Mac Pro 2010 + Pro Tools Flex + Pro Tools HD Native PCIe + Apogee Symphony MK1

[RTD]

Hey Everyone,

So I'm currently running Pro Tools 2019 (standard) on my Mac Pro mid 2010 model with two Apogee Symphony mk1 16x16 units.

I'm getting sick of the latency issues I'm having with my analog gear. I don't want to deal with that issue anymore. If I run a track through my analog compressor with an Insert I want it sample perfect back into the computer.

So my idea is to buy a Pro Tools Native HD PCIe card and upgrade Pro Tools standard to Pro Tools Flex.

Before buying and upgrading everything (I can buy a secondhand Native HD PCIe card) I really want to know if these new components will fix my issue.

Greetings,
Rick

[syMPh]

hey Rick,

i believe you will get HW insert delay compensation.. i havent worked on hd native for quite awhile (hdx for ages !) but i remember it working from memory just the same for HW insert delay at least.

one thing to know is the Symphony is different latency on input and output by 2 samples IIRC. Roundtrip for HW inserts it is perfectly matched as it is the sum total which matters... but for output or input timign of audio will be different if mixing with multiple interfaces such as Avid IO etc.

cheers
M

[Darryl Ramm]

What problem are you really trying to solve?

What is stopping you manually setting insert latency comp for what you are doing? What latency are you measuring though the insert and entering in the IO>Latency?

You are going to do all this, add a DigiLink interfaces to your Symphony interfaces etc. Add ongoing cost to Pro Tools licensing just for this? And then maybe cut yourself off from other interesting interface development/options? I just would not do it (unless I needed the DigiLink IO for other reasons, if I had a ton of Avid boxes laying around... sure).

Yes Avid could do a lot better job in the insert latency UI. It sucks, whenever at Avid is responsible for that mess clearly sucks. But it should be usable.

It took me only a few minutes I just calibrated the insert latency of an RME Fireface UFX+ interface here. 5.33ms @ 96 kHz @ 512 sample IO buffer. Accurate to within a sample or so. Validated with inactivating the HW insert. And by doing a quick phase cancel test.

[XJENSEN]

Do I understand correctly that you would have to do this for every combination of sample rate and buffer size?
And everytime you switch sample rate and/or buffer need to manually update all latency figures?
I think the advantage of HDN/HDX is this gets calculated automatically in all of those cases, with sample accuracy.

[Darryl Ramm]

Yes. Each sample rate and buffer size you want to work at with hardware inserts. *and* use of any stupid settings like ignore errors or "minimize additional latency" changes stuff, but that should not be unexpected. And if you run with that on you may have more problems than HW insert latency.

Hopefully that is not be too many measurements. Which for me would be three buffer sizes, all at 96 kHz. YMMV. You can get fast at doing this. Small test session and zoom in on the timeline of the driving clicks and use loop record to "punch in" to record the delayed signal so you don't even need to go scrolling around and zooming out/in to find click pulses. Make a table print out the values, stick it on your computer and/or interface. Done.

Like I said it's a UI/UX embarrassment for Avid, and if anybody at Avid actually cared they could improve it greatly. But it's not rocket science to use. And I personally would not go to clunky old Digilink solely for this, if I was already on Digilink sure I'd like how it works.

I'm not sure why folks have so many problems getting this going. Some may be not appreciating dependency on IO buffer, sample rate and other settings. Some may be confused with plugin delay compensation and how that is all automatic. Or maybe there is a bug I've not run into? But one way to make this harder than it should be is to fark around on a working session with plugins and latency comp on trying to change insert latency numbers. Create a small test session, no plugins. Latency comp off (disables insert latency correction as well as plugin correction). Measure the insert latency as described in the reference guide (As BScout has pointed out here as well recently - measure in samples convert to ms (down to 1/100 ms accuracy) enter value in the insert delay box. Turn on latency comp (to enable the insert latency you just entered) and see if you need to tweak the number more. Enter the same latency for other equivalent inserts.

[BScout]

Originally Posted by XJENSEN

I think the advantage of HDN/HDX is this gets calculated automatically in all of those cases, with sample accuracy.

Insert delay is not calculated on HDX. It is still a manual process (for each sample rate.)
Buffer size is calculated/compensated on HDX.

[arche3]

Originally Posted by BScout

Insert delay is not calculated on HDX. It is still a manual process (for each sample rate.)

Buffer size is calculated/compensated on HDX.

If you use HD i/o. Or the older 192s. hardware inserts are automatically fully compensated.

Which is why I only use HD i/o and 192s.

So op should stick to hd I/O IMO.

Sent from my SM-F711U using Tapatalk