TO ALL TDM undecideds, HDX users are multiplying daily, AAX porting is as well.

[phatbeatstudio]

Originally Posted by gaas

Why do you care? And why are you desperately trying to convince people you don't even know to conform to a viewpoint that's apparently making it hard for you to breathe? Don't you have a life to live or some ph(F)at beetz to cook up?

These inane posts you make are really creepy dude. Seriously.

Im not trying to get any person to conform to anything.

You are obviously just causing problems , So for the future I request you don't respond to any of my threads .Thank you

[phatbeatstudio]

Originally Posted by BigMeany

And what DSP plugins would you be referring to? Links?

DVERB it should have been in the first install but it wasn't .

[SOUNDDECISION]

Originally Posted by WernerF

OK thanks. A for real double blind comparitive listening test would be quite interesting.

Actually.....it doesn't need to be all that fancy...

Its not subtle at all.

Its not one of those minor sonic differences that would be hard to pick out.

What happens is with TDM when you clip a bus or plugin it distorts nasty. With the new floating point mixer there is so much headroom all over you can just back off the gain at any stage even after it is clipping and you get the clean signal back.

Now I'm not saying that this is good engineering.... and that proper gain staging isn't important. but....One of the great thing about analog is we used to like to slam things...including the mix bus....then just pull back the master fader. You can actually do this now if you wanted.

Where this is most noticeable is if you do a mix on HDN or HDX then open it on a TDM rig.... where is sounded great on the HDX it could play back all distorted and small on the TDM...

This is not to say that you couldn't re balance things on the TDM system to try to get it to the same place... Its just easier to get it to sound good quickly on the newer systems.

And this is why you dont need a blind test to tell them apart.... It will be very obvious.

[WernerF]

It will be quite obvious if the mix that you are using as a comparison was done without paying attention to proper gain staging procedure. If the only difference between the HDX mixer and the TDM mixer is that the HDX mixer is idiot proof, who the H__ cares! There're too many idiots in the world as it is anyway. Why would anyone want to cater to that situation?

I can only speak for myself but, my mixes for sure don't clip anywhere as long as I'm paying attention to what I need to be paying attention to.

[roberts]

Until you sit down and do a session on HDX you'll never get it.
I upgraded one TDM system to HDX once we worked on one session we ordered all of of our TDM systems to be converted to HDX.
There is point is comparing 10 year old technology against 2012 technology.
HDX puts Avid 5 years ahaed of eveybody else. We leads me to wonder what's next once we hit 64 bit.
HDX is no brainer upgrade

[SOUNDDECISION]

Originally Posted by WernerF

If the only difference between the HDX mixer and the TDM mixer is that the HDX mixer is idiot proof, who the H__ cares! There're too many idiots in the world as it is anyway. Why would anyone want to cater to that situation?

It's not that its simply idiot proof, its more that it is a lot easier to get it to sound the way you want it.

Its similar to why we all record 24 bit even though it will probably end up 16 bit on CD or worse an Mp3. Really we could all track at 16 bit and be much more careful about levels along the way and get pretty much the same final mix.

But with 24 bit audio theres a lot more clarity in the lower levels so we can record lower, allow more dynamic range and also save soft performances that would have ended up grungy on 16 bit tracking.

If you understand that concept it's a somewhat similar situation.

FWIW, I too was skeptical having had my 6 card accel system for almost a decade... I actually just had to try the HD native when there was all this buzz about it "sounding better" (even tho it was originally marketed as a mid level system, everyone was talking about how it sounded BETTER than the flagship product)

Not wanting to give up my TDM set up I actually built a second system so I could have both at the same time and after mixing on the native HD it was actually amazing how fresh everything was sounding. It really was a big surprise.

The only thing that was lame was all the latency issues especially during tracking. Which is why it was great when HDX came along...except there are hardly any DSP plugins yet.

TDM systems still have the major advantage of TONs of DSP based plugins...
but there is no comparison of the overall sound of the HDX mixer... If it weren't for this horrible plugin situation I don't think anyone would be having this conversation.... just like In the same way no one would argue that their 16 bit nubus protools rig "sounded better" than an HD rig.

At this point there are actually drawbacks because of the 3rd party plug ins. Once thats straightened out, I don't think anyone will honestly claim they'd rather have a TDM rig than an HDX.

