|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 6, 2018 22:31:33 GMT -6
I'm trying to use my 828es and 16a via AVB with Pro Tools 12. In my I/O settings, it doesn't look like Pro Tools is recognizing the 16a's I/O. I can only see the 828es.
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Dec 6, 2018 23:04:12 GMT -6
In the MOTU setup you need to go to the routing matrix and make a link such as:
Analog in -> AVB link out -> avb link in -> to computer
And
From computer -> avb link out -> avb link in -> analog out
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 7, 2018 5:57:52 GMT -6
In the MOTU setup you need to go to the routing matrix and make a link such as: Analog in -> AVB link out -> avb link in -> to computer And From computer -> avb link out -> avb link in -> analog out Are you talking about the routing matrix? Because I believe I have that set up properly. I can route a signal out to the 16a via AVB. I just only see the 828ES available for hardware inserts in PT I/O settings, meaning I only have 8 inserts available, instead of 24.
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Dec 7, 2018 7:07:49 GMT -6
Then it may be something needed in the setup I/O tab in PT. You also may need to expand the number of “to computer” signals in the front page of the MOTU.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,921
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Dec 7, 2018 8:56:32 GMT -6
Then it may be something needed in the setup I/O tab in PT. You also may need to expand the number of “to computer” signals in the front page of the MOTU. This is one of those stupid things that makes HD so attractive! Hey Avid how about partnering with the major interface manufacturers and setting it up so the software figures out what interface it is and giving us a single matrix? Even set it up so Something like RME Totalmix is incorporated into PT? Seams like a simple thing that would make DAW life less clumsy.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 7, 2018 9:05:05 GMT -6
Then it may be something needed in the setup I/O tab in PT. You also may need to expand the number of “to computer” signals in the front page of the MOTU. There's not much to setup in the PT I/O tab. I mean, I added the ins and outs of the 16a AVB stream, and bussed those to the proper outputs. But as far as HW inserts, there are no other options. I can add additional inserts, but there is no where to route them. I'm thinking it's got to be something in the Motu setup. To be clear, I have my 828 setup as my main interface, with the 16a setup via AVB. On the 16a, I don't have any 'to computer' 'from computer' routing enabled. It's just the analog ins and outs, and the 2 AVB streams. Because the 16a isn't communicating with the computer directly, it's sending I/O to the 828, which in turn sends via AVB to the 16a and back. Right?
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Dec 7, 2018 9:21:38 GMT -6
Yes, that sounds right. The to and from computer connections should connect to AVB streams on the 828, and then the AVB to analog on the 16A.
There is an option on the main page (not the routing tab) to set how many to/from connections are available.
I’m not sure in protools (it’s been a while since I used PT with my MOTU) but in reaper the names you assign pass through so you don’t select input 1 in PT you select the name you typed.
The other thing that I remember from PT - and maybe this has changed - but it used to be for an insert to work, instead of a send on an aux or something, the input and output numbers had to be the same. So if you have your outboard on input 3 but output 4, it wouldn’t work.
I had really good luck with motu tech support. Maybe give them a call if you have the time.
|
|
|
Post by din on Dec 7, 2018 11:47:20 GMT -6
Here's what I do, in case it helps. 16a > network cable > 828es > usb > computer. I only use the EQP's as inserts. Everything else it just regular inputs. To use as inserts in Pro Tools, I send and return the pair on channels 3 and 4. The routing of these devices is a confusing pain in the ass!
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 7, 2018 12:36:54 GMT -6
Here's what I do, in case it helps. 16a > network cable > 828es > usb > computer. I only use the EQP's as inserts. Everything else it just regular inputs. To use as inserts in Pro Tools, I send and return the pair on channels 3 and 4. The routing of these devices is a confusing pain in the ass! That’s helpful. What does your 16a matrix look like? I got rid of everything except the analog I/O’s and the AVB streams. That right?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 7, 2018 12:40:02 GMT -6
Also, what is your 16a set up as under the device tab? Stage IO? Or something else? (Under Launch Setup)
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 8, 2018 15:09:37 GMT -6
Ok, I figured out the HW inserts. Now a different question. I'm having trouble getting signal into the Motu mixer. I've got signal coming in, and I can access it in PT, but I'm not getting anything in the Motu mixer to monitor latency free. I've got my Analog in put routed to the mixer input in my Motu routing matrix. I can see the signal. It's just not showing up in the mixer view.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 8, 2018 15:23:35 GMT -6
Ok, so get this. I can hear the signal through the Motu mixer, but it's not displaying the level meter. The signal is definitely coming through the mixer (i.e., mute and fader adjustments are audible), but I'm not seeing the meter.
