one of the Soundgrid I/O boxes and PT11.
+1. I'd like to see these type of benchmarks documented myself. This would be a major selling point for many.

Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing

Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em!
__________________

"Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM

__________________

Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 07-26-2014, 01:08 PM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 24,853
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

So they have a mystery TDM-->native code wrapper nobody else could have done and they have proven that performance sucks if you go from low-level assembly to high-level language? Well that is something
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 07-26-2014, 01:13 PM
meric meric is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: France
Posts: 268
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

I'm devloping some audio plug-ins and it isn't story of writing plug-ins on C++/ C+... It's about algoritm and technology...

I'm happy with my HDNative and digigrid and I try to share my experiences that I'm having for a year:)

Cheers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emcha_audio View Post
Nope from what I remember of that discussion they had taken a tdm plugin which wasn't written in c++ (remember tdm were assembly code) wrapped it in he dsp SDK and wondered why they were getting such a poor result.. then blame the hdx card chips for their failure.
__________________
Protools HDN Card, DigiGrid DLS, Avid Omni, Aurora 8, Digi 96 I/O


Waves mercury Bundle
Massey Plug-ins
AIR Creative Bundle
many Audio gears...
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 07-26-2014, 01:54 PM
WernerF WernerF is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,052
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by meric View Post
Hey Guys,
It's Ümit... I'm Waves DigiGrid Beta tester for a year...
I'm having love with DLS because it's a powerful system for all PT users.
the Digigrid and PT is working amazingly at my studio... Before i had PT HD 2 Pcie and I decided to get an PTHD native card. So i can say now I'm having any latency problem, New SR plug-in is a wonderful thing and eMotion mixer is awesome for recording/mixing/mastering! You can do everything you want on eMotion mixer... You can record everyting on multiple DAWS at the same time by eMotion Mixer...+ no latency problem...

The modes SGP and I/O are real freedom for any user! i mean PT Native or DSP.
The avantage is with eMotion mixer you can mix your session as an external mixer! S-imaginer is on every channel! You don't need a plug-in for widing the signal! guys! It's a awesome insane! I never touch a machine as like DLS and eMotion Mixer! Amazing!

I'm so excited with RC because I'm sure that when you work with DigiGRid you'll feel real eMotion of your mix!

If you have any question or need any information please just ask me...

Cheers

Ümit Ceyhan
What is the eMotion Mixer?

I would never use a plugin, or anything else for that matter, to widen the signal. There is not one that doesn't work by simply putting things slightly out of phase. Terrible things those wideners. If a person can't get a mix to sound wide enough without one of those things something's wrong with the mix. Anyway, sorry for the digression. Back to the thread, Ha
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 07-26-2014, 02:30 PM
Emcha_audio's Avatar
Emcha_audio Emcha_audio is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Montréal, canada
Posts: 6,752
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by meric View Post
I'm devloping some audio plug-ins and it isn't story of writing plug-ins on C++/ C+... It's about algoritm and technology...

I'm happy with my HDNative and digigrid and I try to share my experiences that I'm having for a year:)

Cheers
Actually it had a huge difference back in TDM/Rtas because both version of the plugins were using different programming languages multiplying the programing time as both had to be done in both languages, which is no longer the case with AAX dsp and Native, both uses c++. Also the bigger point was that the plugins were written as one big block that had to be completely processed by the TDM (HD) cards, same thing with the RTAS block wise. This was stated by the AAX code creator Dave Tremblay, which is no longer the case with AAX dsp as only the Processor block is hosted on the HDX chips, the GUI block and the Core block are hosted natively. Which means that not only are the HDX chips faster and allow 8 channel of 32 bit processing per clock per chips at a higher clock speed, but they actually have to process less information as they do not host the GUI and the Core block on them any longer, meaning more memory and faster processing since the chips don't have to actually read the GUI and The Core blocks anymore. So yes it has a very big impact on the testing done by waves because they allegedly did not take the time to actually uncouple the GUI and Core blocks from the plugin and everything was passed through the dsp sdk and then had to be processed by the HDX chips as a whole instead of 1 block of 3. They simply didn't want to actually do their jobs right from my point of view, and if someone who would work for me would take such a shortcut and then brings me into a situation were there's a hell lot of angst because they haven't given me the right information to base my decision on, they would be fired and sued. Waves already had it's foot in the dsp market with it's soundgrid system way before they took the decision not to push AAX DSP out, they could still have decided to push their Digigrid system with Digico while keeping their wup promise of having their plugins works on all major platform which HDX is such. Right now they do not work On the HDX dsp chip as they are processed on a different server that is not what the wup promissed. They would have avoided all the ruckus and sea of angry emails, have made more money from the wup sales and new users buying into their plugins bundles as they moved to HDX, and could have went on selling their Digigrid system on the side. It would have been a win-win situation for them, but because of the poor job done by their engineers they are stuck in a predicament, from my contacts in different big equipment suppliers, the digigrid system is barely mentioned at all by clients, doesn't bold well for sales.
__________________
Manny.

Wave-T.com
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 07-26-2014, 02:49 PM
jjnssn jjnssn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 556
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by propower View Post
Yes-

1) Please detail the roundtrip analog to analog monitoring latency with 4 Waves Plugins through one of the Soundgrid I/O boxes and PT11.

Mic --> SG I/O --> 4 plugins --> SG i/O --> Headphones (DAW = PT11 Native with buffer set to 512)
AT:
1A) 44.1kHz
1B) 96kHz
Please include any buffer settings from the Waves SG system.

2) Also is there any latency difference between different SG I/O boxes (DLS and IOS for instance)

3) Lastly - if one wants to use a NON-SG plugin for monitoring - forcing one to go THROUGH PT and not straight through the LowLatency waves path - what would be the total latency for --

Mic --> SG I/O --> 1 PT11 AAX Plugin --> SG i/O --> Headphones (DAW = PT11 Native with buffer set to either 44.1/32 or 96/64)
I think this is an excellent idea. Are you asking for theoretical values, I would propose we get a test we can agree upon that will provide some practical values.

Do the moderators on the forum here have a documented test method from AVID? something that we can actually repeat and reproduce amongst ourselves and our measurement system could be the same... if we start working with theoretical numbers I am afraid this thread could dissolve into garbage, that is what I want to avoid. It would be great to have the truth.

Your test #1, I get. #2, Is great and will be interesting. Your Test #3, you're going to have to help me understand why you would even choose to do that? I'll clarify so if my understanding is way off; if I am overdubbing in a session with my HDX system, I always choose DSP plug-ins, I would never in this situation put a native plug-in as an insert. If I misunderstood, please clarify.

I would propose we start with a PT11 session, setup with a routing scheme, that we could record through an output, with DSP plug-ins, and then back through an input and we could measure the delay against the original. Then we can just swap out the AAX DSP plug-ins, with the StudioRack SG I/O configuration. Something similar to how we verify delay compensation issues with the current system. Seem reasonable?
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-26-2014, 03:10 PM
propower propower is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 2,202
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Quote:
Originally Posted by MADIrouting View Post
I think this is an excellent idea. Are you asking for theoretical values, I would propose we get a test we can agree upon that will provide some practical values.

Do the moderators on the forum here have a documented test method from AVID? something that we can actually repeat and reproduce amongst ourselves and our measurement system could be the same... if we start working with theoretical numbers I am afraid this thread could dissolve into garbage, that is what I want to avoid. It would be great to have the truth.

Your test #1, I get. #2, Is great and will be interesting. Your Test #3, you're going to have to help me understand why you would even choose to do that? I'll clarify so if my understanding is way off; if I am overdubbing in a session with my HDX system, I always choose DSP plug-ins, I would never in this situation put a native plug-in as an insert. If I misunderstood, please clarify.

I would propose we start with a PT11 session, setup with a routing scheme, that we could record through an output, with DSP plug-ins, and then back through an input and we could measure the delay against the original. Then we can just swap out the AAX DSP plug-ins, with the StudioRack SG I/O configuration. Something similar to how we verify delay compensation issues with the current system. Seem reasonable?
Hi and thanks for this..

I am only interested in real world performance

To this end I have already measure ND Native (the only system I own) for RTL latency like #1 in this post - http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=344994 . I only measure things with Function generator and Oscilloscope. I know of no way to do this using ProTools that I can absolutely trust that the software isn't compensating for things. I feed a signal in and measure the delay in real time. So for all zero additional latency plug ins (in Native) we get no additional latency by chaining them on a record enabled track.

WRT #3 - once we know #1 for HDN, #3 is only impacted by any additional latency the plug in adds.

Now with SG - there are MANY potential paths - each with its own latency implication
- Low Latency using their i/o and dsp
- Going in their i/o and looping through ProTools (Native/HDN) for a non-Waves plug
- Going in AVID i/o and looping into one of their DSP boxes for Waves plugin then back to AVID i/o for headphones
Not to mention the concerns of VI people
- Going into either their box or AVID box - routing through a VI and going back to headphones.
And your question about
- HDX guy wanting to route AVID i/o loop through their DSP box and back to AVID i/o for headphones.

