Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Hardware > Pro Tools | Carbon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-15-2024, 08:47 AM
martthie_08 martthie_08 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 380
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Before you go out spending big $$$ on AT Hybrid please wait for others to post their experience, I can only assume that there might be problems with specific systems and that being the reason Antares will not officially support it..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-15-2024, 09:50 AM
Kunst Kunst is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: London
Posts: 32
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Quote:
Originally Posted by martthie_08 View Post
Before you go out spending big $$$ on AT Hybrid please wait for others to post their experience, I can only assume that there might be problems with specific systems and that being the reason Antares will not officially support it..
Appreciate this - I want to buy a perpetual licence in the sale which is why I am trying to find out.

So it is working for you on your Apple silicon machine without having to open it in Rosetta as you say. Again quite confused, is this an Apple silicon installer / build then? Otherwise how would it work?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-15-2024, 01:07 PM
digiot digiot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: NYC,NY
Posts: 517
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

There is absolutely no documentation of AutotuneHybrid being Apple Silicon compatible on their website! I let my subscription lapse since I hardly used it but I guess we could download the demo and see how it reacts on an Apple M1/2/3/4.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-15-2024, 01:18 PM
WHelbsing WHelbsing is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2022
Location: Germany
Posts: 33
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Come on. guys, it is definately Arm-coded, i own it as i told before, and does a good job.
W. Helbsing
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-15-2024, 01:50 PM
Kunst Kunst is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: London
Posts: 32
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Quote:
Originally Posted by WHelbsing View Post
Come on. guys, it is definately Arm-coded, i own it as i told before, and does a good job.
W. Helbsing
If it is ARM coded how is it running on Apple Silicon computers as per one of the posters above? Without using Rosetta?

And if it is Apple silicon ready, why are Antares saying it is not?

I am not trying to be obtuse I am simply trying to work out what is going on. If I had an Apple silicon machine here I could download the demo and try it but I don't.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-15-2024, 02:17 PM
Darryl Ramm Darryl Ramm is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 20,690
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunst View Post
If it is ARM coded how is it running on Apple Silicon computers as per one of the posters above? Without using Rosetta?
You mean if it is *NOT* Apple silicon coded...

Because folks are likely confusing AutoTune and Auto Tune Hybrid. Occams razor and all...

Anybody who thinks they have AutoTune *Hybrid* running natively on Apple Silicon support can you please post a screenshot of a PT Prefs2 plugin report showing the plugin version and all the other info shown there about the plugin. I expect it will say x86/Intel support but be careful here, even if that says "universal" it may not really be universal, if it does I'll pick apart the plugin bundle and see what is really happening.

Quote:
And if it is Apple silicon ready, why are Antares saying it is not?
Uh because I expect Antares, as sloppy as they can sometimes be, actually know what they are talking about here. Part of me has little sympathy for Antares given the confusion they created by claiming past Apple Silicon plugin compatibility via Rosetta, and how they still have sloppy confusing stuff in their support knowledge bases etc. So yes given that type of crap maybe it's not unreasonable people don't believe what they are saying.

Quote:
I am not trying to be obtuse I am simply trying to work out what is going on. If I had an Apple silicon machine here I could download the demo and try it but I don't.
I'm not in any hurry to have to share a credit card or any other info with Antares just to look at their plugins.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-16-2024, 03:59 AM
martthie_08 martthie_08 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 380
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Here's a screenshot from my Carbon based system. It also works on HDX..

https://imgur.com/a/zpjtSFm

Edit: how do people post images here and what's everyone using to host the files? the IMG tag did not work with imgur..
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-16-2024, 07:16 AM
Kunst Kunst is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: London
Posts: 32
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Quote:
Originally Posted by martthie_08 View Post
Here's a screenshot from my Carbon based system. It also works on HDX..

https://imgur.com/a/zpjtSFm

Edit: how do people post images here and what's everyone using to host the files? the IMG tag did not work with imgur..
Well, there it is for everyone to see.

Thank you for taking the time!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-17-2024, 02:22 PM
Matt Hepworth's Avatar
Matt Hepworth Matt Hepworth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Phoenix or SLC
Posts: 566
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ptbright View Post
Hello all,

If recording a single channel, does the carbon offer reduced latency when tracking with autotune vs the Apollo? This would be my sole reason for getting the carbon as will likely use an external preamp. Has anyone who has used both for this application noticed a difference latency wise? Is it markedly reduced? Will usually record with autotune, a reverb, and compressor insert through console for monitoring purposes only.

Thanks
Apollo at 48kHz with AutoTune Realtime, or AutoTune Advanced Realtime is between 1.9 and 2.8ms, depending on which Apollo and which output. Both plugins add zero samples additional latency.

Carbon at 48kHz with AutoTune Hybrid is 2.38ms RTL (76 samples latency on AT Hybrid).
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-18-2024, 02:12 AM
Ptbright Ptbright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2024
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 37
Default Re: Carbon vs Apollo latency with autotune

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth View Post
Apollo at 48kHz with AutoTune Realtime, or AutoTune Advanced Realtime is between 1.9 and 2.8ms, depending on which Apollo and which output. Both plugins add zero samples additional latency.

Carbon at 48kHz with AutoTune Hybrid is 2.38ms RTL (76 samples latency on AT Hybrid).
Thanks Matt. That’s actually way closer than I had imagined.
Do you perhaps have the figures for 96kHz? Also, when you say depending on which Apollo, are you referencing duo vs quad, gen 1 vs 2, desktop vs rack, or other?

Thanks
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Carbon vs Apollo noah330 Pro Tools 35 10-04-2023 02:36 PM
Carbon Ultimate/Autotune Promo SoundEng1 Pro Tools | Carbon 84 09-02-2021 09:00 AM
Any Carbon users who were using UAD Apollo before? Oblivion777 Pro Tools | Carbon 72 04-03-2021 04:51 PM
Strange Apollo Latency orangepopsongs01 Pro Tools 2018 11 06-07-2018 02:14 PM
latency with new setup ua apollo drewblue macOS 12 06-10-2013 06:20 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:41 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com