We need a Thunderbolt HDX system

[Dism]

Originally Posted by panosd

Just in the interests of having the correct info out there, Intel invented Light Peak, not Apple. Apple only "made requests" as they kept developing it:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10363956-64.html

And interestingly enough, Sony went ahead and made their own optic version of Light Peak, as a hybrid with USB 3... which is what Intel originally intended. Though now they're stuck with a proprietary port when they were expecting that everyone else would be following suit. I guess they didn't see it as too expensive:
http://www.theverge.com/2011/10/14/2...ith-light-peak

Yup. Intel developed and owns the rights to Thunderbolt. Apple merely had a year of exclusivity, which is why they appeared on Macbooks before anything else. It's since been licensed out to all the major brands, and manufacturers. There are a bunch of laptops popping up these days with it, as well as motherboards from the usuals (Gigabyte, ASUS, et al).

By the end of the year/early next year we should see just about everything with at least one TBolt port.

[Electrox]

Originally Posted by Dism

Yup. Intel developed and owns the rights to Thunderbolt. Apple merely had a year of exclusivity, which is why they appeared on Macbooks before anything else. It's since been licensed out to all the major brands, and manufacturers. There are a bunch of laptops popping up these days with it, as well as motherboards from the usuals (Gigabyte, ASUS, et al).

By the end of the year/early next year we should see just about everything with at least one TBolt port.

Just because CNET reported that, it doesn't make it true.

The main point of this thread wasn't to discuss where Thunderbolt came from. It was to see if there was any interest for a DSP box by Avid that could be CONNECTED to Thunderbolt. Something tells me, based on the viewer numbers of this thread, that I hit a nerve. I think Avid is aware of the desire, even though some of users are on the fence about this. The Mac Pro line works in a stationary equipment filled recording studio. Fine, I have one of those. Occasionally I use it. More often than not I am using MacBook Pros and getting more done with it because they travel with me...

[Dism]

Originally Posted by Electrox

Just because CNET reported that, it doesn't make it true.

The main point of this thread wasn't to discuss where Thunderbolt came from. It was to see if there was any interest for a DSP box by Avid that could be CONNECTED to Thunderbolt. Something tells me, based on the viewer numbers of this thread, that I hit a nerve. I think Avid is aware of the desire, even though some of users are on the fence about this. The Mac Pro line works in a stationary equipment filled recording studio. Fine, I have one of those. Occasionally I use it. More often than not I am using MacBook Pros and getting more done with it because they travel with me...

I'm not quoting CNET... it's the truth. It's not a conspiracy that Intel owns Thunderbolt, and that PCs are gaining ground in TBolt connectivity... Go to the Lenovo website right now. Same with Gigabyte and ASUS.

Not sure what your point is. I think we'd all like to see a serious attempt at a DSP box from Avid, regardless of whether or not you use a laptop.

[Emcha_audio]

I don't think it's worth it anymore to try and make him understand that Intel was the developer of the tech and that they approach many third parties to get their input, apple included.

I also think it's beating on a dead horse to try and make him understand that there's absolutely no R&D Cost justification to do a product that is already being done by a competitor. If it was, then tell me why we don't see hundreds of UAD clone systems out there? Magma is already developing the technology to allow attaching pcie cards by thunderbolt. Avid had in the past tried their hands on a PCIE extender chassis and failed miserably, and now works with Magma instead for those things.

There's no reason why Avid should spend more money on something that is already being done by competitors, for a minuscule fraction of the customers base that represent HDX owners. Why? Because most HDX owners actually have a head on their shoulders and know they wouldn't want to carry a 10 k to 30 k system to work in a park or the subway, that no insurance company will want to cover because you are using it in a manner that is like having a illuminated sign "Hey guys come and rob me, I am clueless and carrying 16 grant of equipment and using it in plain sight, just there for the grabbing". There's a frigging huge difference in having your system in a rack mount flight case, and carrying it in a bag that could just be snatched by any miserable piece of #$% that is in need of a fix.

And beside as I said before, they could have released it already quite easily since they already have the HDN thunderbolt box. They didn't, they might, they might not, but personally I don't think it's a good idea they do.

[Electrox]

Not sure what your point is. I think we'd all like to see a serious attempt at a DSP box from Avid, regardless of whether or not you use a laptop.

