Upgrade Options - Mac Pro 1,1 using HD9 , 192io and 3x PCIe HD Cards

[weezul]

Hello fellow HD users.
One of the studios I engineer for has entered a change of management and the new studio manager has asked for my opinion on an upgrade. It's mostly a music studio, but has done some ADR and voiceover work in the past I believe.

The current system is an SSL AWS9000 with the Mac Pro 1,1 , running Pro Tools 9 HD with 3 PCIe cards and I believe a 192io.

Someone else connected to the studio 'bought pro tools 12'. That's as far as his knowledge goes. No hardware, probably just a license somewhere that won't even work with the older HD PCIe cards. Who knows even what sort of license, but that's at the bottom of the list of potential problems right now!

So, the new manager's main concern is upgrading the machine as it is over 10 years old. I am confident in my abilities to build a working hackintosh build, as I have built them for other studios, run one myself at my home studio, and have even managed to get an AMD machine running MacOS at another so that I could use Pro Tools 12 more reliably with an A+H Q16 (uegh)

As far as I can see, upgrading the machine to either a trashcan, iMac, or anything including a Hackintosh build, will put the OS above the minimum required for Pro Tools HD9, which is 10.6 (right?). This is the first problem. Has anyone still got an HD9 system running on sierra for instance?

Continuing on, it looks like the real upgrade will have to be to 12HD. However, does the system really need 3 new PCIe HDX cards? Is one card enough to provide all the IO required? As far as I can see, Pro Tools can see 24 (maybe 32) ins and outs at the moment, which are the analogue ins/outs from the SSL, and I think there's a digital connection to a Cransesong HEDD. (Honestly, i'm a bigger picture guy, and have rarely used it)

Me and the other engineers frequently use our own iLoks to authorise various RTAS plugins but to be honest none of us really use TDM stuff. Even for tracking, on my native non HD rigs I can track with plugins at a 32 sample buffer with my RME PCIe card with great latency. One of the problems of 9HD was putting an RTAS plug in on a track, meant it was bypassed when the track was record enabled. Is this still the case with 12HD? Two more cards in this day and age solely for AAX-DSP seems totally wasteful to me.

Last piece of the puzzle, the 192io. I read it works, but not officially supported. The plan would be to replace the computer system, having just one HDX PCIe card, and just replug in the connectors for the 192, and then everything the other side of the machine room (connection to the SSL analouge inputs, patch bay etc) remains as it is. Am I right in considering this will work?

Finally, there's a problem with the SSL as well. All monitoring seems to only come out of one side. We've bypassed the problem by patching 'mix buss out' back into 'stereo aux return 1' and listening to that AFL. Now that truly is a fix out of my depth. It happened maybe 6-12 months ago. I'm not here very often, and so I have to just work with what I have when I arrive. Would a call to SSL maybe get this sorted in terms of someone coming out to look at it? Or has anyone had a similar problem? [off topic, perhaps]

Also, using the AWS900 as a control surface seems to be HUI over MIDI but I have not checked the Peripherals window in PT yet. There is a MIDI device in the rack in the studio, the blue MIDI io, which I assume is being used to connect the desk, and offer a few ports on the front for MIDI keys and things. They do work fine at the moment and looking at it, seems to just be a USB connection back to the machine, no direct connection to the HD cards.

As you can see, the studio has sort of just been 'left as is' for so long without any documentation on how it's even wired up on the studio side. The previous owners just 'have a studio' and that's that. Various engineers come in and out all the time, but we've all just sort of just got on with working without worrying about the more technical side of things, and working around the problems.

I would consider myself very interested in knowing the entire studio inside out, and happy to build the system but would be interested in any pitfalls I am not considering. I still need to go back to the studio and make a full record of all connections to and from the machine room, and double check the hardware but this is where it's at so far.

Any opinions welcome! Do you think this a sensible way to upgrade to PT12HD and a newer machine?

[panamajack]

Sounds like a challenge to keep it up and running while you update it. I would lay out a budget for the whole project, then spend money where you will get the biggest pop.

The other issue will be timing. How soon does all this updating have to be accomplished? ...and how long of a life expectancy are you thinking?

[weezul]

Thanks for the input. Fairly certain because there's no changes to make to any wiring aside from the machine, it should be a fairly painless exercise. A long day + evening, after building the machine (in a perfect world!). But as with everything, kinks expected I suppose.

I guess if one hdx card doesn't cut it, adding more is a simple affair.

