Quote:
Originally Posted by K Roche
I am guessing the difference in perspective may have to do with whether or not one has used HDX or not ??
For me never having used HDX the current Carbon Hybrid implementation seems like it could hardly be more intuitive
When you want DSP put the track in DSP and use DSP plugins
When you want to use a Native only plugin put the track in native .
And I am guessing the Focus some have shown on Input Monitoring and Record Enable as well as order of native or DSP plugins is something to with HDX because those things are not relevant in the current Carbon Hybrid implementation
Now how that may play out with this new HDX Hybrid has yet to be seen
|
In some ways it isn't relevant if the Hybrid engine is running a decently stable dual buffer for the native side of things. The question was more a query from a classic
voice point of view. Voices in Pro Tools DSP systems have historically always reflected something physical, like the number of available pathways through DSP, and the number of available pathways between DSP and the native system.
With HDX you can toss 10 native plugins on a playback channel, or use VIs followed by native plugins with no increased consequence on voice usage because the audio source already originates from the native system. It will stick around in the native system for all of the plugin processing, then be passed to the DSP mix engine.
The same doesn't seem to apply with Carbon, which is what lead to the input monitoring/record armed question. It just seems a bit strange that a playback channel can be put into DSP mode, yet can't host native plugins or VI's at the same time given the audio source is ultimately coming from the native system anyway. I can appreciate alternating DSP/Native/DSP not being an option, perhaps due to the limited pathways between DSP and Native in a carbon system.
In any case, I am looking forward to getting my mitts on this new release!