Originally Posted by Emcha_audio

I also think it's beating on a dead horse to try and make him understand that there's absolutely no R&D Cost justification to do a product that is already being done by a competitor. If it was, then tell me why we don't see hundreds of UAD clone systems out there? Magma is already developing the technology to allow attaching pcie cards by thunderbolt. Avid had in the past tried their hands on a PCIE extender chassis and failed miserably, and now works with Magma instead for those things.

There's no reason why Avid should spend more money on something that is already being done by competitors, for a minuscule fraction of the customers base that represent HDX owners. Why? Because most HDX owners actually have a head on their shoulders and know they wouldn't want to carry a 10 k to 30 k system to work in a park or the subway, that no insurance company will want to cover because you are using it in a manner that is like having a illuminated sign "Hey guys come and rob me, I am clueless and carrying 16 grant of equipment and using it in plain sight, just there for the grabbing". There's a frigging huge difference in having your system in a rack mount flight case, and carrying it in a bag that could just be snatched by any miserable piece of #$% that is in need of a fix.

And beside as I said before, they could have released it already quite easily since they already have the HDN thunderbolt box. They didn't, they might, they might not, but personally I don't think it's a good idea they do.

Aren't you two just contradicting each other? Which one is it, we'd all like a serious attempt, or no R&D Cost justification to do a product that is already being done by a competitor?

Staying on topic of this thread - Your $30k investment on a tower computer doesn't mean it is the only viable way to record. I can stick my 2 laptops under my arm and feel more secure about their safety than my tower I have to leave at the studio each night. What Avid did when they bought Digidesign was buy something that was entrenched as a pro product in most studios across the world. But Moore's law has reached the level of making some of the rules that existed for computers and turn them on their collective laptop/ipad heads. You can get a lot more done on a system that you can carry around with you now than you could even five years ago with the most powerful systems around. You will see products at the next few years that address exactly what I am talking about, and not only by Universal Audio. Universal Audio has the right idea, but they are not entrenched like Avid is. They do not have Pro Tools as a base. You cannot equate the two companies by the mere fact that Digidesign built a huge following over time because of the integration of both hardware and software. I love Pro Tools software, but there's little I see as a future FOR ME in buying cards for a tower system. The fact that any of you think that Magma racks are a way to go seems to me to be ridiculous. That is exactly the WRONG way to go! Does Avid really want to use a 3rd party vendor? You all have your towers. Enjoy them. What I am asking for is a modern "other option".

[Dism]

I just said I wasn't disagreeing with you.

I can't be held accountable for what Emcha said.

I started a thread a while back already addressing this. I think Avid should totally be in competition with those offering DSP solutions already in the box.

When Avid bought Pro Tools, it was the ONLY digital recording solution. It's a different world now, for sure. You can get a lot more done on a laptop or tablet than ever before. But the thing about those devices is their limited expandability and life cycle, especially as they make them smaller and less easy to modify. There will still always be a market for towers and modular systems because some of us demand it. I will never seriously use a machine I can't modify for mixing and production. Even my old Macbook I've been inside to replace hard drives, and swap memory. You can't do that with a Retina or a Tablet, or any other glued together device. Next year there will be a faster Macbook, and so forth. I paid $1300 for my tower. Next year, I can double my RAM, or get more SSDs, maybe CrossFire my video, and it will still cost less than if I had bought a new Macbook this year, and probably still out perform next year's Macbook.

I don't disagree that there should be an in the box solution, because a modern tower could take advantage of it, in the same way an old laptop could. That's the thing about DSP. Thunderbolt is all fine and dandy, but it still doesn't surpass PCIe, it's essentially the same thing in a smaller hole. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/asu...cie,15925.html

Just because Apple doesn't believe in towers anymore, doesn't mean the rest of the world doesn't.


Call me when the glue starts to melt in that Macbook.

[groundcontrol]

The DIY thing is more a mentality issue. A lot of ae's traditionally fit that profile and will gravitate towards solutions that suit their personal as well as professional needs.

That doesn't mean that the futur is not generally pointing towards portable dsp solutions for the most part.

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by Electrox

Aren't you two just contradicting each other? Which one is it, we'd all like a serious attempt, or no R&D Cost justification to do a product that is already being done by a competitor?

Even if Dism and I happen to agree on some things, that doesn't mean it's always the case and that when we are not that we are contradicting ourselves.