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Dec 11, 2018 18:51:32 GMT -6
Did you get this resolved?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 11, 2018 22:38:20 GMT -6
Did you get this resolved? I did. There is a lot to the routing to understand, and you really do need to have a good understanding of it before being able to properly use it. Lots of moving parts that need properly set. But, it really is super flexible. I can route anything to anywhere, really. I’m still getting the hang of it. They should hire a team of UX/UI designers and charge a bit more for their interfaces. Oh, and I guess the browser thing is just a graphics glitch in the browser. I was told to refresh my browser next time it happens. We’ll see.
|
|
|
Post by Tommy Harron on Dec 12, 2018 11:42:23 GMT -6
Did you get this resolved? I did. There is a lot to the routing to understand, and you really do need to have a good understanding of it before being able to properly use it. Lots of moving parts that need properly set. But, it really is super flexible. I can route anything to anywhere, really. I’m still getting the hang of it. They should hire a team of UX/UI designers and charge a bit more for their interfaces. Oh, and I guess the browser thing is just a graphics glitch in the browser. I was told to refresh my browser next time it happens. We’ll see. Now that you have it resolved, how are you dealing with latency in Pro Tools?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 12, 2018 11:44:44 GMT -6
I did. There is a lot to the routing to understand, and you really do need to have a good understanding of it before being able to properly use it. Lots of moving parts that need properly set. But, it really is super flexible. I can route anything to anywhere, really. I’m still getting the hang of it. They should hire a team of UX/UI designers and charge a bit more for their interfaces. Oh, and I guess the browser thing is just a graphics glitch in the browser. I was told to refresh my browser next time it happens. We’ll see. Now that you have it resolved, how are you dealing with latency in Pro Tools? I monitor through the Motu mixer for near zero latency. Is that what you mean?
|
|
|
Post by Tommy Harron on Dec 12, 2018 11:49:35 GMT -6
Now that you have it resolved, how are you dealing with latency in Pro Tools? I monitor through the Motu mixer for near zero latency. Is that what you mean? Apologies - I meant for the HW Inserts and processing. Do you have significant latency to account for when mixing through the HW inserts?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 12, 2018 11:54:05 GMT -6
I monitor through the Motu mixer for near zero latency. Is that what you mean? Apologies - I meant for the HW Inserts and processing. Do you have significant latency to account for when mixing through the HW inserts? No, I don't believe so. Analog HW inserts should be zero latency. I guess I should measure to verify.
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Dec 12, 2018 21:06:23 GMT -6
I think I am compensating for .3ms on inserts at 96k. From what I understand the only interfaces that are compensated for correctly are Avid's.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 13, 2018 6:27:27 GMT -6
I think I am compensating for .3ms on inserts at 96k. From what I understand the only interfaces that are compensated for correctly are Avid's. What’s your method for measuring?
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Dec 13, 2018 9:46:50 GMT -6
A record test to another channel. I found a method on line. I can look later.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 13, 2018 13:41:32 GMT -6
There's no .3ms at 96khz...and there's not "HW inserts should be zero latency"--they never...EVER will. Buy an all analog system. What you MEAN to say is that it should arrive back to the mixer at the same place I nthe timeline it LEFT...which isn't the same thing--that's just properly COMPENSATED for the inherent latency of the combination of running a round trip through computer bussing, hardware DSP mixers, DAW process buffers, and ADA conversion latency.
