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 HDX & HD Native Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 06-13-2021, 02:00 AM
dominicperry dominicperry is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 141
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by mik View Post
Hi,


There was a webinar on the Hybrid engine, and i didn't have time to connect.
Is there a way to find the video ?
Thanks
This one??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnR6Wn_A5gM
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-13-2021, 04:49 AM
mik mik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Paris
Posts: 365
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by dominicperry View Post


yes ! Thanks


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-14-2021, 06:48 AM
snowplaysmusic snowplaysmusic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Ann Arbor
Posts: 32
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Newbie question, but if some tracks are DSP and others are native, when played back they will "out-of-sync" or out of time alignment, right, because the (DSP tracks are happening much quicker then the native)? Conceptually how would this impact workflows? When does this matter and when does it not?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-14-2021, 07:31 AM
Kyle Splittgerber's Avatar
Kyle Splittgerber Kyle Splittgerber is offline
Avid
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CA
Posts: 490
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesehead View Post
So, just trying to get my head around the advantages of the Hybrid Engine.
I've watched all the videos and the live stream.


I understand the benefit of recording with HE on, to get the lowest latency, but the live stream showed having your record channels and busses Hybrid enabled when recording mixes back to a track in your session.


What is the benefit of doing it this way?
I already record 5.1 mixes back to a track in the session and I don't notice any latency issues.
What would the difference be with HE on and would all the plugins prior to that re-record track have to be DSP?
Will you post a link to the point in the video you're referring to?
__________________
Kyle Splittgerber
Senior Principal Product Designer
Avid
Berkeley, CA
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-14-2021, 07:52 AM
Kyle Splittgerber's Avatar
Kyle Splittgerber Kyle Splittgerber is offline
Avid
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CA
Posts: 490
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowplaysmusic View Post
Newbie question, but if some tracks are DSP and others are native, when played back they will "out-of-sync" or out of time alignment, right, because the (DSP tracks are happening much quicker then the native)? Conceptually how would this impact workflows? When does this matter and when does it not?
Audio playing back from disk, regardless of whether tracks are in DSP Mode or Native Mode, is aligned. The key difference is that tracks in DSP Mode with hardware inputs provide low latency monitoring. For example, let's say you have a full mix and want to overdub some acoustic guitar. You'd enable DSP Mode for the acoustic guitar track to ensure low latency monitoring. When you start recording, the full mix will be delayed from its position on disk because of the various mixing paths and plugin processing which cause those delays. But, when you strum the guitar you'll hear the guitar track in low latency because that track is in DSP Mode. Once you complete the record pass, that audio clip is nudged to the correct place on the timeline to ensure it aligns in Pro Tools respective to where you played it against the full mix. Put another way, all you need to worry about is enabling DSP Mode when you want low latency monitoring. Pro Tools figures out the rest.
__________________
Kyle Splittgerber
Senior Principal Product Designer
Avid
Berkeley, CA
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-14-2021, 08:31 AM
Cheesehead Cheesehead is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 796
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Will you post a link to the point in the video you're referring to?

Hi Kyle,
It's at 1:04:21 in the livestream.
Dave Tyler says:
"I've made use of the DSP power available to put my stems and print tracks into DSP mode"
Could you explain what the advantage is of this please.
Does it mean you could drop in to your record track with no latency?
Do all the plugs on the stems etc have to be DSP?

He does kind of explain it but it's not very clear.
How is he doing that if the upstream plugins and tracks are all running Native?
__________________
Mac Pro 7,1 16 core, OSX 10.15.6, HD-Native TB, Trinnov MC, MTRX Studio, 2xRME ADA-4, Sync HD, AJA IO XT, PT Dock, PT Control, Soundflow, PT 2021.6
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-14-2021, 11:40 AM
Kyle Splittgerber's Avatar
Kyle Splittgerber Kyle Splittgerber is offline
Avid
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CA
Posts: 490
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesehead View Post
Hi Kyle,
It's at 1:04:21 in the livestream.
Dave Tyler says:
"I've made use of the DSP power available to put my stems and print tracks into DSP mode"
Could you explain what the advantage is of this please.
Does it mean you could drop in to your record track with no latency?
Do all the plugs on the stems etc have to be DSP?

He does kind of explain it but it's not very clear.
How is he doing that if the upstream plugins and tracks are all running Native?
Ok, I found the section you're referring to at around 42:21.

He's talking about PEC/Direct monitoring for post production dubbing workflows. That workflow generally has multiple Pro Tools source machines playing back which then get summed and printed to a Pro Tools recorder (dubber) system. Part of that workflow is punching in when making mix changes. When you do that you want to be able to monitor those hardware inputs (Pro Tools source machine outputs) in low latency just as you would when overdubbing a guitar, for example.

The other use case he mentions is offloading plugin processing to DSP to free up the CPU for other tasks.

For your last question above about upstream Native plugins, see post #45.

Hope that helps.
__________________
Kyle Splittgerber
Senior Principal Product Designer
Avid
Berkeley, CA
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-14-2021, 01:04 PM
Kyle Splittgerber's Avatar
Kyle Splittgerber Kyle Splittgerber is offline
Avid
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CA
Posts: 490
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushpig View Post
Hey Kyle,

Thanks very much for the detailed reply.