[WernerF]

Fair enough.

[WernerF]

Originally Posted by StewartFang

Why anyone who owns HD or HDX would bother with that is beyond me. If someone has invested over 10 K in a DAW, but doesn't know what sounds good what what doesn't, then there is no double triple non - fat -iced-half cap ABX test that'll change a dang thing.

I think we all know what we'd like our work to sound like and are doing our very best to get there.

I could give a rats ass about another bogus online A/B test of a stereo file run out and back. ...and I could care less if you or anyone thinks that HD sounds the same as HDX. It doesn't. I was fine with HD. It worked great. I really like HDX. It works great too.

They sound different. Get over it.

Obviuosly they don't call you Fang for nothing. 49 posts, hmmmm. Can you say, nah, I won't say it.

[phatbeatstudio]

Originally Posted by StewartFang

How do I get mine. I really need a DSP reverb for tracking.

HD 10.2 it should be in there . It was included as well as another DSP plug I believe but my D Verb is there. . It looks a lot like the new plugs there doing now nothing fancy at all kinda dark like a Waves plugin. I actually liked the way the TDM plug was layer out better myself. Reverb One and Revibe2 are AAX DSP if you have those licenses. Space Verb seems to work a lot better in AAX native than it did in TDM as well. Its not DSP but its my fav of the bunch. Good layout good tone I like it.

AVID don't stay on your trend of the darker User Interface for plugs please. Keep it with the fun colours they used to be. Darker is harder to use , for me at least. ProTools always did and still does have the nicest most inviting look to it but some of these new plugs have me a little concerned .

[Electrox]

Honestly. HDX is now and the future .SUPPORT IT

Honestly, HDX is a POSSIBLE future. But the implementation of it leaves much to be desired. Avid has created a system where we need to buy big boxes to stick cards into. Apple has reduce the updating of these computers to 1, releasing a new one every 2 years. Then Avid wants us to update ALL of our plug ins to a system which they themselves have proven will be valid for a maximum of 10 years before the NEXT round of updates. I understand the performance gains of these systems, but I also realize that these tools, although powerful, are not giving me a great return on power verses other options that are out there. Plus I just don't see the value in buying a non-portable system (as I mention in another thread) for the sake of keeping Avid the "standard". All this investment in big boxes, hardware cards, separate IO box - it just seems to be crazy in 2012 to be dealing with all of that when I am creating MORE music on 2 laptops I carry around with me. I HAVE the money to update. I just do not like the tools Avid is offering because they don't fit my lifestyle of working. I am not going back to the Mac Pro just because Avid only sells PCI cards for it. They are not giving me the tools I need to get my work done, so I have moved on. I keep the TDM system running for when I want to record in the studio... Oh, and I am writing this on a Mac Air that I run Logic, Pro Tools 10, Live, and Studio One on. It fits into my suitcase next to my MacBook Pro. Soon I will be getting 48 tracks running on my iPad. All three fit into my hand bag, along with an Apogee interface. No one has ever complained about quality. Even my Air has more power than my older TDM computer that gathers dust in my studio. I fire the TDM up when I do "sessions" at the studio. That type of working seems so last decade! My MacBook Pro has 2 extra monitors tied to it. In the next few weeks I will be updating THAT to allow for USB 3 and a higher resolution screen. I get to take these systems with me (minus the screens) EVERYWHERE! I don't feel I have abandoned Avid, but more like they have abandoned ME! I am not going to be tied to a "big box" system again, ever! Mac Pro just doesn't cut it any more. And the PC? Please! Rather be learning Apps on my phone and iPad. Where is the Avid interface for these tools? The old supreme ruler left Digidesign to work on the iPhone, and Avid, like Microsoft, seems not concern with these "lowly" tools.
HDX systems are great in quality. But when you lay out the specifics of cost, value, 10 year life, usefulness, lack of portability, lack of industry acceptance (your point, I think), well, all I can say is Avid hasn't yet given me a product that I can embrace as being of much value to me. I am taking music with me everywhere I go, and getting more done now than I ever did before. I still have 3 TDM systems. It's not that I am a "TDM indecided". It's that HDX hasn't yet fully address my needs.