-9171 and -9172 errors with Pro Tools HD 10.3 on HDX

[SHIRK]

Originally Posted by Benny_Cha_Cha

Seems this works only for older machines. See: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht2838

Older machines as in the last machines that accept PCI-E Cards. Can't wait to check my settings out when I get back to the studio tomorrow. How is this just now coming to the surface? I'm not ready for PT11 yet and I still suffer through occasional -9171 and -9172 errors in my 2010 12-core. Fingers crossed.

[stopxwatch]

Originally Posted by SHIRK

Older machines as in the last machines that accept PCI-E Cards. Can't wait to check my settings out when I get back to the studio tomorrow. How is this just now coming to the surface? I'm not ready for PT11 yet and I still suffer through occasional -9171 and -9172 errors in my 2010 12-core. Fingers crossed.

Let me know what happens tomorrow! Good luck!

[SHIRK]

Hmmmm. It appears that my system, a Mid-2010 Mac Pro 2.66Ghx 12-core, is set to run (by default) slots 1 (ATI Radeon HD 5770) and slots 2 (my ProTools HDX card) in 16 lane mode. Slots 3 and 4 default to 4 lane. The "Expansion Slot Utility is not intended to run on this system". Maybe that's what Benny Cha Cha was referring to....

Bummer.... was hoping this was the problem.

[Peter Duemmler]

My 2009 Nehalem 8-core says 16x for slot 1 (ATI 5770) and 4x for slot 2 (HDX). The utility won't run on that machine either.
Does HDX require a 8x or 16x slot at all?

[Benny_Cha_Cha]

Originally Posted by SHIRK

Hmmmm. It appears that my system, a Mid-2010 Mac Pro 2.66Ghx 12-core, is set to run (by default) slots 1 (ATI Radeon HD 5770) and slots 2 (my ProTools HDX card) in 16 lane mode. Slots 3 and 4 default to 4 lane. The "Expansion Slot Utility is not intended to run on this system". Maybe that's what Benny Cha Cha was referring to....

Bummer.... was hoping this was the problem.

Yes, SHIRK, exactly. I have a 6-core similar machine.

[Will Russell]

Well, I'm sorry to say, that running the latest OS and the latest version of ProTools 11 on my MacPro 4,1 I get 9171 errors playing a singletrack with no audio and no plug-ins at a buffer of 128.

This is a problem.

[Boe Larsen]

Originally Posted by Will Russell

Well, I'm sorry to say, that running the latest OS and the latest version of ProTools 11 on my MacPro 4,1 I get 9171 errors playing a singletrack with no audio and no plug-ins at a buffer of 128.

This is a problem.

I agree!!

[Will Russell]

I'm assuming everyone has seen this and applied it?

http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/e...zes&popup=true

I'm having this problem with ProTools 11 at the moment.

[Ienjoyaudio]

This is crazy guys. First go have a shot and a shave to calm the stress of these PT HD native woos. I had to!

I got my HD native with and HD madi in August of 2013 and had all the same issues that are addressed in this thread. Recording @ Low buffer sizes with even just 1 or 2 VI's keep giving me 9171 errors. The only thing I could do was just settle for recording with low latency monitoring at 256. That was stable and workable for 90% of things. When I record guitar solos or have a "shredder" guitar player in, they notice it. I notice it as well when playing fast.

Its all software optimization. Has to be. My rig is a BARE OSX install and every piece of hardware I have is avid recommended. Im doing everything they say I should do but no juice. I guess we just have to wait for newer releases of PT11 to fix this.

I kind of feel stupid. With my old 003 and PT9 on Snow leopard I could record on over 20 track sessions with various instances of Slate Drums, some synths, and Guitar sims, All at 96k with a 64 buffer size. All host based.

Granted there was a limit you could hit and it was a consistent limit but as long as you stayed below that certain threshold, I could record, stop, record, stop, on the transport as fast a my fingers could move with ZERO hang ups.

I bought the 5,1 8 core for the HD native and continued to instal the latest releases of PT11 hoping this would be worked out. Very sad to see that people are still dealing with this.

To end on a positive note, Mixing at 96k with a 2048 buffer is rock solid. Usually im making money when im mixing so its good to have a stable mix rig but it just doesn't seem to be where it needs to be yet for low buffer recording. A lot of serious composers i mix for wont even touch PT for this reason and just use Abelton. I guess thats good because they then send me the work to mix their abelton sessions in PT.

I really would have thought that after more than 6 months this would have been resolved.

[Ienjoyaudio]

Just an update. Ive installed 11.1.3. I have seen some overall stability improvement. But the 64 buffer @ 96k is still unusable.

A typical session for this scenario would be 96k 24bit

1 stereo instrument track with SSD4
1 Stereo instrument track with AIR Hybrid
2-4 mono Audio tracks with Eleven
1 mono audio track with Waves GTR bass amp

So far the only way I can get this to work is with the 128 buffer and Low Latency Mon.

This seems to do for the most part and i'm getting some composing done. Still getting errors just enough to not make me ditch the session but still enough to be annoying.

Hopefully each subsequent release of PT11 will get closer to getting this to work.