I'm not saying that Thunderbolt support will not be a great Idea when Thunderbolt is finally optics. But even when it is optics, Using thunderbolt for HDX for simply the sake of portability isn't strong. If we're talking of optic thunderbolt for interconnection within an array of Components I/O, pre's, computer, from machine room to control room displays and controllers. Hey I'm all for that. Within the proper use for a portable recording gear, there could also be some use for simplifying the connections just like in the studio again once it's optic. But for mixing on the go anywhere with headphones, that you pick up under your pit arm and just waltz around on your merry way..... Sorry I don't buy that. Doing a proper job at Mixing requires a lot more than good headphones, fact is there's no good enough headphones for proper mixing, maybe I'm more old fashion there, where I understand the actual physic properties of how the sound pressure affects your ears with closed cup headphones, vs open rear headphones that has to have you blast your ears just to cover the ambient noise, vs a properly treated studio where the sound waves will have the natural abilities to die off, a quiet room without having to kill your ears in five minutes, or where your ears will be able to respond normally because the sound pressure caused by the closed headphones pushes them to react unnaturally. So yeah, again, for editing, Sure a portable system is fine, HDN is there. For Portable recording, it could have some use but again way too expensive to carry around in a purse , for mixing on the go.. I would be worried to give you money to do any kind of work for me if you said you were going to mix on headphones.

And if you feel insecure about your studio, compared to carrying it.. then you really have a nasty problem at your studio that you should probably fix. A good alarm connected through the net and phone backed up by an internal battery system are not that expensive, then you can complement that with some thick anti theft plexiglass windows and a drop down metallic door system, is a must if you know that your studio is in a risk area. But anyways, point cases, just for the sake of portability is very weak and not a good enough reason for avid to wast R&D for HDX on that type of system, when there's much more they could do with that money globally.

[Electrox]

Originally Posted by Emcha_audio

Using thunderbolt for HDX for simply the sake of portability isn't strong.
But anyways, point cases, just for the sake of portability is very weak and not a good enough reason for avid to wast R&D for HDX on that type of system, when there's much more they could do with that money globally.

You have good points here. Yes, there are a lot of times when the more equipment one has at their disposal, the better the whole mix session goes. However, I disagree with Avid wasting R&D. I think these portable systems are the main way to go in the future. And if it is the way to go, Avid HAS to be putting some R&D in if they want to be part of that future. I think we are all seeing the last few years of tower computing. Let me explain.
I have 4 Pro Tools rigs from over the years. What I find is that I am doing more and more stuff on laptops. That may work for some of you. I am rarely doing things that other people don't do. I am however usually a few months ahead of the curve. These laptops allow me to take my work with me, which, even though I miss the other equipment at times, allow me to work wherever and whenever I chose. This has been a DRASTIC change for me and how I work.
I think when Steve Jobs first announced the iPad most tech people said "why?" I think now they know why. Microsoft has scrambled to put together OS8 and Intel has announced reduced profits directly resulting from what Jobs called the "post pc world". I am saying the same for working on powerful tools that fit under your arm. The first instinct will be "why". A few years from now everyone will understand why. The Pro Tools native system has been introduced for Thunderbolt. That will finally allow the laptop crowd an Avid way to go. I feel the DSP thing is next. A few years from now there won't be any questions as to why. Touch screens, moving faders with a finger instead of a mouse, working anywhere at any time, not being locked down by cables, wires, noisy hard drives...
I recently opened up my old G4 PT 5.1.1 system to see if I could salvage any of it. I have been spoiled with iPhones, MacBook Pros, and iPads. I forgot how hard it was to find the right software, the digi approved hard drives, the correct SCSI interface, Magma enclosure.... I look at my Retina laptop with 2 Thunderbolt Displays, internal ssd, and USB 3 drives. For me there's no going back. Plus the amount of money I save from electricity and cooling the rooms from the older systems help me pay for the "sealed and glued" newer Mac systems!
Good luck, gang. I will be back after NAMM.

[froyo]

Hello. Electrox I think we're all glad that you have found a way to work that you like and works for you. However I think you have vastly overestimated how prevalent that is now and specially in the future. While I agree that a laptop could be a great addition to an existing desktop system at a facility, I disagree that it will ever replace desktops for most people.

Professional facilities in just about every budget, size and focus like to do audio in a specific room that's been optimized for audio, etc. As I said, laptops can be a great addition to a desktop system, but I think you are way overestimating how big a role they will play in the future for audio professionals. And for that reason, I think it should be low in Digidesign's focus. I think you will find most audio professionals will tell you the same. But as I said above, good for you that you have something you like and works for you.