HDX to Native?

[neev1073]

I was a happy HD3 user for a long time.
However, I kind of felt the pressure to switch to either the HDX or the Native system before my HD3's value goes down the drain.
Well, I've been enjoying the HDX system for the last couple of months, but the AAX DSP plug in support is pretty sluggish from most of the manufacturers.
I've been researching about the UAD 2 cards, and they seem very interesting.
So, here is what I've been wondering.
Would you go from the HDX system to the HD Native with a UAD 2 Quad card?
I'm pretty tempted to do it right now.

[Liquid Ghost]

Yes
I would never own another DSP system again after my HD4.Native is the way to go with computers getting faster & faster.If i did major film scoring with a 1 to 2 hour timelines then i could see it.But for music productions recording bands Native is the way.So in a year or so i buy a new Mobo & Cpu and i'm right back in the game.

[TOM@METRO]

I’ve used both HDX and Native. For music production I agree that the Native card will do most everything you need, but there is still something to be said for never having to consider record latency with plug-ins on the record track. More DSP plug-ins will come as we get closer to PT11. Also HEAT is not available with Native, if that matters to you.

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by Liquid Ghost

Yes
I would never own another DSP system again after my HD4.Native is the way to go with computers getting faster & faster.If i did major film scoring with a 1 to 2 hour timelines then i could see it.But for music productions recording bands Native is the way.So in a year or so i buy a new Mobo & Cpu and i'm right back in the game.

You do realize that UAD is a dsp system?

[Cliffy_Boy]

It is until it enters ProTools and then it's basically Native in the PT domain. The UAD box processes the plugin then passes the info to the ProTools environment which loads it up as RTAS.

[Carl Lie]

I went from PT9 with a raydat card to HDn. The raydat system worked flawlessly and for the first time I was able to get my cpu up in the 70-80 percent range.

I didn't like my convertors so I thought I'd pick up HDn. Couldn't get nearly the same before CPU errors crept in (30-40% CPU). So then I realized I loved the AVID convertors but needed more horsepower so I bought HDX with an 888 out right and sold the Native card (kept the OMNI).

Point of story, the best "native" system I had did not involve AVID hardware.

My needs however require overdubbing with back tracks that have been polished a bit so I like to sort of work on the production while I go.

If I dropped HDx I'd try another RME card but with better convertors.

I do think for AVID to survive, PT11 better be able to run a lot of stuff Including VI's without with CPU errors. If the can't do that with AAX then I'll just run HDx until it's time to switch.

C

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by Cliffy_Boy

It is until it enters ProTools and then it's basically Native in the PT domain. The UAD box processes the plugin then passes the info to the ProTools environment which loads it up as RTAS.

Kind of funny cause everywhere I looked at the docs and specs in the past, the plugs were run on the card just like the HDX system. Meaning the audio signal was routed from the HDD to the dsp card chips and back, exactly how the hd and hdx system works.

[Firechild]

Correct, if going native is the goal, don´t bother with UAD2. It is the opposite of "native". It introduces huge latency in your system. To have a usable native system you need to go with 32 samples latency. UAD2 only plays nice with a latency setting of 256 samples.

[tomhartman]

I have HD Native and would not even THINK of going to it, good as it is...from HDX.

HDX is the ultimate.

TH

[TOM@METRO]

Originally Posted by tomhartman

I have HD Native and would not even THINK of going to it, good as it is...from HDX.

HDX is the ultimate.

TH

Pretty much.