Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

Hi,
I was considering upgrading my Mix4 TDM ,G4 800 and Adat bridges to a system containing PT HD2 Accel, Mac Pro 2.66 and an 192 I/O DIgital (I use digital boards).

However, I see myself divided between two points of view, with its pros and cons:
a) wait until late 2007 and pick a possible new system by Digi
+ wait for the next generation of Macintels (7.3.1 not fine with them, some weird performance with the MAcs)
+ Mix Systems will even lose more value

b)Upgrade now,but:
+ aware that prices might go even lower towards december, 2007
+ Mix Systems still keep some value now.
+ might not have now such a stable systems as mine

So, what is your opinion?
Also...

any rumours? what would be the next step? for Pt HD Accel ++++?

a)DSD option for mastering?
b) an utility similar to Masterlist within PT?
c)full Music Notation?
d)new improved interfaces?

I would really appreciate to know that, because I'm close to upgrading stuff here.
Thanks

[el duderino]

I've been trying to guess at this lately, but luckily have plenty of time still.

The way i see it, they have to be coming out with something more powerful very soon. If not, native will take over. Latency aside, the mactels are super powerful so someone with say a logic rig compared to someone with an HD2 rig that isnt on a fairly new computer could have similar processing capabilites.

but what the fuck do i know. its just a guess.

[brett]

actually, the performance on a dual 3gz macpro is much more powerful than a HD2 system on an older G5. Latency is 1.5 ms with a symphony pcie card. And, many of the Good staple TDM plug-ins are going Native.

If Logic would figure out a way to have sends on buses we would not need PT at all. For me, and I use both, I like Logic over PT for creating and making music. But come mix down I have to get creative in Logic. I have to use inserts, like a reverb, after the delay and use the wet/dry function to acheive what I would normaly do by just sending my delay to the rev bus in PT.

Not a hard work around but uses more reverb instances. Like I said it isn't a bid deal.

I also like the ability to adjust the width of the stereo track in PT without having to use a phase type of a plug-in like I do in logic.

I have to say, Logic is an off-the-shelf production system. Open and go make music. Even without third party plugs, you can get some good tracks and mixes done. Space Designer rocks! And the dynamics and eq's are very usable off the shelf. So are the ESX24 libraries.

I am also gald to see Sony, DaD, and Wave Mechanics/Sound Toys recognizing this and porting their plugs to AU. There will be many more doing so this year. Another reason to think long and hard about a propretary hardware based system like PT.  

 

[Tomas Danko]

I too have been struggling with Logic not having sends on the bus. But I've done it like this instead...

I take the tracks and feed them to a bus.

I output the bus to an aux.

The aux has got... aux/sends.

It's one extra step, but you just put the bus at zero and use the aux like a bus. I am using this constantly these days, to the point that I should make a new autoload with more aux and bus instances just to get by.

Had this not been possible, I'd be severely limited when mixing in Logic.

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

Is anyone else upgrading too?
No rumours about next generation?
Thanks

[brett]

Tomas Danko wrote on Thu, 26 April 2007 22:31

I too have been struggling with Logic not having sends on the bus. But I've done it like this instead... I take the tracks and feed them to a bus. I output the bus to an aux. The aux has got... aux/sends. It's one extra step, but you just put the bus at zero and use the aux like a bus. I am using this constantly these days, to the point that I should make a new autoload with more aux and bus instances just to get by. Had this not been possible, I'd be severely limited when mixing in Logic.

I can see how that would work. Not too much of a big deal. I am sure it adds to the latency of the bus. Latency on a drum sub is a killer. Does it get it out of time with the extra channel? I don't think the compensation would adjust for that.

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

Reasons to upgrade: (not the 200 listed by Digi)

a)a few studios in the city already have at least hd: 96k, higher track count, better a/d (not HD Accel);

b)mix hardware is gone obsolete, losing more of its value everyday and got 2 refurbishled mix systems here;

c)locked to G4 dual or a few early generation G5s only;

d)If one waits a bit longer the distance from a top notch system will be even $$$$$;

e)some great tools only available for Accel;

f)Plug-in developers also abandoned mix systems;

* reasons not to upgrade:
a)extreme stability with the current mix4;

b) a better front end (Apogee, Mytek, Pendulum)is much more important than having the a/d HD Interfaces;

c)Not really that cheap yet;

d)actual system still brings money;

e)96k and higher track count not necessary and not requested by clients;

f)repay TC, Waves, Mc DSP upgrades;

Still in doubt.. and I have to decide this till monday...

(Current: Mix4 OS 9.2 G4 800 QS TDM 1GB RAM 5.1.3/6.x 3 Adat Bridges into 02R96)
(Future: HD2 Accel 10.4.x MAc Pro 2.66 1GB RAM 7.3.x 1 Adat Bridge 24 bit + 192 I/O Digital)

Thanks for any opinions!

[Tomas Danko]

brett wrote on Fri, 27 April 2007 22:56

Tomas Danko wrote on Thu, 26 April 2007 22:31 I too have been struggling with Logic not having sends on the bus. But I've done it like this instead... I take the tracks and feed them to a bus. I output the bus to an aux. The aux has got... aux/sends. It's one extra step, but you just put the bus at zero and use the aux like a bus. I am using this constantly these days, to the point that I should make a new autoload with more aux and bus instances just to get by. Had this not been possible, I'd be severely limited when mixing in Logic. I can see how that would work. Not too much of a big deal. I am sure it adds to the latency of the bus. Latency on a drum sub is a killer. Does it get it out of time with the extra channel? I don't think the compensation would adjust for that.