Congratulations on what I can only guess must have been a huge project. And yes, I can appreciate how there must always be difficult trade off decisions to be made. Simplicity versus trying to cover every possible (even niche) scenario.

From what I can tell from spending years around the forums here, I know (anecdotally) I'm not the only one who has an HDX system sat on the shelf not working for various workflow compromise reasons. Some I think are to do with voice limitations (addressed here with the alternative modes), others are centred around availability of plugs etc.

Personally my reason is a workflow issue. For my money the voice stealing methods that were built into TDM systems, were the first improvement in track laying processes since the invention of multitrack recording! A dramatic statement I know, but there's good reasons why I feel this way, and why I feel Avid has errantly killed off a major advantage they once had over everyone else in the marketplace. For your reference, here's a short thread from around the time when the news of the kill-off first surfaced, and I first discussed it with Paul V:

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=316448
(My comments start at post #5)

I started out my recording journey on tape, and the problems of recording multiple passes/takes of (for instance) a singer on several different tracks, presented a huge problem with monitor switching and overlapping during drop-ins etc. The assignable voices of a TDM system combined with the menu function "Mute Frees Assigned Voice" was the first and (as far as I can tell) only time a DAW implemented a solution to this age old problem, but you guys for some reason chose to abandon this major feature that no other DAW has ever offered. Here's a very quick and dirty video to show you the basics of how I use it to my advantage. There's many more great things this method can enable, but the nuts & bolts of it are all here.

https://youtu.be/O9na6N7WQD8

I still pay my full PT Ultimate subscription every year, and keep checking what's potentially coming down the pike with each software revision hoping for a return to this awesome workflow, but even though I've had a number of conversations with various of your colleagues over the past few years (Paul Vercelotti, David Cotton), I haven't made any headway with convincing the powers that be to find a way to bring this method back. There's not one person I've shown this workflow to, who hasn't immediately fallen in love with it though BTW. I'm even convinced it would solve many problems for the post production guys.

Sorry to the original thread poster/host here, and sorry If I've hijacked/ambushed you (not my intention at all), I just wanted to keep up with the thinking about improvements in the software, and to see if I can finally press my HDX system into service. If you'd prefer to carry on this conversation away from this thread, drop me a PM.

Thanks again for all yours and the other boys & girls great work over there at Avid.

Regards.

Steve Bush
Hey Steve,

That's a very clever use of the way voices used to work. And, I can see that being a frustrating casualty of our architectural changes. That said, we don't need to change the way voicing works to bring this feature back. We'd just have to formalize it as a comping feature and develop it in the way that makes the most sense with how the system operates today. Should we revisit comping workflows in the future, we'll be sure to keep your workflow in mind.

Thanks,

Kyle
__________________
Kyle Splittgerber
Senior Principal Product Designer
Avid
Berkeley, CA
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-14-2021, 04:57 PM
Watagushu2013 Watagushu2013 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: México
Posts: 164
Default The Hybrid Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Splittgerber View Post
Ok, I found the section you're referring to at around 42:21.

He's talking about PEC/Direct monitoring for post production dubbing workflows. That workflow generally has multiple Pro Tools source machines playing back which then get summed and printed to a Pro Tools recorder (dubber) system. Part of that workflow is punching in when making mix changes. When you do that you want to be able to monitor those hardware inputs (Pro Tools source machine outputs) in low latency just as you would when overdubbing a guitar, for example.

The other use case he mentions is offloading plugin processing to DSP to free up the CPU for other tasks.

For your last question above about upstream Native plugins, see post #45.

Hope that helps.

Hi Kyle and thanks for all the explanations.
I work in post with HDX1 and always use input monitoring to record my stems and masters and I been using the “blue mode” latency compensation off in a track by track basis. With the hybrid engine if I use my stem master tracks to input monitoring, the compensation will be automatically ?
And I will be able to monitor my recorded stems and inputs without changing it to blue mode ?

Give us now the hybrid engine please!!!!
I need it so urgent !!
I been switching back and forth between native and HDX for a while now with a troublesome switching and cabling every time I work with huge 5.1 sessions over my voice limitations. I really love HDX with the ability also to really put a lot of hardware inserts and really do hybrid mixing!

I will be staring a new mix in a couple of days and this upgrade will explode my workflow and my Mac Pro 2019 that is so needed to help me !!

Thanks

Pablo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-15-2021, 02:41 AM
Bushpig Bushpig is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 642
Default Re: The Hybrid Engine

Hey Kyle,

Thanks for the reply. Much appreciated.

>>>> That said, we don't need to change the way voicing works to bring this feature back <<<<

Excellent news to hear. I always imagined that since the new architecture is now long since baked in, it might still be possible to make use of a clever "secret" voice (or voices for wider than mono track types) allocated to each track, such that displaying and utilising playlists and employing "stairstep" editing would auto-takeover (or drop through as Paul V calls it). Although one of the possible major headaches with a playlist based implementation, is when one needs to cut and paste across a whole song arrangement, and various tracks have their playlists hidden, then the playlists are left untouched. This already causes problems as the software stands if one doesn't keep their wits about them.

