HD1 or native

[lukeyy]

how many tracks can I record/playback with

- a HD1 system (with a 192)
- a HD native system (with a 192)
- a PT9 system without digidesign interface

thx for your help

[nst7]

The standard PT9 software gives you 96 tracks. When you add the Complete Production Toolkit, it goes up to 192, equivalent to the HD systems.

[Keybeeetsss]

HD1 is only 96 @ 44.1|48k & 32 i/o...

Native is 64i/o & 192 tracks @ 44.1|48

& PT9 with a Kit is also 192 tracks & up to 32i/o of course depending on the hardware...

With no hardware, as u asked, obviously u can't record anything (technically, unless ur bussing stuff within the mix or VI's)...

[drumster]

An HD1 system is not really worth considering since it only gives you 96 voices at 48 Khz. Don't mistake this with the number of tracks, however, as voices mean something different in TDM system. i.e. mono track - 1 voice, stereo track - 2 voices. This gets more confusing when you start using RTAS plugins on Auxes, which burn even more voices because of processing on the host routed back to the card. If you're thinking HD Accel, I wouldn't considering anything less than an HD 2, especially if you're running RTAS plugins.

[Keybeeetsss]

^^^yeahppp^^^

Native &|or PT9 counts as tracks & not voices so there is a huge difference there...

Especially, as Drumster said, when u get into VI's &\or RTAS on Aux trax etc. u start losing voices from the 96, not to mention ADC...

[drumster]

When I first considered moving up to HD, I was trying to justify that I didn't require an HD 2 system because I'd be using RTAS plugins. As it turned out, based on the recommendations of some people I respect, I went with the HD 2 system. It wasn't until I had a damaged Accel card that I had to send back to Avid that I truly experienced what an HD 1 system would be like. It was actually more limiting in many ways than LE, which solidified the fact that I made the right decision investing the extra money for the extra card.

[TOM@METRO]

Personally, I like the concept of HD Native a lot. If I stay with Avid hardware, this will be the way I go.

[filosofem]

Originally Posted by TOM@METRO

Personally, I like the concept of HD Native a lot. If I stay with Avid hardware, this will be the way I go.

And what Avid hardware would that be Tom?

[acmost]

Originally Posted by drumster

When I first considered moving up to HD, I was trying to justify that I didn't require an HD 2 system because I'd be using RTAS plugins. As it turned out, based on the recommendations of some people I respect, I went with the HD 2 system. It wasn't until I had a damaged Accel card that I had to send back to Avid that I truly experienced what an HD 1 system would be like. It was actually more limiting in many ways than LE, which solidified the fact that I made the right decision investing the extra money for the extra card.

It's true...because when you have LE and you're considering TDM, you don't really know how it works & you think yeah TDM plus just as much RTAS as the Mac Pro can handle...then you find out how it's allocated and it doesn't exactly work like that.

That said, HD2 here & can't really see going back to Native no card or the Native with the card. Performance is way too solid as is except for the very occasional glitch...but all DAWS have that from time to time.

YMMV.

[antonis]

I am using a HD 1 system and I am interested to see how the system performs under both Pro Tools 9 and Pro Tools 9 HD, strictly in terms of plugin usage. But I am not entirely sure if I can do this using my 192 Digital i/o. It doesn't seem like it but I would like to double check with you: In the Pro Tools 9 comparison chart it says that it has Core Audio/ ASIO support (up to 32 channels). At the same time it say that Legacy Pro Tools interfaces are only compatible with HD or HD Native systems. Hence, I shall assume the having Pro Tools 9 installed on my system, the software will not recognize my 192 through Core Audio/ ASIO. Would anyone know for sure?