|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Re: HDX vs Native
Just curious - when we discuss HDX versus native are we specifically talking about the HD Native card/box, or also about Pro Tools software in general i.e. with a third-party interface?
I have no plans to track using my mix setup, but I wonder - given the Quantum 4848 is a Thunderbolt 2 interface like the Avid HD Native box, how the two compare in terms of latency... I'm not one for statistics but I understand the Quantum's round-trip latency is supposed to be class-leading.
__________________
-- Justin Mark Hill https://theotheroperation.com Apple Mac Pro 6,1 late 2013 2.7Ghz 12-Core Xeon E5, 64GB RAM, D500 Graphics, OSX Monterey 12.7.1/Pro Tools Ultimate 2023.12/Presonus Quantum 4848 Thunderbolt 2/Digidesign C|24/Focusrite ISA430 MkII/SPL GoldMike |
#62
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HDX vs Native
All native systems... only difference between Avid HDN and other native interfaces is that Avid HDN has two digilinks which means 64 i/o
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#63
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HDX vs Native
You can't really compare latency numbers between the two because they don't include the interface.
My personal beef is with fader latency. Every console with moving faders has flunked that test for me because it always requires rehearsing moves. DAWs also have varying fader latency. HDX seems better than native.
__________________
Bob's room 615 562-4346 Interview Artists are the gatekeepers of truth! - Paul Robeson |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Re: HDX vs Native
Quote:
It would be amazing if they offered a more home budget friendly interface similar to hdx. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Re: HDX vs Native
This is an interesting thread, it clearly shows the strengths of HDX in a recording situation. I totally agree having owned HDX, you can record through the software with no problematic latency at all, drop ins, headphone mixes are super tight etc etc. It just works.
However in in a purely 'post' situation, Native offers massively more bang for the buck on a modern fast computer than HDX, whether its HD Native or just using core audio. Its not always down to voices either. Sessions can be not necessarily large in voices, but large in processing. Offloading some processing to a card doesn't seemingly always give you more processing power these days. The to and fro from the card to the cpu eats up resources.
__________________
Mac Pro 7,1 16 core, OSX 12.7.3, HD-Native TB, Trinnov MC, MTRX Studio, 2xRME ADA-4, Sync HD, AJA IO XT, Avid Dock, Avid S1, PT Control, Soundflow, PT 2023.12 |
#66
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HDX vs Native
I use an HD native system with Ravenna, I always use 32 ms and no issues, my sessions are small though.
__________________
Felipe Gonzalez A. Avid ACSR Elite Dante Certified http://felipousismix.wix.com/felipousismix Open Core Mac Pro OSX Ventura | ProTools HD 2023.x | Merging HAPI ADA8 | UAD Quad PCIe | Kali IN-8 | Presonus Temblor 10 | Softube, SSL, Universal Audio, Slate Digital, McDSP, Fabfilter, Plugin Alliance among other plugins |
#67
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HDX vs Native
Likely using 32 buffer not 32ms? Monitoring latency has nothing to do with small/large mixer. Only the hardware you're using and playback buffer you have chosen.
Of course you can mess it up with a plugin that introduces insane amount of delay, but that's another story, cannot use those with any system when you create a can mix.
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Re: HDX vs Native
i,ve been running a HDN system for 7 years now and have had the chance to work on a HDX system recently. To ear the HDX is much tighter. I don't the know measured differences but we have to remember to sometimes put the analytics down a listen, However, be sure you have a accurate line stage so you hear whats actually going on.
I will be switching to HDX as soon as i can afford it. |
#69
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HDX vs Native
Make sure you aren't comparing a 192 feeding balanced inputs to one feeding unbalanced inputs. Balanced sounds surprisingly better. I've also noticed that HDX plug-ins often sound better and use fewer resources in HDN than native-only plugs.
__________________
Bob's room 615 562-4346 Interview Artists are the gatekeepers of truth! - Paul Robeson |
#70
|
||||
|
||||
Re: HDX vs Native
True, because the algorithm needs to be tuned to comply with DSP restrictions. However same plugin AAX-DSP and AAX-native should sound the same.
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: McDSP Analog Channel Native V5, 6020 Ultimate EQ Native V5 | soundroad | Buy & Sell | 31 | 03-21-2016 06:03 AM |
Does HD native or native native disable plugins when monitoring inputs? | BasketCase | Pro Tools HDX & HD Native Systems (Mac) | 7 | 05-20-2013 08:48 AM |
FLUX Elixier V3 AAX Native & DSP + Freeware Bittersweet V3 AAX Native & DSP released | psmworld | AAX Plug-ins | 18 | 01-31-2013 04:16 PM |
SSL4000 native/ Renmaxx native/ DUY everpack native!!! | cary chilton | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 3 | 03-22-2007 07:58 AM |