Bx_Console_E

[WernerF]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

It's AAX-DSP aka HDX.

So someone can do DSP if they set their minds to it. Too bad it's so rare these days.

[TOM@METRO]

Most of the plug-ins developed by Brainworx are AAX/DSP.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by amagras

Cheap, I prefer cheap

why you're here?

[amagras]

Originally Posted by JFreak

why you're here?

For the Avant Garde, the Indie and some good tracks?

[zedhed]

Originally Posted by JFreak

why you're here?

Maybe he just likes to be interrogated

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by zedhed

Maybe he just likes to be interrogated

Abuse? Oh sorry - this room is for arguments. Abuse is down the hall

credit: Python (Monty) ltd.

[WernerF]

Originally Posted by TOM@METRO

Most of the plug-ins developed by Brainworx are AAX/DSP.

Yup, I know. Just proves that if the will is there it can be done. My comment was more about the fact that the will is not there for most developers. Instead we get tons of excuses and rationalizations. It's really too bad that the music producing pro has been pretty much left behind in the present day recording product industry. My two cents and sorry for hijacking this thread.

[Stephen Bond]

Originally Posted by WernerF

It's really too bad that the music producing pro has been pretty much left behind in the present day recording product industry.

I don't really think that is the case. It is all about economic realities. In the old days, the CPU was working hard enough just to deliver the tracks and such so DSP solutions were a great idea. Everything was expensive, TDM plugins were commonly twice the price of their RTAS counterparts but there were plenty of pros around with the money to afford the DSP solutions and plugins to go with them.

These days the host CPUs can do everything and more for peanuts by comparison. Additional coding for DSP solutions isn't the commercial viability for most plugin manufacturers it was in previous decades. The money is in selling host based plugins to the masses from pros to beginners alike.

UAD will be the last bastion of the expensive DSP order IMHO. Expensive code running on expensive chips. Sure, some great sounds and functionality but even UAD are having to cut their prices in today's market as their products start to look overpriced.

Stephen

[WernerF]

Originally Posted by Stephen Bond

I don't really think that is the case. It is all about economic realities. In the old days, the CPU was working hard enough just to deliver the tracks and such so DSP solutions were a great idea. Everything was expensive, TDM plugins were commonly twice the price of their RTAS counterparts but there were plenty of pros around with the money to afford the DSP solutions and plugins to go with them.

These days the host CPUs can do everything and more for peanuts by comparison. Additional coding for DSP solutions isn't the commercial viability for most plugin manufacturers it was in previous decades. The money is in selling host based plugins to the masses from pros to beginners alike.

UAD will be the last bastion of the expensive DSP order IMHO. Expensive code running on expensive chips. Sure, some great sounds and functionality but even UAD are having to cut their prices in today's market as their products start to look overpriced.

Stephen

That is all true. However, a non DSP based system still, no matter how powerful the host computer is, still can't do certain things that a DSP based system can do. Among them are putting plugins on the master buss and having a latency free drum buss. All of these things are done in order to inspire the people involved in the project and serve the "mix as you go" workflow. That is what some of us do and we have, unfortunately, been left in the dust by the present day industry. Even the having plugins on the master buss scenario can't work in a track one thing at a time scheme. If you don't need that then you are fine. Those of us that do are s___ out of luck. I have an HDX system that I pretty much never use because there are still not enough DSP plugins that exist. I use my Pro Tools 10 tdm system instead. That's just the way it is.

[Stephen Bond]

Originally Posted by WernerF

That is all true. However, a non DSP based system still, no matter how powerful the host computer is, still can't do certain things that a DSP based system can do. Among them are putting plugins on the master buss and having a latency free drum buss. All of these things are done in order to inspire the people involved in the project and serve the "mix as you go" workflow. That is what some of us do and we have, unfortunately, been left in the dust by the present day industry. Even the having plugins on the master buss scenario can't work in a track one thing at a time scheme. If you don't need that then you are fine. Those of us that do are s___ out of luck. I have an HDX system that I pretty much never use because there are still not enough DSP plugins that exist. I use my Pro Tools 10 tdm system instead. That's just the way it is.

Understood. There's one or two plugins I would like to have on the master whilst tracking whilst monitor the main outs but the latency is too great such as Waves LinMB or the Grey Wells MixCentric. However, I generally have around four others there which are no probably at all.

Also, using sends from the channels for the monitor mix for headphones avoids the latency so no issue there either.

Stephen