Thinking of upgrading to HD

[tim carter]

I've been using 002R for a long time, with issues, but for the most part I've done alot of good records with it... I'm thinking of upgrading to HD to get rid of some of the issues I've had (buffer, latency etc.)... I never really do anything over 16 trks, I use a Rosetta 800, so I do 8 digital and the rest analog... My question is: what are all the HD components needed? Would the 190 I/O suffice me? Please advise... thanks

[O.G. Killa]

Originally Posted by tim carter

I've been using 002R for a long time, with issues, but for the most part I've done alot of good records with it... I'm thinking of upgrading to HD to get rid of some of the issues I've had (buffer, latency etc.)... I never really do anything over 16 trks, I use a Rosetta 800, so I do 8 digital and the rest analog... My question is: what are all the HD components needed? Would the 190 I/O suffice me? Please advise... thanks

Well, if you have the Rosetta 800, just buy the X-HD card from Apogee. That way your apogee takes the place of the 192 IO. Then all you need is the Protools Cards/Software. HD1 is one core card. HD2|Accel is a core card plus one additional Accel DSP card. HD3|Accel is Core and Two Accel cards.

If you are only doing 16 tracks, I would say an HD1 will be sufficient. You can always buy an additional Accel card later and add it to your system.

Once you get the HD1. The Core card plugs into your PCI or PCIe slot inside your computer...then the X-HD card from the rosetta connects directly to the HD core card. Protools will see the Rosetta as though it's a 192 IO.

[tim carter]

That would take care of 8 dig chnls.. what about the additional chnls I need.

[BradLyons]

Congrats on your decision to move into the PTHD system, I've been using PTHD for quite a few years now and love it. There are some differences sonically, even though you're already using the Rosetta800. As the other person stated, you'll want to get the Apogee HD interface card as well as a Digilink cable. The Rosetta800 works just fine as an HD interface and as stated, it shows up as a 192I/O.

As to the HD1, I generally recommend an HD2 Accel to start with as the cost difference up-front is not nearly as much as if you were to purchase the Accel Card separate later. The other thing is there are some plugins that require the Accel Card, however if you're going to be using PCIe then that in essence will give you more power than an HD1 PCIx. The thing is, you're going to use up a DSP chip for your Mixer, as well as one for your delay compensation. OF the (9) 100Mhz chips onboard, two are used. Your DSP will get maxed quicker on an HD1 than an HD2 Accel. Heck for TL Space, that's (4) chips right there. I personally have (2) HD3 Accel Systems, but I do LARGE projects. I find for traditional recording projects, an HD2 Accel is ideal as you do not have the limitations of plugin and DSP.

Just something to consider while you're in the research stage of this.

[OddsAre]

Tim you are opening a can of worms if you wanna move to HD just for 16 inputs. While O.G. and Brad have good advice if you went that route, maybe you should first look to see if you could get a streamlined LE machine running. I run LE all day every day and record and mix full time. For me I don't see it necessary to head into HD land until I am really ready to incorporate heavy external hardware processing. The can of worms I was eluding to above starts like this... you get an HD1 card, it only comes with a few plugins and is really not a TON of processing power, nothing a Mac Pro can't handle. So now you start looking and TDM plugins are quite a bit more expensive. Like you said you need to buy another 8ch worth of interface, PLUS the X-HD cards which is another $1000 for 2. By the time you are done, you could have really put together a nice machine to run LE for a fraction of the price. What computer/PT version are you running right now? I can assure you that with a Mac Pro and setup properly you can get stable, error free performance, it just takes dedication to the system drive you are using to keep it clean and an OS and PT version that is proven stable. I'd be willing to help you put together a smokin' machine if you were wondering how I have mine setup. Sure it sucks that I am still on OSX 10.4.9 but my system is as stable as it has ever been, other than 7.1.1 on OSX 10.4.8. That might have been the best combo yet for stability for me.

I sometimes have the HD epiphanies and then sit down and do the math, and even already having the Mac Pro to put the cards into, the investment is substantial, plugins are the scary part.

[tim carter]

well.. this is good advice.. right now I'm running a g4, 10.4.9, 1024 GHz, 2GB, PT 7.4, 002R, C24 with the Rosetta 800... maybe my $ would be better spent on a Mac Pro?

[RussUK]

Tim - I write on LE but complete tracks on HD, they are completely different animals, mostly because of the quality of the sound produced on a HD system. Don't be confused by the track count argument, whilst LE is perfectly acceptable for home studio/semi pro work, HD is a different world sound wise. It might help. if you've not heard to go and track and mix in a HD studio and hear the difference - yes you don't get the obviouse host based issues, but you get wole lot more sonically with a HD system. You should do they are also world's apart in cost.

[tim carter]

Thanks Russ... this is a big part of my living and I work with some major artists here in Nashville... you're right, the quality is better... what would be your suggestion on what I should get? Thanks

[OddsAre]

while I would agree with you Russ if you are talking about tracking through the digi002's analog inputs and letting the 002's converters do the work, then yes there is a huge difference between LE and HD sonically. However, tracking through the Rosetta straight into the ADAT I/O essentially beefs up the input to HD quality. Whether or not the 192 sounds better than Apogee conversion is a debate for another thread. I've even heard that the 192 uses converters designed by Apogee, maybe that's right maybe it's not. If you are talking about how the audio is handled internally once it has been converted than maybe we are in an area that I know less about. But for straight up conversion Apogee right in through the ADAT inputs is far from Semi-Pro quality. Presonus is Semi-Pro quality in my book. And to say it's a "different world" makes it sound like the difference between 8 bit and 24 bit. Would you say that you might have over stated that a bit? Or do you stick with that statement, I'm only curious. I will say that with LE you only get 8 inputs of pristine input, and 8 inputs of 002/003's average conversion, but I only use the Digi inputs when doing drums and even then usually only need to dip into 3 or 4 of them and save those for toms. After drums I use the Apogees 100% of the time, and yes there is a massive difference.

[OddsAre]

forgot to mention I tracked with PT HD though 192's for nearly 5 years, so I'm not just blindly blabbing, which maybe on a different occasion I might be prone to doing.