MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

I am a longtime Cubase/Nuendo user where I have a couple hundred track orchestral composing template going. I have added PT 19.12 Ultimate to my DAW.



Today, my studio runs on Focusrite Dante. PCIe card in the DAW, and Focusrite analog and digital IO to taste. Preamps go directly to AD and then onto Dante network. Foldback monitoring is via a Dante-connected Allen & Heath SQ-5, so I effectively have zero latency monitoring already. The preamp signals show up at the mixer and DAW simultaneously - a neat trick of Dante networks. Dante is the patchbay in my studio. I am digital all the way to my Genelec mains (volume control via the GLM app on a touchscreen).



I am considering an MTRX as it would consolidate all the pre's and conversion into one box vs five or six. I can fit into a single MTRX with ease, and it would simplify my rig considerably. In Monopoly terms, "sell my houses and buy a hotel".



Q. Should I plan on an HDX card?



My thought is that this would eliminate the need for the SQ-5 for foldback. I could route monitor mixes out through the DANTE on the MTRX out to my AM2 headphone boxes.



My question is if the HDX is even needed anymore? I have over 32ch of inputs today, with an Eventide H9K also on the Dante network, and I think that is a factor with Avid software?



Thank you for any insight on integrating MTRX into a studio.


I also have to figure out if my Nuendo template can use an HDX card and how stable that is. If I have to keep Dante to interface the MTRX I would need to know.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

While I can't comment directly on MTRX / Dante, I can definitely say that, for my setup, HDX is still an integral aspect to running with near-zero latency for tracking sessions.

I'm running Merging HORUS and connecting via DigiLink/HDX for tracking sessions, and then switching playback engine to Ravenna VAD for mixing. It's very easy in HORUS to load up either configuration.

In HDX, you have the advantage of being able to run DSP plugins on input channels (most basic plugins are about 4 samples of latency), and run DSP-based reverbs like ReVibe, ReverbOne, etc., for generating headphone mixes. I usually create about 8 stereo output stems for headphone mixers, and this works very well.

In my experience, the biggest latency penalty that you'll find is the transition from the DSP to the Ravenna (or Dante) environment - and that may very well be so small that it's very workable in your studio.

I'm sure that MTRX will give you ability to manage all of that very efficiently!

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

Just beware the latency on the AM2 may be too high for tracking. You likely want a KLANG:quelle. The latter uses a different and more expensive Dante chipset that can provide sub-ms latency.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

I have HDX and Dante integrated pretty well using a Focusrite Red 16 Line.

The advantage of the Red 16 Line over other Dante cabe interfaces is you can monitor some inputs off hardware, so they are essentially zero latency.
It also operates over Thunderbolt or HDX, expanding its inputs via Dante (I have 2x Focusrite A16R's and an X2P).

It is extraordinarily flexible.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

Thanks! I wasn't familiar with the KLANG stuff. In fairness, I've never had any trouble, even with drummers on the AM2's. As far as I know, there are only two Dante chipsets. The older one and the newer one. Part of why Dante works is that the actual chips and drivers come from one company. I have AM2's from both generations and haven't noticed a difference.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

Thank you for reminding me of the Red16 line. I'm used to looking at the pure Ethernet boxes in their line. That would be my least expensive route to connecting my existing studio to an HDX card. I don't get any preamp consolidation/rack space reclamation from it, but having a bunch of Rupert Neve pre's is hardly something to complain about.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

Thanks for confirming. I was pretty sure I read that in one of the feature matrices on the marketing site. So, it seems I will be getting an HDX card regardless of what else I choose to do MTRX or no.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

The Ultimo chip used in the AM2 has a minimum latency of 1ms. The Brooklyn chip used in the MTRX, KLANG:quelle, and other high channel count devices has a minimum latency of 150us (although in the MTRX it cannot be below 250us). You are correct that there are also two generations of these chips, along with the newer Broadway chip. See here for more information.


The KLANG:quelle latency D/A converter is 214us (when set at a Dante latency of 150us). The HDX mixer adds approximately 230us. I don't have the MTRX A/D latency on-hand but lets assume it is also around 250us. So round-trip latency should be around 750us with the KLANG:quelle vs 1.5ms with the AM2. I found the AM2 to be unsuitable for tracking but everyone has different expectations.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

I'm sure you are getting exquisite sound quality from the Merging unit. If all I did was classical, I'd probably just use Pyramix and a HORUS. Obviously the cost is about the same as MTRX, I was just figuring that Avid's own unit would integrate seamlessly, particularly with their Eucon surfaces. Another part of my decision to add PT to the studio is the fact that no other company has a comparible commitment to workflow, surfaces, etc. I will add a Dock at least, and probably dual S1's so plugins have lots of space to spill out.



When I was starting out, the idea of buying a whole "solution" was overwhelmingly expensive. Now, down the road a fair ways, it makes lots of sense. It costs a bit more, but there isn't another solution as well thought out for actually saving time on repetitive tasks in audio editing.

Re: MTRX-> HDX or MTRX->Dante
 

Three things to know about the Red line of interfaces.

1. Only the Red 16 Line has matched input/output alignment.
If you buy a Red 8 or Red 4 and use a lot of hardware inserts you will have to compensate for 9db loss with a trim plugin. I upgraded from the Red 8PRE to Red 16 Line because of this.

2. The Red series is not sample accurate with HDX.
That may or may not be an issue for you.
It isn't for me- I track with HDX and mix natively- the Red 16 Line is great for that, switching between Pro Tools and Thunderbolt mode keeps all my routing.

3. The Red 16 Line only had 32 channels of Dante so it is a maximum of 48 channels of IO unless you want to use the optical ports, then it is a maximum of 64 channels. I'm right on the limit of this device- I would appreciate Focusrite releasing an updated Red 16 Line that had 64 or 128 channels of Dante and I would add a couple more A16R's.

I know I could use the Rednet PCIe card but that would see me lose hardware monitoring, which I use all the time.

Finally, one HDX card is often insufficient- most people I know have 2 or 3.
Depends on how much processing you use and your workflow.

I have considered moving to the MTRX but just the base chassis is £5k here.
For me to get 48 channels of IO it would be something like £30k so that isn't going to happen.

I had considered getting an MTRX with 8 channels of DA and Dante and keeping my A16R's but it is still £9kish and I would lose the convenience of Thunderbolt.