Another trick I often employ, is to have a certain piece of audio that needs special EQ or other plugin processing treatment, placed on a track of it's own above the other voiced tracks so that it seemlessly blends into the overall playback stream, but with it's "remedy" applied in realtime (seperate spot pitch fixing etc. DSP only of course). This would play into my comment below about the use of clip FX.

All this is to say that my instinct would be that not having to use playlists for this feature, might be less complicated overall. A special preference selection "treat selected/grouped tracks as one mega/macro track" or similar? As long as any audio "north" on the screen took over from lower down pieces as demonstrated in my video, that would be the holy grail. Having 16 takes of a vocal all playing at the same time, or only one playlist lane hearable in the special playlist solo mode at a time, just isn't the same.

As this workflow method has historically been a TDM/DSP card only feature, it could now also be employed on Native only systems too, as on the occasions when I've been forced to work on someone else's Native only system is when I've really felt the pain of losing my cherished voice stealing workflow.

>>>> We'd just have to formalize it as a comping feature and develop it in the way that makes the most sense with how the system operates today <<<<

One thing for certain is, I don't only use it as a post recording/editing and comping mode method. For instance, a major part of the charm is that at any point in a session, I can put a higher up track into input or record and drop in a new piece of playing/singing etc without losing what I've already got, or confusing things hugely with multiple copies of almost identical playlists. It also aids in testing and refining song arranging overall. Often once I have a mostly completed comp of a part, I can still add another track copy or blank track voiced the same above the current master comp version, and say, copy from a later Chorus to an earlier Chorus to test that new melody or an alternative lyric, or a change of phrasing etc elsewhere in the arrangement. It's just such a flexible and beautiful way to work.

I'll be honest, although I don't know much at all about post production workflows, I've always wondered why more Post operators haven't hit upon the realisation that voice sharing amongst tracks could help tremendously with voice counts in the massive sessions they run. They'd benefit from allocating tracks that (as far as I can tell from my limited experience) could easily share a common voice(s) ie: that one lone gunshot, and the Hyena laugh 5 minutes later, then the pool splash sound 15 minutes further down the timeline etc. All on separate tracks, but sharing a single voice allocation. What with DSP plugs and even clip based effects, their sessions could run many more tracks for less voice resources overall. And alternative takes above one another that merely need muting/unmuting to audition, and even just mute regions to have alternatives "drop through" benefits everyone IMHO.

For anyone else reading this thread, here's the video link and short older thread link from my earlier post that I've been referring to:

https://youtu.be/O9na6N7WQD8
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=316448

I keenly watched the situation with trying to add more voices to HDX systems that the hybrid engine is clearly a top notch solution to, but allocatable voices would add even more functionality to this new paradigm. A win for everyone in my opinion. We humble music guys would revive a much cherished workflow, and the Post guys could squeeze more performance from the exact same system, including benefits when switching backwards and forwards with Native only systems potentially. What's not to love?

My clumsy imagined solution aside, since you've been kind enough to take a look at this method I'm personally so passionate about, my guess is yourself and the other inventive peeps over there, would probably be able to engineer a much cleverer and typically elegant implementation. It's been said many times around the forums here and elsewhere that, although Avid are not always first to an idea, once it's been carefully thought through and implemented, it's always best in class. I certainly agree with that.

Again, thanks for all your hard work. Even though I'm not currently a daily HDX user, I'm very much looking forward to popping my HDX card in the machine and having a fresh play about with the new Hybrid Engine when it's ready, and hopefully be convinced I can move into the new world, as I dearly miss having access to all the new tools PT provides (Freezing, consolidating, faster than realtime bouncing etc), which would speed up my work rate considerably. Unfortunately for me, you'd have to prise TDM style voice stealing from my cold ........

I'd be very keen to contribute with further feedback or testing if that became possible, so drop me a PM if I can help in any way.

Cheers.

Steve Bush
__________________
2 x Systems: MacPro 5.1 (Nehalem) 2 x 2.26 Quad Core, OSX 10.9.5 (Mavericks), PT10.3.10HD, 32 Gig RAM, PCIe HD3, 192's, Sync I/O, Midi I/O.

Last edited by Bushpig; 06-15-2021 at 04:36 AM.
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
What is the Hybrid Engine? loopzilla2 Pro Tools HDX & HD Native Systems (Mac) 31 04-22-2021 07:11 AM
upcoming Hybrid Engine HDX Option? DetroitT Pro Tools HDX & HD Native Systems (Mac) 16 03-01-2021 04:34 PM
Upgrading from Hybrid 1 to Hybrid 3? tuomiopäivä Virtual Instruments 2 01-11-2016 12:01 AM
Playback Engine>Current Engine issue Hunterkiss macOS 0 06-28-2013 01:14 PM
No m-audio interface in current engine (playback engine) SlicerSounds Windows 1 10-04-2012 12:27 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:47 PM.


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