PT HD: where's the beef?

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2002 12:18 pm

I have to say, all the brouhaha around this release has left me wondering what the big deal is. * You have to buy new hardware, converters and computer
* No support for 3rd-party converters
* The same old internal TDM bus mathAll these drawbacks just for higher sample rates and more tracks if you work at 44.1 or 48 kHZ.Let the buyer beware. The PT HD looks like a mid-term marketing move, not a revolution. It will be obsolete rather quickly...and I am doubtful it will catch on in a big way like the MixPlus did.On the other hand, the MixPlus systems will be more affordable now.Anyone else underwhelmed by the new PT? Jon
Capitol Studios Paris
www.capitolstudiosparis.com

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2002 3:24 pm

For those of you who "mix in the box" and were hoping for improved internal mix processing in PT, check out this excerpt from the DUC......
Rail Jon Rogut
Member # 1857
posted January 17, 2002 09:02 PM
Currently the stock mixer other than upping the time slots and the sample rate - is for all intents and purposes the same as the existing mixer. There is a second dithered mixer in the DAE disabled folder which doesn't give as hard a hit on the HD system as on the Mix system (supposedly).
Bushpig II
Member # 6551
posted January 17, 2002 09:25 PM
Oh God!! So it's still gonna sound like ProTools. AAAAAHHHH!!! 
Rader Ranch
Member # 1853
posted January 18, 2002 10:21 AM someone not associated with digi has posted elsewhere that the old problem where complex mixes that required more than one chip for the mixer plug would have to truncate from 48 to 24 bits to pass from one chip to another is now eliminated, ...the path will stay 48 bit. if a Digi DSP engineer could clarify that, that'd be pretty cool... 
Rail Jon Rogut
Member # 1857
posted January 18, 2002 11:10 AM
I had an hour long meeting with Dave Lebolt at NAMM yesterday -- as I posted above, the mixer still relies on plug-ins to dither down to 24 bits back out to the TDM buss and at each mixer node the data can only be 24 bits wide.... So other than having an optional dithered mixer which is in the disabled folder -- the HD mixer, other than upping the time slots and sample rates, is the same as the existing Mix mixer. This is predicated on their choice to continue using the Motorola chips for many reasons.Rail
--------------------
Recording Engineer

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2002 7:39 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Jon Atack:
...the HD mixer, other than upping the time slots and sample rates, is the same as the existing Mix mixer. This is predicated on their choice to continue using the Motorola chips for many reasons.<hr></blockquote>IOW, "consumer be damned". I expected as much.

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2002 7:58 pm

Yep, typical digi. Release a "new" product that is not only not a real improvement of the current soundquality. But at the same time immediately devalues the current owners systems to probably about 30-40% of what they have invested into it. The next step, as in usual digi fashion, will be to stop development of any future software developments for the old systems. Thereby forcing their current users to spend a small fortune to upgrade to the new system. (even though it's not an improvement."By the time they have developed new software, that might sound better (doubtful), it will be too late for their current trade-in offers.That's right, bend over and say "Please sir, can I have some more".And all of this because the "pro's" bought into an inferior sounding product from the beginning.I remember when all those guys were so high on analogue. Did you ever see them talking about how great a Tascam 1" or 1/2" 24 track sounded?No, it had to be the most expensive 2" machines , studers etc. They went from neve consoles and studers to the biggest piece of shit sounding HD recording system out there.Well, unless they smarten up and tell digi to go fuck themselves, they're stuck with it. So instead of buying nice new shiny cars, they can "upgrade", and spend a fortune on new interfaces, and new hardware that won't improve shit.
There. I'm done for today. Very Happy

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2002 10:24 pm

I'm sure you'll have more tomorrow. Very Happy

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 4:14 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>The same old internal TDM bus math<hr></blockquote>The summing buss is pretty simple maths, it's just summing. How would you like Digi to change this, maybe make the summing algorithm calculate 2+2=5? <blockquote>quote:<hr>So instead of buying nice new shiny cars, they can "upgrade", and spend a fortune on new interfaces, and new hardware that won't improve shit.<hr></blockquote>To understand how higher quality converters are going to improve sound quality you need to understand the basics of digital audio theory, which you obviously don't otherwise you wouldn't have said this. <blockquote>quote:<hr>They went from neve consoles and studers to the biggest piece of shit sounding HD recording system out there.<hr></blockquote>My advice then is to use a Neve console and record into the mini jacks of your laptop, and to leave PT to the people that know how to use it.Thanks Jon for posting up that excellent example of why the DUC can be a dangerous place unless you really know what you are talking about.Greg

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 6:27 am

Uh, Greg? TDM math processes audio at 48 bits but truncates the result to 24 bits at many points in the internal signal path. The effect is cumulative.

The disappointment of many folks stems from the fact that Digi did not improve the internal bit width in the system, most particularly when the new system requires the user to buy all new hardware.Most high-end PT users I know are at least as concerned about PT sound quality as they are about having more plug-in DSP (which was available anyway by purchasing additional Mix Farms) and tracking at higher sample rates. The high-end users who are using Apogee and Prism converters also do not particularly appreciate the new policy that Digidesign converters are required in order to use the new system and that they are the only converters that can connect directly to the cards. Greg, I'm all for debate and am happy to see you posting here. I do feel, however, that each RO member should be able to post here without being subject to comments calling into question his/her competence or level. I would appreciate it if you would apologize or edit those parts of your post. Back to the debate! Who is already planning to trade in their current PT for the new system?Jon
Capitol Studios Paris
www.capitolstudiosparis.com

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 10:48 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Greg Malcangi:
My advice then is to use a Neve console and record into the mini jacks of your laptop, and to leave PT to the people that know how to use it.Greg<hr></blockquote>Thanks for the tip!!! I'm pretty sure the converters on my Sounblaster card, combined with Logic or Nuendo, WILL sound better. And it won't cost me a small fortune either.

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 11:02 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Greg Malcangi:
To understand how higher quality converters are going to improve sound quality you need to understand the basics of digital audio theory, which you obviously don't otherwise you wouldn't have said this.
Greg<hr></blockquote>Well, Since everybody agrees that the audio quality issue is the shitty sounding software, converters mean dick. And, given digi's track record in selling some of the crappiest sounding converter's, but advertising them has high quality (888/24's), I would think twice about buying into their advertising campaign again.But, I'll grant them this, they are a smart marketing company. They fully understand the concept of brainwashing and that people are sheep. And with enough marketing, you can sell anything.

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 11:33 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Henchman:
I'll grant them this, they are a smart marketing company. They fully understand the concept of brainwashing and that people are sheep. And with enough marketing, you can sell anything.<hr></blockquote>
That's what I don't get. I am a PT user, but this is like "Drink the KoolAid"What's up with all these people dumping their systems and ordering this stuff sight unseen...and unheard?I read the DUC daily, and from what I see, these *aren't* the features everybody has been asking for, yet everybody seems to be throwin down some serious coin for this new and *unproven* stuff.Also, Digi hasn't exactly been known for their clocks and conversion, yet everyone seems to believe these new boxes are going to rival, or even surpass the competition (Apogee etc) ...based on what, the Digi brochure???Some people may be in for a big 15k let down when they find their stuff sounds the same as it use to.
<img src="graemlins/retard.gif" border="0" alt="[rasta]" />

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 11:48 am

Digi fooled me once, shame on them!
Digi fool me twice, shame on me!Maybe next time!!!!(ha,ha,ha,ha)

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 12:04 pm

Bassmac and Obostic,True. Many folks have been so hopeful for years that the new PT would sound better, they are feverish to upgrade and are ready to believe in just about anything.I love PT, don't get me wrong. I'm not yet a Radar 24 or Nuendo owner, though I consider them to be attractive systems. But you won't see me drinking the kool-aid unless most of my clients do, which I hope won't happen.One other thing. I fortunately don't have to mix in PT very often, but if I did and was upgrading to the HD version, I would be pretty pissed off that there still is no automatic delay compensation for plug-ins and inserts.Jon

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 12:15 pm

Henchman, I'd have to disagree when you write that converters mean dick. Converters mean quite a bit, as does the clock, perhaps even more so for folks like me who use PT extensively but not as a mixer. I try to avoid the internal math truncation by leaving all faders at unity, using no plugins except for separate fx, and outputting each track individually to an analog desk. That means that not only does the converter influence all the audio going into PT like for most folks, but in this case there are also 48 channels of conversion going back out to the desk. Yes, I think converters matter.Everyone,It will be interesting to hear about the first comparisons of PT+ApogeeSE versus PT/HD+Digi192. Keep it coming.Jon

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 12:20 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by bassmac:
Some people may be in for a big 15k let down when they find their stuff sounds the same as it use to.
<img src="graemlins/retard.gif" border="0" alt="[rasta]" /> <hr></blockquote>Probaly what will hapen, is that these people will not want to admit that there is no improvement, and tell everyone how much better it sounds. And everyone will uy into it. And a year down the road they might start to admit it don't sond so great. Just like the current system. "Yeah, check out the comparison. This PT mix sounds just as good as the mix we did on the Oxfordor the SSL." "Hey, this new Lexicon plug-in sounds s good as a 480L""Hey, this Focusrite Red Plug-in sounds as good as the hardware"Sound familiar? Do I need to go on.

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2002 12:25 pm

Henchman, that's very true. People tend not to bad-mouth equipment they've just sunk $10-$30k into.Jon

This topic sponsored by: