Avid Link says PT 2022.9 is on the way

[LDS]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Seems plausible that Avid could if they wanted to enable a SyncX to communicate to a host computer serial port (or adapter). Needs maybe a device driver and some magic/careful software to communicate to the DAW and keep the latency very low.

Has anyone peeked inside the SyncX? It wouldn't surprise me if Avid tucked a USB or TB header in there like they did with the MTRX Studio.

I don't really know about the inner complexities of the Avid Sync stuff. If it works similar to the Steinberg Syncstation, it doesn't like it would be too onerous to adapt to USB or TB. Nuendo just sends and receives positional data to the Syncstation through USB1.1, plus a bit of software control of hardware settings. Most of the magic happens in the sync box itself - receives positional data from Nuendo about where it is at, checks it against the phase of tri-level, then returns positional data back to tell Nuendo where it should be.

[moogboy100]

Originally Posted by Dax Productions

Man that webinar was painful! The guy doing the demo didn’t seem to know much about melodyne. The guy from celemony had to walk him through some basic stuff.

So effing painful. The only interesting thing from it was the news that 2022.9 is coming this week.

But, yeah, it was unnecessarily more of a Melodyne tutorial and barely touched on the potential of ARA in its current and possible future implementations.

Second, the guy doing the demo was using the free Melodyne Essential!?! Like, what???

I'm so tired of Avid catering to the lowest common denominator of PT user now, trying to grab that consumer-market share.

That webinar was just so low effort. Felt like an improvised Zoom meeting with a Melodyne Product specialist and a student. It made me sad for Avid.

[smurfyou]

I said as much when SyncX was released. There's no reason it can't have direct host communication. Except a last grasp to continue selling HDX cards.

I still don't see much reason for a dedicated rack unit for sync. 98% of users need exactly zero features beyond locking to incoming clock and resolving frame edge sync for playback. I'm no engineer but that seems like it could entail a small daughter card inside MTRX / MTRX Studio. Or just using sync connected to your Black Magic or Aja peripheral.

If I'm wrong please explain it to me.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by smurfyou

I said as much when SyncX was released. There's no reason it can't have direct host communication. Except a last grasp to continue selling HDX cards.

I still don't see much reason for a dedicated rack unit for sync. 98% of users need exactly zero features beyond locking to incoming clock and resolving frame edge sync for playback. I'm no engineer but that seems like it could entail a small daughter card inside MTRX / MTRX Studio. Or just using sync connected to your Black Magic or Aja peripheral.

If I'm wrong please explain it to me.

Totally. I wonder how straight forward it would to simply allow the audio output of Pro Tools to be embedded in the video. Most BM and AJA cards have some pretty decent digital audio I/O available, and could very easily be patched straight back into a DAD/MTRX interface and added to the list of sources in a monitor profile. There is now AUX I/O, so you don't really lose any of your DAD/MTRX features at all.

[gives]

Originally Posted by The Weed

For now, look at Ginger Audio.

Interesting stuff!

G

[gives]

Originally Posted by smurfyou

I said as much when SyncX was released. There's no reason it can't have direct host communication. Except a last grasp to continue selling HDX cards.

I still don't see much reason for a dedicated rack unit for sync. 98% of users need exactly zero features beyond locking to incoming clock and resolving frame edge sync for playback. I'm no engineer but that seems like it could entail a small daughter card inside MTRX / MTRX Studio. Or just using sync connected to your Black Magic or Aja peripheral.

If I'm wrong please explain it to me.

THIS is a MOVING TARGET with the changes now, but here goes.. Not totally setup with then new IO yet.
When using an external renderer, you would be using the Sync X to output Word Clock to the MTRX (as it doesn’t have loop sync), the MTRX would also be master of the Dante Network Clock, or provide WC to an external renderer that uses MADI. the Video peripheral would receive Video Reference from the Sync X.
The advantage is that all devices are now resolved to the same clock, running at the same speed (speed reference)
LTC would be sourced from the Sync X for the external renderer (positional reference)

In this setup, all parts of the system will run at the exact same speed, and video playback will not drift.

For Example: When using the internal renderer, as you are now, using the Dolby Audio Bridge, will not allow you to use your HD Native Thunderbolt as playback engine, which also disqualifies the Sync X from being used. So there is no way of getting video and audio playback to stay in sync. They will drift out of sync eventually in long form for the most part.
One solution could be to use the send & return plugins, which would allow you to use the HD Native and Sync X and a connected Video Peripheral to get frame edge aligned video playback, but the drawback is that there is no Automatic Delay Compensation…
If you are mixing channel based formats, such as stereo, 5.1 and 7.1 where video and audio can’t drift apart, getting the sync X and a video peripheral is great. To be able to use a similar configuration with Dolby Atmos, however, will be VERY expensive as you’d need all of this:

2 HDX cards to output 128 channels of audio
128 channels of MADI or Dante on your MTRX
1 RMW with 128 MADI or Dante channels
Avid Sync X
Video Peripheral

The inexpensive way is using the internal renderer.
Personally I’d think of it this way:
If most of your work is channel based Post, where perfect sync between video and audio is critical, I’d be looking at Sync X and a Video peripheral. When mixing odd projects in Atmos, I’d use the Dolby Audio Bridge on an internal renderer. If you start getting a lot of work for Atmos, you might need to start thinking about an external renderer, and then you’ve got the sync x and video peripheral in place.