The .3ms being discussed is an offset in ADDITION to what the app is already compensating for...which even at 96khs isn't going lower than a few MS with a tiny buffer, NO UAD plugs, and a PCI/e (unbuffered driver) card. As soon as you add USB/FW/Thunderbolt, up it goes by a little (or a lot depending on which)...add a SINGLE tape sim/lookahead limiter/or UAD ANYTHING into the ProTools mixer and it's up a VERY VERY tangible amount...
People NEED to understand how native compensation works, because if you're not working in hardware digital or analog, you WILL have issues, so you need to understand where and what causes what. When I see dumbass stuff like denying that UAD makes the whole system more latent...or someone on the Purple site wanting to know why all the good sounding plug ins are latent--implying it's poor code, not the fundamental nature of what the plug in DOES...I wonder LESS why people left hardware systems to begin with. They don't understand the benefits of embedded design. They didn't CHOOSE software systems based on a solid knowledge of the tech.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Dec 13, 2018 15:05:57 GMT -6
When I see dumbass stuff like denying that UAD makes the whole system more latent...or someone on the Purple site wanting to know why all the good sounding plug ins are latent--implying it's poor code, not the fundamental natwith near-zero latencyure of what the plug in DOES...I wonder LESS why people left hardware systems to begin with. They don't understand the benefits of embedded design. They didn't CHOOSE software systems based on a solid knowledge of the tech. To be fair to people's misunderstanding , companies like UAD and others played a role into this delusion: UAD Apollo"Built upon UA’s 60-year heritage of audio craftsmanship, Apollo 8 distinguishes itself with four Unison™-enabled mic preamps, UAD-2 QUAD Core processing, and an included bundle of award-winning UAD plug-ins — which you can track through with near-zero latency, shaping sounds like a classic analog studio — without taxing your host Mac or PC." If they were honest they would have put disclaimers of what the limits of the system are, but they didn't.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 13, 2018 15:18:29 GMT -6
There's no .3ms at 96khz...and there's not "HW inserts should be zero latency"--they never...EVER will. Buy an all analog system. What you MEAN to say is that it should arrive back to the mixer at the same place I nthe timeline it LEFT...which isn't the same thing--that's just properly COMPENSATED for the inherent latency of the combination of running a round trip through computer bussing, hardware DSP mixers, DAW process buffers, and ADA conversion latency. The .3ms being discussed is an offset in ADDITION to what the app is already compensating for...which even at 96khs isn't going lower than a few MS with a tiny buffer, NO UAD plugs, and a PCI/e (unbuffered driver) card. As soon as you add USB/FW/Thunderbolt, up it goes by a little (or a lot depending on which)...add a SINGLE tape sim/lookahead limiter/or UAD ANYTHING into the ProTools mixer and it's up a VERY VERY tangible amount... People NEED to understand how native compensation works, because if you're not working in hardware digital or analog, you WILL have issues, so you need to understand where and what causes what. When I see dumbass stuff like denying that UAD makes the whole system more latent...or someone on the Purple site wanting to know why all the good sounding plug ins are latent--implying it's poor code, not the fundamental nature of what the plug in DOES...I wonder LESS why people left hardware systems to begin with. They don't understand the benefits of embedded design. They didn't CHOOSE software systems based on a solid knowledge of the tech. You’re talking about using HW inserts during mixing, right? And you’re saying there’s always going to be a discrepancy between PT compensation and the actual signal that’s coming back in? And you’re saying that if I use a Thunderbolt interface and/or any UAD plugins anywhere else in the mix during HW insert, that it’s going to be off even more? Is this just a PT thing?
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Dec 13, 2018 16:00:28 GMT -6
indiehouseNot sure exactly what popman is discussing about things changing. It does change for each sample rate that you use. The insert latency compensation tells PT to delay all other tracks by a specific amount when a HW insert is used. It's the same type of "compensation" for a plug-in that adds additional latency to a specific track. There is a option to show the channel latency below the fader in PT. When you instantiate a HW Insert, PT will add the additional delay time that you tell it in the I/O setup to it's normal calculations. Hope that makes sense. This brings up a side note, how well to manufacturers report latency to the host?
|
|