As for life expectancy, I wouldn't even go HD. I can't see on-card processing lasting another 10 years for instance but the 192io is still working fine and I think they would be keen to keep it up and running at least.

Especially with all this studio one low latency hype kicking off. It makes me wonder why people are so fond of uad for instance, but different strokes I guess.

Thanks for your thoughts :)

[albee1952]

Originally Posted by weezul

Thanks for the input. Fairly certain because there's no changes to make to any wiring aside from the machine, it should be a fairly painless exercise. A long day + evening, after building the machine (in a perfect world!). But as with everything, kinks expected I suppose.

I guess if one hdx card doesn't cut it, adding more is a simple affair.

As for life expectancy, I wouldn't even go HD. I can't see on-card processing lasting another 10 years for instance but the 192io is still working fine and I think they would be keen to keep it up and running at least.

Especially with all this studio one low latency hype kicking off. It makes me wonder why people are so fond of uad for instance, but different strokes I guess.

Thanks for your thoughts :)

I feel your pain Re the UAD stuff, as good as it sounds, the latency is a total buzz-kill for me. Now with Apollo as the interface, that's a great setup. But if I had it to do over, I would either have gone Apollo(instead of HDN which I am running) or I would have skipped UA completely(my quad card and plugins don't get enough use to justify the cost).

Now you COULD keep using the 192's and all current studio wiring by connecting them to a digilink-equipped box like Waves is offering In any case, I also would keep the old machine running as is and build/buy a new computer/card. Do you NEED HDX? I have to say, having used both, I am happy as a clam with my HD/Native card on a 6-core/64GB Ram system. I track full bands(have 32 inputs and 16 outputs, working all ITB) and have no troubles at all(and 192's still work fine with the latest version of PT HD, as long as you have the required Digilink license on your iLok)

[weezul]

....right I need to look into HD native a little more as well in all honesty. I'm just in the hdx way of thinking as the studio is currently accel/tdm. Thanks!

[albee1952]

Originally Posted by weezul

....right I need to look into HD native a little more as well in all honesty. I'm just in the hdx way of thinking as the studio is currently accel/tdm. Thanks!

One thing to sway you; Does the studio use an analog console? If it does, then you may really want the low latency that HDX delivers. I work in the box, so for me, that's less of an issue. Careful selection of plugins while tracking will keep excess latency down to very little(64 sample buffer and 7 samples of latency from my amp sim plugin I use on bass). Number of simultaneous inputs needed can also matter(HDN maxes out at 64 IO, but HDX can go way higher). Lastly, I bet the current setup uses a lot of TDM plugins? All of those will need to be updated and some companies(like waves) have abandoned DSP(AAX-DSP for HDX systems), so that deserves consideration too

[weezul]

Originally Posted by albee1952

One thing to sway you; Does the studio use an analog console? I

Yes, it's an SSL AWS900. And I have used it in the past for round trips and they seem to phase cancel on the SSL, i'e if I send something out pro tools 1-2, to ext eq/comp, massive passive, bring it back in and record, with output of that set to 3-4, on playback they do phase cancel. Bit of a unique use (I was showing some students the massive passive, and phasing it to show the EQ change and noise added to the signal)

However, you are preaching to the choir re:native plugs. Just to add, does Pro Tools HD go down to a 32 sample buffer? I've not seen anyone mention anything below 64. I get 2ms roundtrip with my RME card at 32 samples / 44.1khz. 1.1ms at 96khz!

Another thing I've just been looking at is latency compensation for the 192io with outboard. Does Pro Tools HDX/HD Native still calculate that RTL for you even with this 'not officially supported' interface?

[Drew Mazurek]

Originally Posted by weezul

does Pro Tools HD go down to a 32 sample buffer? I've not seen anyone mention anything below 64.

HD Native PCIe does 32.

[weezul]

Thanks. How about hdx? For when using aax native plugs for instance?

[albee1952]

Originally Posted by weezul

Thanks. How about hdx? For when using aax native plugs for instance?

Based on my own experience, Native plugins are often worse on HDX as compared to HD/Native. When I track bands, I provide 5 separate headphone mixes(a bank of sends in the session) and track at the 64 buffer setting. To date(3+years), no player has mentioned latency, unless I screw up Yes, HDN will go to 32 on the buffer(44.1 or 48K session), but I don't feel the need to use it, unless I have a loaded down mix(lots of plugins with latency upwards of 1000-1200 samples) and suddenly need to do an overdub. In that case, I will select a 32 buffer and see if the player is comfy(it may save me disabling a few dozen plugins)