[smurfyou]

Originally Posted by gives

THIS is a MOVING TARGET with the changes now, but here goes.. Not totally setup with then new IO yet.
When using an external renderer, you would be using the Sync X to output Word Clock to the MTRX (as it doesn’t have loop sync), the MTRX would also be master of the Dante Network Clock, or provide WC to an external renderer that uses MADI. the Video peripheral would receive Video Reference from the Sync X.
The advantage is that all devices are now resolved to the same clock, running at the same speed (speed reference)
LTC would be sourced from the Sync X for the external renderer (positional reference)

In this setup, all parts of the system will run at the exact same speed, and video playback will not drift.

For Example: When using the internal renderer, as you are now, using the Dolby Audio Bridge, will not allow you to use your HD Native Thunderbolt as playback engine, which also disqualifies the Sync X from being used. So there is no way of getting video and audio playback to stay in sync. They will drift out of sync eventually in long form for the most part.
One solution could be to use the send & return plugins, which would allow you to use the HD Native and Sync X and a connected Video Peripheral to get frame edge aligned video playback, but the drawback is that there is no Automatic Delay Compensation…
If you are mixing channel based formats, such as stereo, 5.1 and 7.1 where video and audio can’t drift apart, getting the sync X and a video peripheral is great. To be able to use a similar configuration with Dolby Atmos, however, will be VERY expensive as you’d need all of this:

2 HDX cards to output 128 channels of audio
128 channels of MADI or Dante on your MTRX
1 RMW with 128 MADI or Dante channels
Avid Sync X
Video Peripheral

The inexpensive way is using the internal renderer.
Personally I’d think of it this way:
If most of your work is channel based Post, where perfect sync between video and audio is critical, I’d be looking at Sync X and a Video peripheral. When mixing odd projects in Atmos, I’d use the Dolby Audio Bridge on an internal renderer. If you start getting a lot of work for Atmos, you might need to start thinking about an external renderer, and then you’ve got the sync x and video peripheral in place.

Thanks, I do know all this. My gripe is that the SyncX is unnecessary as a standalone box. Except as you note with an RMU. There it's providing clock and positional reference. But the overwhelming majority of users have no need for LTC, 9 pin, multiple sync outputs, etc... We do need proper frame edge sync. Which is possible without the box, if Avid would allow it.

The SyncX does a lot. Just way overkill for many.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by gives

THIS is a MOVING TARGET with the changes now, but here goes.. Not totally setup with then new IO yet.
When using an external renderer, you would be using the Sync X to output Word Clock to the MTRX (as it doesn’t have loop sync), the MTRX would also be master of the Dante Network Clock, or provide WC to an external renderer that uses MADI. the Video peripheral would receive Video Reference from the Sync X.
The advantage is that all devices are now resolved to the same clock, running at the same speed (speed reference)
LTC would be sourced from the Sync X for the external renderer (positional reference)

In this setup, all parts of the system will run at the exact same speed, and video playback will not drift.

For Example: When using the internal renderer, as you are now, using the Dolby Audio Bridge, will not allow you to use your HD Native Thunderbolt as playback engine, which also disqualifies the Sync X from being used. So there is no way of getting video and audio playback to stay in sync. They will drift out of sync eventually in long form for the most part.
One solution could be to use the send & return plugins, which would allow you to use the HD Native and Sync X and a connected Video Peripheral to get frame edge aligned video playback, but the drawback is that there is no Automatic Delay Compensation…
If you are mixing channel based formats, such as stereo, 5.1 and 7.1 where video and audio can’t drift apart, getting the sync X and a video peripheral is great. To be able to use a similar configuration with Dolby Atmos, however, will be VERY expensive as you’d need all of this:

2 HDX cards to output 128 channels of audio
128 channels of MADI or Dante on your MTRX
1 RMW with 128 MADI or Dante channels
Avid Sync X
Video Peripheral

The inexpensive way is using the internal renderer.
Personally I’d think of it this way:
If most of your work is channel based Post, where perfect sync between video and audio is critical, I’d be looking at Sync X and a Video peripheral. When mixing odd projects in Atmos, I’d use the Dolby Audio Bridge on an internal renderer. If you start getting a lot of work for Atmos, you might need to start thinking about an external renderer, and then you’ve got the sync x and video peripheral in place.

The AUX I/O allows you to use avid hardware as the playback engine, while also incorporating the renderer using dolby atmos bridge.

Our gripe is more about the method that Avid requires us to use to achieve edge frame sync, rather than how to do it. For about a decade now Steinberg has offered a USB1.1 version of the SyncHD. It is audio hardware agnostic. The Rosendahl HD has been on the market for just as long, with phase locked tri-level and wordclock outputs and positional reference.

For whatever reason, in an era when I can already sync a MTRX or DAD interface and any number of video playback cards to the same video sync generator, Avid's revised 2020 Sync box design still works in exactly the same way and uses exactly the same Macintosh serial printer cable from the models from two decades ago...