Every one of these has latency implications and so far we have NOTHING from Waves on how it really works. Just "enthusiasm" as a replacement for facts... HD Native is great but Latency is always a concern. The new Soundgrid stuff may be brilliant or "other" - I truly can not tell from the info available so far!

I am happy to be the test point for all things HD Native related. Agree on a structure and i will post results
__________________
2017 27" iMac 3.8GHz i5, 1TB SSD
Logic ProX, Studio One V4, PT current version, Apogee Ensemble TB
Musician: http://www.ivanlee.net/
Design Engineer: http://www.propowerinc.com/resume.html
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 07-26-2014, 03:38 PM
meric meric is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: France
Posts: 268
Default Re: Waves Studiorack

Hi Emcha_audio,

I think you have missunderstood what's the Soundgrid... You didn't try the DLS box but you have too many ideas on Digigrid...

waves ported ssl plug to hdx to evaluate how much work is needed to do it.. the benchmark speaks to themselfve about the relative power of hdx card crd intel servers! moreover the intel servers are true double precision while hdx is a 32 bit engine and the power you get from intel servers it much more then hdx at a fraction of the price...

I really can't understand that why waves has an obligation to write their AAX DSP(250~ plug-ins)?
I don't know and I hope you know the price of debuging an AAX DSP plug-in? There are too many companies that they won't support their AAX DSP plug-ins... I understand their dessicion because they won't... Steven massey allready told that he should't re-code his plug-ins AAX DSP! It's buisness... So reality will speak...

Ùmit


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emcha_audio View Post
Actually it had a huge difference back in TDM/Rtas because both version of the plugins were using different programming languages multiplying the programing time as both had to be done in both languages, which is no longer the case with AAX dsp and Native, both uses c++. Also the bigger point was that the plugins were written as one big block that had to be completely processed by the TDM (HD) cards, same thing with the RTAS block wise. This was stated by the AAX code creator Dave Tremblay, which is no longer the case with AAX dsp as only the Processor block is hosted on the HDX chips, the GUI block and the Core block are hosted natively. Which means that not only are the HDX chips faster and allow 8 channel of 32 bit processing per clock per chips at a higher clock speed, but they actually have to process less information as they do not host the GUI and the Core block on them any longer, meaning more memory and faster processing since the chips don't have to actually read the GUI and The Core blocks anymore. So yes it has a very big impact on the testing done by waves because they allegedly did not take the time to actually uncouple the GUI and Core blocks from the plugin and everything was passed through the dsp sdk and then had to be processed by the HDX chips as a whole instead of 1 block of 3. They simply didn't want to actually do their jobs right from my point of view, and if someone who would work for me would take such a shortcut and then brings me into a situation were there's a hell lot of angst because they haven't given me the right information to base my decision on, they would be fired and sued. Waves already had it's foot in the dsp market with it's soundgrid system way before they took the decision not to push AAX DSP out, they could still have decided to push their Digigrid system with Digico while keeping their wup promise of having their plugins works on all major platform which HDX is such. Right now they do not work On the HDX dsp chip as they are processed on a different server that is not what the wup promissed. They would have avoided all the ruckus and sea of angry emails, have made more money from the wup sales and new users buying into their plugins bundles as they moved to HDX, and could have went on selling their Digigrid system on the side. It would have been a win-win situation for them, but because of the poor job done by their engineers they are stuck in a predicament, from my contacts in different big equipment suppliers, the digigrid system is barely mentioned at all by clients, doesn't bold well for sales.
__________________
Protools HDN Card, DigiGrid DLS, Avid Omni, Aurora 8, Digi 96 I/O


Waves mercury Bundle
Massey Plug-ins
AIR Creative Bundle
many Audio gears...

Last edited by meric; 07-26-2014 at 04:07 PM. Reason: Mistaken2
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 On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Waves license not found after Waves update Talisker Pro Tools 10 5 03-26-2014 09:14 AM
Keep Loosing all Waves presets from Waves tool bar!! crizdee Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 4 03-12-2010 02:59 PM
Not enough space on Waves only ilok to download Waves update 7 crizdee Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 38 11-09-2009 05:19 PM
Plugs Advice: Sony vs Waves - Sonalksis vs Waves? John J. 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 0 12-08-2005 01:31 PM
WAVES Protools7 update and Waves tech support x9blade 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 12 11-11-2005 06:24 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:40 AM.


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