Any happy users of the Focusrite 8/16Line with HDX systems?

[melodydetective]

As above. Seems like such a feature-rich box. Anybody?

[Darryl Ramm]

Been discussed in multiple threads in the past. Including how Focusrite Digilink interfaces are not sample accurate vs Avid interfaces.

Why don't you start by using google search to find past threads (with site:duc.avid.com qualifier).

[melodydetective]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Been discussed in multiple threads in the past. Including how Focusrite Digilink interfaces are not sample accurate vs Avid interfaces.

Why don't you start by using google search to find past threads (with site:duc.avid.com qualifier).

Because then I’d miss out on the scintillating conversation.

[JCBigler]

I don't use HDX, but I do use HD Native with a Focusrite Red 8Pre.

I love the thing. I bought it before the Avid Matrix Studio was even announced. And it allows me to do full redundant recording to two separate computers, with one being fed from the Red 8Pre through Digilink and another being fed through Dante amd DVS.

With both computers being connected to the same managed switch for Dante I can use the Satellite function in Protools Ultimate to keep both systems in sync and start and stop them together.

I'm not sure what being sample accurate buys you when you aren't running an HD Sync as well.

[JCBigler]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Been discussed in multiple threads in the past. Including how Focusrite Digilink interfaces are not sample accurate vs Avid interfaces.

Why don't you start by using google search to find past threads (with site:duc.avid.com qualifier).

Why don't we just shut down the forums and direct everyone to the FAQ on Avid's website. Don't be a douche, bro.

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by JCBigler

Why don't we just shut down the forums and direct everyone to the FAQ on Avid's website. Don't be a douche, bro.

Why suggest looking for old threads on this? Because there are old threads have useful information. And I gave the suggestion to use google search which some folks don't know about. I did not say don't ask questions/don't post here, I was suggesting a good place to start. Maybe it unintentionally seemed like it.

Including as I said discussions on sample accuracy. That's the leading thing some folks worry about with those boxes so I wanted to make sure it was mentioned. Pretty sure past threads include latency specs. Wether folks think it's an issue or not varies, some folks doing HW inserts might, expecting sample accurate inputs with say an Avid HD box, it's not only Sync users who might care, but sure other users won't care at all. So lots of info, if that sounds useful to the OP, a google search away.

And those old threads can be great to post questions to because then it pops up as an active thread and folks who posted before may be more likely to see it, especially if they have thread notification on.

[melodydetective]

There aren’t many times in recent memory where someone posting den-motherly comments about using search functions or the like (which I see you’ve done a few times) comes off as genuinely attempting to help.

And I’m honestly not so interested in older posts about problems, but rather newer reports, and I’m mostly curious about how people think it sounds in a music context. Lots of folks doing post with it, but that’s not the same reference point; and some doing remote recording which isn’t my field. So my question is directed at users of these boxes. If you use one and have first-hand experience I welcome your input. Otherwise it would be great if some air in this room were left to talk about the actual question.

[melodydetective]

Originally Posted by JCBigler

I don't use HDX, but I do use HD Native with a Focusrite Red 8Pre.

(Snip)

I'm not sure what being sample accurate buys you when you aren't running an HD Sync as well.

It’s kind of a misnomer to me because the term is traditionally applied to synchronization to a tc source. The issue is in how the 16Line reports its own latency to PT - and that it takes a little longer to process but doesn’t give PT an accurate number of samples to offset IO operations like inserts.

When you record with it, do you need to create a cue mix from PT outs or can you listen before it is sent to the Native card? In other words, is your monitoring latency utterly dependent on buffer size?

[Darryl Ramm]

Sample accurate in the context of a third party DigiLink interface means the devices have the same input and output conversion latency as the DigiLink box they are emulating… all these boxes lie and say they are something, like in this case a HD I/O (or two HD I/O)

All Pro Tools Ultimate can do is assume that the device has the actual input and output conversion times of the emulated device. The only way of being “sample accurate” is if the hardware latencies match the emulated device. Some vendors including Lynx do that by having lower conversion latency and deliberately adding slight delays to match a HD I/O input and output latencies. There is no way for the DigiLink interface to signal Pro Tools that it has a different actual conversion latency(ies). Yes ironically non-DigiLink third party interfaces using CoreAudio or ASIO do not suffer from this, but they come with other subtle issues

Focusrite is is one of the vendors not sample accurate, hence why I flagged it in the first post. It might not matter at all to you, might be too small to worry about, but then potentially being tens of samples out might cause issues. There are multiple discussions on this, but start here: https://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=403502 somewhere scattered around there is a set of all the latency offsets vs sample rates, I could not find it, might be on another forum. If you want to
measure the RTL yourselves I am happy to talk about that, and hopefully avoid some confusion/mistakes folks make. And yes in the case of a hardware insert you can always manually adjust the compensation. But some folks really don’t want to have to do that.

If you use these boxes as a Thunderbolt or Dante CoreAudio or ASIO interface then all the latency comp stuff just works (there is commonly confusion that only PT DigiLink systems compensate properly for conversion latency, that is not true), there the drivers do their usual stuff and report the correct latency data… but here with HDX you need to use DigiLink and live with this behavior.

[JCBigler]

Originally Posted by melodydetective

It’s kind of a misnomer to me because the term is traditionally applied to synchronization to a tc source. The issue is in how the 16Line reports its own latency to PT - and that it takes a little longer to process but doesn’t give PT an accurate number of samples to offset IO operations like inserts.

When you record with it, do you need to create a cue mix from PT outs or can you listen before it is sent to the Native card? In other words, is your monitoring latency utterly dependent on buffer size?

I've recorded symphony and opera live concerts with it. I usually monitor the Protools main output so I can hear my mix and solos from within Protools, so yeah the latency buffer comes in to play. But since I'm usually set up at the back of the house in a booth, even the 1024 buffer gets the audio to me via headphones before the acoustic sound gets to the back of the house.

But you can set up the Red Interfaces to send the actual preamps to the headphone output also. The only thing that I don't like is that the headphone output on the Red 8Pre isn't as loud as the headphone output on the HD Native box. But the Focusrite output sounds better. The HD Native box is kind of crunchy sounding.

For the redundant Dante recordings that I do to a second Protools machine, I use a Focusrite AM2 to monitor the secondary system.