pulling the trigger on protools hd 2

[MetalJonesy]

hmm not sure about that, but i know the largest PT system you can run is HD10 if that helps lol!

whats the ssl e channel? is that via the pci/firewire duende system?

 

[MetalJonesy]

yeah the 96 I/0 is just either line or adat ins, so you need external pres, which im sure you have sorted, the interfaces are just there for PT to work, however im sure that with macs you can use the HD cards in logic.

 

[Joshua Wickman]

yeah the 96 I/0 is just either line or adat ins, so you need external pres, which im sure you have sorted, the interfaces are just there for PT to work, however im sure that with macs you can use the HD cards in logic.

Are the line in dsub or 1/4in on the 96?

 

[Ermz]

Also Joey, Lynx have a deal going on the Aurora where if you buy one before the end of the year they will throw in the LT-HD card for only $100 extra. This way you don't need a 192 or 96 i/o at all.

http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=1

Doooo it.

 

[MetalJonesy]

1/4 on the 96I/O it depends which 96I/O you get for the amount of 1/4" analogue ios though there are two 96 I/O versions!

96 I/O

96i I/O

 

[jval]

i heard you can't run more than 7 ssl e-channels on hd (perhaps in tdm mode)

is that true O_O

Doubt it... probably meant 7 instances on one chip... there are many chips on the card and the new accel cards are more powerful.

though I guess I could be wrong... only have those plugs in rtas.
though I frequently have up to 20 or more tdm plugs running while tracking drums, and sending a separate drum mix to the drummer, etc all on an HD1 so don't worry...

 

[MetalJonesy]

as you can see on each model they have the expansion port which is where you chain another 96 unit or something similar, for the 32 I/O via just the one HD core card

 

[colonel kurtz]

with the mac, your core + accel card and a 192, you should be pretty much set

i would throw out a +1 at sticking with the converters in the 192...there's been tons of fantastic records made through those converters, and getting something like a lynx or apogee is going to use up thousands of dollars that would probably be better spent on preamps

i don't know how many channels of pres you're wanting to get, but that's another whole topic entirely...just make sure you get some TRS or XLR to DB25 snakes so that you can actually hook the pres to the 192

also, with just a single unit handling your conversion, i wouldn't bother with a clock...might be worth it later on if you went for another 192, or added some other converter

 

[MetalJonesy]

Doubt it... probably meant 7 instances on one chip... there are many chips on the card and the new accel cards are more powerful.

are they?

basically each DSP chip on a pt core/accel card is like a dual core processor in terms of power, and there are 18 on each card!

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

are they?

basically each DSP chip on a pt core/accel card is like a dual core processor in terms of power, and there are 18 on each card!

I don't think this is true? they are old and slow chips, as far as I know.

 

[BLUElightCory]

What type of Mac are you putting the HD2 in?

need some help!

i dont know what all i need to buy
just assume all i have is a mac computer

so far i know i need

1. hd 2 (2 pci express cards, comes with protools software + license)
2. 192 interface (protools doesnt work without this?)

thats all i know

requirements:
i need at least 16 channels
i dont want to use the digidesign a/d or preamps (so what do i need?)
also, do i need a wordclock? recommendations?

thanks so much for all the recent help, guys.

You should grab a Lynx Aurora with the Pro Tools card instead of the 192 or 96 I/O if you don't want to get Digi converters - It'll get you 16 ins and outs for less money than the Digidesign interfaces. If I got my PT rig all over again I definitely would have gone for the Aurora 16.

That said, my 192 I/O has done the job admirably and I have no complaints about the sound.

You will need your own preamps.

You won't need to worry about a master clock unless you're running multiple digital devices all at once.

You will also need some type of monitor controller/talkback/headphone solution (such as the Mackie Big Knob, Presonus Central Station, etc.) and you'll need at least a couple hundred bucks for cabling (DB-25 snakes and the like if you don't already have them).

 

[MetalJonesy]

well so are dual core processors these days, and these things have been around for years!

seriously, from being told straight off from PT tutors, the chips on one core card are amazing basically, i couldnt see the need for an HD2 setup, especially with computer power these days!

 

[MetalJonesy]

the difference in quality between a 96 I/O and other is very very subtle! listen to the majority of records nowadays and alot will have been done with standard 96/192 units

SYLs alien album was deffo done with 192s or 96 ios, even used the 888s on that! its an older and different mix, but still none less professional!

 

[joeymusicguy]

What type of Mac are you putting the HD2 in?

You should grab a Lynx Aurora with the Pro Tools card instead of the 192 or 96 I/O if you don't want to get Digi converters - It'll get you 16 ins and outs for less money than the Digidesign interfaces. If I got my PT rig all over again I definitely would have gone for the Aurora 16.

That said, my 192 I/O has done the job admirably and I have no complaints about the sound.

You will need your own preamps.

You won't need to worry about a master clock unless you're running multiple digital devices all at once.

You will also need some type of monitor controller/talkback/headphone solution (such as the Mackie Big Knob, Presonus Central Station, etc.) and you'll need at least a couple hundred bucks for cabling (DB-25 snakes and the like if you don't already have them).

its the 8core mac pro with 8 gigs of ram (hasn't even arrived yet, its brand new from apple )

 

[joeymusicguy]

if digidesign embraced the vst format (which im sure they can't do)

it would be game over.

 

[joeymusicguy]

p.s. to everyone helping

i already have a monitor / musician-monitor situation worked out

although i dont know how submix routing works in protools...
in cubase i use control room so that the drummer can have a seperate mix / click
i turn the metronome off for my self, cuz i could die hearing that all day

 

[colonel kurtz]

although i dont know how submix routing works in protools...
in cubase i use control room so that the drummer can have a seperate mix / click

you just select which output you want the track to go to...of course 192's come with 8 analog outs from the factory, so you'll have 2 outputs to the drummer, 2 to the monitors, and 4 left for whatever

 

[Ermz]

Submixes in PT are very analogue-esque. Whereas in Cubase you have a separate, completely independent feature set for just about everything, ProTools remains unified and logical always.

You basically just create a bunch of sends on your channels, either route them to an Aux track, or directly out to the drummer and there you go. Use your controller to flip faders when you need to adjust his levels and you've got his mix at your fingertips.

 

[joeymusicguy]

Submixes in PT are very analogue-esque. Whereas in Cubase you have a separate, completely independent feature set for just about everything, ProTools remains unified and logical always.

You basically just create a bunch of sends on your channels, either route them to an Aux track, or directly out to the drummer and there you go. Use your controller to flip faders when you need to adjust his levels and you've got his mix at your fingertips.

control room works like a copy router

it sends a mix to me
and a seperate mix to a seperate pair of outputs
(sample accurate)
without having to reconfigure my outboard gear

so i've got headphone amps hooked up to outputs 3 and 4
and my monitors controller on 1 and 2

in the control room mixer, i just send my mix to his mix, change his however i'd like (volume, click, seperate plugins, built in auto talk back), and we both get the mixes we need

on pt:
if im sending the drums to a seperate aux and the aux output is to a different pair of physical outs, does that mean they dissapear in the original out pair?

p.s. im just trying to learn, not trying to compare pt to cubendo

 

[colonel kurtz]

if im sending the drums to a seperate aux and the aux output is to a different pair of physical outs, does that mean they dissapear in the original out pair?

what you'll want to do is have the actual output of the track go to 1-2 for the monitor controller

then you'll aux out sends 3-4 to the headphone amp, like you do now, and make volume/plugin/whatever changes on the aux send