![]() It is used for music creation and production, sound for picture ( sound design, audio post-production and mixing) and, more generally, sound recording, editing, and mastering processes. Pro Tools is a digital audio workstation (DAW) developed and released by Avid Technology (formerly Digidesign) for Microsoft Windows and macOS. Is that wrong?Ī now-discontinued HD I/O would be supported for five years, which should be fine.Chinese (Traditional and Simplified), English, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Spanish Also, my understanding is that the Auroras spoof, but need manual adjusting for time when used as HW inserts. I don't know what the combination of the two would be like to use, as a workflow. The question is: Would the HD I/O only be addressable through the normal I/O Setup? I expect DADman wouldn't see it. The HD I/O was my original idea and might still be the way to go, and would save a ton of money. Lynx Aurora, Aurora(n), Apogee Symphony, etc. There are plenty of other third party digilink interfaces that spoof the HD I/O to make hardware inserts more seamless. You need to configure the delay compensation manually. They sound great, and would also be better suited to handle the 16 channels of hardware inserts as they automatically compensate for the insert delay. If you do go with a second HDX card, perhaps consider just springing for an Avid HD I/O with 16 analogue in and 16 analogue out. You can also route them via DVS/Dante straight into your MTRX Studio monitor profile, making them selectable as a monitoring source. Aux I/O for example will route sounds straight from MacOS or specific apps to faders in Pro Tools digitally. You do technically have enough available I/O within a single HDX card and single MTRX Studio to do what you need to do.įor stuff like routing Mac sound, you have a bunch of options that aren't dependent on digilink at all. Unless you are planning on leveraging the additional mic preamps, additional Dante & ADAT I/O, etc of a second MTRX Studio, it seems like it would be pretty gratuitous. If I ever need more than 32ch of DANTE (get into ATMOS, etc), I'll be happy to have the second card, plus more DSP. I could just squeak by with one HDX card (16 AD + 16 DANTE-per-MTRX Studio, per card port), but it might be better to add a second card and dedicate MTRX Studio #2 to DANTE concerns for recording, and then switch to analogue when needed. ![]() ![]() The thought at the moment is for two MTRX Studios-this way all I/O is addressed by DADman, converter quality is the same, delays, unit redundancy, etc. Somewhere in there, Mac sound routed to a fader in Pro Tools. ![]() Some DANTE for feeding headphone mixers.32 analogue outputs (surround monitoring + HW inserts/occasional summing mixer use).32 analogue inputs (for some mic lines, and extra for HW inserts, talkback).My setup won't likely be very sophisticated, but it brought up the question of whether or not a second card was a good idea, and thinking about it now, I think it might be. In DADman you could feed all 64 digilink outputs to 64 Dante channels if you would like/need toĪppreciated. Keep in mind that, when using 1 HDX card as your playback engine, you can have max 64 inputs and max 64 outputs in Pro Tools, because that’s what the digilink I/O on 1 card provides. If you can describe how many channels you want to record simultaneously (and what kind of connection sources you use) and how many outputs you need simultaneously (also with what kind of connection) I could think along with you. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |