MTRX Studio with other converters: Dante or HD?

[mahler007]

Originally Posted by creativecontrol

Avid Control doesn't require wifi to be turned on for the host computer. Either use a hub/dock (usb-c for a modern iPad) or add a simple router which has wired and wireless connections and connect the iPad to that.

best,

Jeff

Thanks Jeff. This seems painfully obvious now. I've gone ahead and connected my iPad directly to my Mac. Hopefully this will lead to some less glitchy improvements all the way around, though there are other reasons I might like to keep WiFi on while working.

[mahler007]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

You are outlining a lot of different reasons to use DigiLink/HDX. So just try stuff... Nobody here can tell you what choice is best for you. You've outlined the choices/reasons and seen some additional points.

Thanks Darryl. I appreciate the time you've taken to respond to my posts and queries. I'm planning a major studio upgrade for the end of summer, and am in my R&D, "measure twice, cut once" stage. To the extent possible, I'd like to make a decision and commit to it.

Going all HDX/DigiLink of course loses you DADman routing outside of the MTRX Studio. Personally I'd like to keep stuff in DADman... like I do in TotalMix on RME systems.

Yes, this is one of the reasons I went with Dante out of the gate. Currently considering whether this is something I can live with or not.

Yes you'll get sample accurate H/W inserts on the DigiLink Aurora(n) (and very close if using H/W inserts on the MTRX Studio). I'm not sure what the offsets are on Dante, but once you know that and can correct it I'm not sure it's a huge pain.

It kind of is, though, if one changes sample rates frequently. I've been working at 48kHz exclusively for a while now, but this means sometimes SRC'ing and resaving whole sessions, which can be time-consuming.

On the other hand, how really well have you got stuff set up/optimized and what troubleshooting have you have done??

Good question. I've done a little more research since my original post and have made a few tweaks. I'll be evaluating any improvements in performance or stability in the coming weeks.

If you are monitoring off an analog console then you should be running at a large playback buffer size... max that out. Dynamic plugin processing should be enabled (but try without). Ignore errors should generally *not* be checked unless you really have to (you want errors to be thrown/be obvious). Have you really troubleshot plugin issues?

Roger, and √, √, and √

What AAE errors do you get? Don't make the frequent mistake of fixating on what CPU meters are doing.

-9093 mostly. My CPU meter is frequently hitting the red, but when working via HDX Hybrid Engine, the whole system seems to be more stable relative to running Native, with fewer errors, in spite of the constant redlining.

Can you use freeze/commit to reduce problems?

Yep, I do this frequently with large sessions.

Jeff made a great point about you don't need WiFi enabled on the host. But you having that problem also makes me curious that you might not have stuff well set up and optimized. Is all the networking really well set up? what switches, what cables/lengths, is there NAS traffic on the Dante or Control networks? (those are rhetorical questions, I'm not after answers more that you ask yourself that).

Yes, I will continue to look into this, and have already made a few tweaks (alluded to above).

You sure don't need and should not be using DVS, and it sounds like you are not. You should be be using Dante Control to at least configure the Aurora(n).

I can confirm that the only thing I'm using DVS for is routing my Mac's playback into DADman for streaming Atmos mixes off of Apple Music. I use Dante Controller for configuring my Aurora(n) and my Bricasti.

Sounds like you don't need any HDX plugins at all, if all your monitoring front-end is analog console (great!). HDX has very low processing power, it's not so much that it offloads CPU load from the host more that it's hopefully less fragile when things are on the edge. That may be another sign of setup or optimization problems.

But, like I said, being able to offload stereo and 7.1.4 master bus processing onto the HDX card creates a significant amount of CPU relief on my native processor, and makes everything run better!

*Personally* for what you are doing I'd start with...

Thank you for these recommendations, Darryl. I am disinclined to buy any more equipment for the time being. I already have everything I need to stick with my current HDX/Dante hybrid setup, or go totally HD. I'm not in a position to make another investment at this point; maybe in a few years it will make more sense. Thanks again for your insight and perspective — much obliged, sincerely.

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by mahler007

But, like I said, being able to offload stereo and 7.1.4 master bus processing onto the HDX card creates a significant amount of CPU relief on my native processor, and makes everything run better!

What plugins/sequence are you running on the master bus and is each of those plugins AAX DSP or AAX native? Give the exact master bus plugin chain from a typical session that would have problem running native.

Again, I suspect this might be a sign you have problematic native plugins somewhere (start with what is on that bus, but it may not even necessarily on that bus) or have something not well optimized. Look out for long chains of heavy mastering type plugins that can get stuck on one native core. And again, don't focus on the CPU meters, especially the Pro Tools one, in fact if you can describe what/how the Pro Tools CPU meters actually measure it would be great, ...

Now HDX helps you here with minimal effort which is great, but what do you do when the next problem happens? Buying a HDX2 may not be the best option or might not even help. If you have time to do more troubleshooting, especially plugin troubleshooting, it might be a good idea just to try to get the system to run better on native, even if you keep using HDX as you are now, and give yourself more safety margin against problems.

[smurfyou]

I've typed this out twice but kept changing my mind about giving my opinion.

But I suspect you'd need an HDX3 to get anywhere with Atmos. Hopefully someone else can chime in with better knowledge but in my experience resources get eaten up very quickly with lots of multichannel tracks and busses.

I'd get Dante on its own ethernet adapter on the Mac. And ensure your Dante network is setup properly. Sample rate changing is a pain. HDX is simpler in that regard; But I don't think it's the key to your CPU problems. But I've been wrong before.

[mahler007]

Thanks Smurfyou and Darryl.

Just to be clear, I am not having CPU "problems" with incompatible plugins, etc. I am simply using *a lot* of plugins in hybrid stereo/Atmos sessions that have a lot of tracks, which is perfectly understandable.

The template I have created is absolutely gluttonous in terms of its processing demands. That said, it works, and it's great! I get to mirror my stereo workflow in Atmos. It's just very CPU intensive. Consequently, I've been looking for ways to make it more efficient.

These two steps took me from constantly redlining and getting -9093 errors to having a reasonably reliable session:

1) Freezing certain immersive multi-mono plugins (especially Sound Particles' Density plugin)

2) Reallocating master bus plugins for both the Atmos and Stereo sides of my template to the HDX card. This maximizes the (relatively modest) resources of the HDX card while significantly relieving strain on my Native CPU. My master bus processors are primarily Plugin Alliance SLP and Sonnox plugins, with some occasional McDSP plugs, all of which run in AAX DSP mode.

Nonetheless, it occurred to me that perhaps Dante was, overall, a little more kludgy and less reliable than HDX, and that perhaps by switching over to HDX entirely I might be able to eke out a bit more performance and/or system stability.

The entire point of this thread was to solicit feedback from users who perhaps had experience with these two different setups, and to see if they had any thoughts about which they prefer, and why.

You have given me a lot to consider. I'm still not sure exactly what I'm going to do, but I do feel like I've got a better picture of the various pros and cons of each format, and have made some tweaks to my Dante configuration in the meantime. I will continue to assess and will ultimately make a decision when it comes time to do the studio rewire later in August. Thanks again for your input and generosity! Be well.