I have been worried over this myself, but they say it should be fully compensated for. I know the buses are covered, but I'm thinking about what happens when you feed a signal around like this. I should probably do some testing before I can relax. However, I haven't experienced any problems so far (although I usually do this on vocals only, not drums). I can't recall hearing things getting out of time, then again I'm not confident I ever had similar tracks routed straight to the stereo bus while doing this roundabout.

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

thanks, guys. Just returned from a long day recording outside and decided not to upgrade.
Risky? Maybe.. if G4 dies, might find another one at ebay...

Nex month I complete 5 years doing occasional remote recording with the very same G4 and Mix system. It just grew in terms of Mix farms and RAM Memory. Never had any glitch!!Not even a pile of Adats gave me such spiritual peace.

Funny, there were situation where the backup system presented problems. LOL Famous ERROR 7!
And the Pt system with the G4 and IDE Ata drives never complained even for a glass of water.

BTW.. are there any members coming to Brazil and want to get rid of their HD systems?

If my system had not had its value reduced due to be labeled "refurbished", I certainly would have done the upgrade. But having this bad name, I have to give the seller much more gear and money.

So... let us go Pendulum Audio (already bought OCL2 - greatttt!, beats any plugin), Apogee, Dynaudio monitors and maybe a few Neumans or additional AudioTechnicas.

Thanks again and if there are any rumours, let us know.

[Tomas Danko]

Tomas Danko wrote on Sat, 28 April 2007 11:19

brett wrote on Fri, 27 April 2007 22:56 Tomas Danko wrote on Thu, 26 April 2007 22:31 I too have been struggling with Logic not having sends on the bus. But I've done it like this instead... I take the tracks and feed them to a bus. I output the bus to an aux. The aux has got... aux/sends. It's one extra step, but you just put the bus at zero and use the aux like a bus. I am using this constantly these days, to the point that I should make a new autoload with more aux and bus instances just to get by. Had this not been possible, I'd be severely limited when mixing in Logic. I can see how that would work. Not too much of a big deal. I am sure it adds to the latency of the bus. Latency on a drum sub is a killer. Does it get it out of time with the extra channel? I don't think the compensation would adjust for that. I have been worried over this myself, but they say it should be fully compensated for. I know the buses are covered, but I'm thinking about what happens when you feed a signal around like this. I should probably do some testing before I can relax. However, I haven't experienced any problems so far (although I usually do this on vocals only, not drums). I can't recall hearing things getting out of time, then again I'm not confident I ever had similar tracks routed straight to the stereo bus while doing this roundabout.

I have done some testing now and it cancels out completely if I invert phase polarity on a straight channel containing the same audio as another track that is being fed to a bus that feeds an aux that goes to the master. Sweet!

Btw, you can't feed a bus to an aux. Instead, you turn off the output on the bus and select the same bus as I/O input for an aux. It's just a practicality, but still.

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

un-LOGIC-al Audio.

[brett]

Al Alécio Costa - Brazil Hero Member Offline Posts: 791 Re: would you upgrade now?What is next for PT TDM? you got a point, bud. Alécio Costa Studio High-end Mastering, Music Production http://www.aleciocosta.com Listen to my album at: http://www.audiostreet.net/aleciocosta MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/aleciocostamasterizacao studilaroche Newbie Offline Posts: 22 Re: would you upgrade now?What is next for PT TDM? You know, I keep hearing about PT troubles on Mac Intel computers.  I'm running PT HD 7.3.1 on a MacPro 2.66 with very few problems.  In fact, it's a bit more stable than my old Mix+ system running on a dual gig G4 (OS 9.2.2/PT5.1.1), which is pretty damn stable.  What actual problems are people having with the MacIntels? Ben Benjamin Price studilaroche productions. inc. Atlanta, GA Alécio Costa - Brazil Hero Member Offline Posts: 791 Re: would you upgrade now?What is next for PT TDM? Ben, are you using HD1 Accel core or and HD2/3 Accel? I am pretty curious about the HD1 PCIe Accel Core. Richard was pretty smart. Alécio Costa Studio High-end Mastering, Music Production http://www.aleciocosta.com Listen to my album at: http://www.audiostreet.net/aleciocosta MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/aleciocostamasterizacao Print Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up « previous next » R/E/P Community > R/E/P > R/E/P Archives > Fletcher > would you upgrade now?What is next for PT TDM?   SMF 2.0.19 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines | Terms and Policies XHTML RSS WAP2 Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc. Page created in 0.037 seconds with 19 queries.

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

you got a point, bud.

[studilaroche]

You know, I keep hearing about PT troubles on Mac Intel computers.  I'm running PT HD 7.3.1 on a MacPro 2.66 with very few problems.  In fact, it's a bit more stable than my old Mix+ system running on a dual gig G4 (OS 9.2.2/PT5.1.1), which is pretty damn stable.  What actual problems are people having with the MacIntels?
Ben

[Alécio Costa - Brazil]

Ben, are you using HD1 Accel core or and HD2/3 Accel?

I am pretty curious about the HD1 PCIe Accel Core.
Richard was pretty smart.