|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 8, 2024 17:24:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Mar 8, 2024 17:29:23 GMT -6
Anyone have any clue why I'm not seeing it on my network after connecting the AVB cable? This bit can take some doing, okay..
If you have a MAC with an ethernet port than you should be fine, if it's a Macbook Pro like me with TB3 ports I had to use a TB3 > TB2 > Ethernet dongle LOL..
Firstly download Avid Carbon Central, install it, let it do the firmware upgrade, select Core audio.
Apple > System Settings > Network > TB Ethernet or Ethernet (make sure it's using DHCP) > Under hardware enable AVB mode (at the bottom it's a check box)
Launchpad > Audio Midi > Window > Show Network Device Browser > Click on Pro Tools Carbon checkbox (they say you don't need AMS but mine didn't work without it). Open Pro Tools > Set the playback engine to Carbon, start setting things up in I/O.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 8, 2024 17:48:38 GMT -6
The checkbox in hardware devices just keeps spinning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 8, 2024 17:54:28 GMT -6
OK - note to self...you have to restart a lot after all this stuff. Finally got sound...It's TONS louder than my Burl. Can't really tell about the DA yet because it's not going through the Trinnov. seems a pushed in the middle a bit. But I'll judge after getting the trinnov in the path.
Just listening to music...center image seems a lot more defined.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Mar 8, 2024 18:07:55 GMT -6
OK - note to self...you have to restart a lot after all this stuff. Finally got sound...It's TONS louder than my Burl. Can't really tell about the DA yet because it's not going through the Trinnov. seems a pushed in the middle a bit. But I'll judge after getting the trinnov in the path. Just listening to music...center image seems a lot more defined. Congrats on getting it set up, tried the headphone amps yet? |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 8, 2024 21:09:53 GMT -6
OK - note to self...you have to restart a lot after all this stuff. Finally got sound...It's TONS louder than my Burl. Can't really tell about the DA yet because it's not going through the Trinnov. seems a pushed in the middle a bit. But I'll judge after getting the trinnov in the path. Just listening to music...center image seems a lot more defined. Congrats on getting it set up, tried the headphone amps yet? I’m sitting at a damn dinner party thinking about my new interface I barely got a chance to use literally got to listen for like 5 minutes right when I get it working, I hear the wife yelling at me Btw - it’s normal dsub, right? I need to buy a line out snake unfortunately and you would think Nashville would have one…but I’ll probably have to order |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Mar 8, 2024 22:37:15 GMT -6
Congrats on getting it set up, tried the headphone amps yet? I’m sitting at a damn dinner party thinking about my new interface I barely got a chance to use literally got to listen for like 5 minutes right when I get it working, I hear the wife yelling at me Btw - it’s normal dsub, right? I need to buy a line out snake unfortunately and you would think Nashville would have one…but I’ll probably have to order The DB25s are to the Tascam standard, which most cables you're going to run across are. But good to doublecheck. You can get a Hosa DB25 to TRS for like $60 on Amazon. Since it's not a cable that's going to be moved around a lot or plugged/unplugged constantly, I have no problem with Hosa. I do personally really like the modular Planet Waves / D'Addario cables, though. Get a core cable (DB25 to DB25) of any length 5ft ($20) to 50ft ($85) and then attach their female DB25 to TRS fanout ($32). Those are Amazon prices, but those cables are usually available at Guitar Center and other big music stores. Somebody in Nashville has to have them. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 0:03:21 GMT -6
The owner of the UAD forum…I’ve always thought he was pretty straight up…but this makes me wonder about his opinion at around 7:00. Claims the DA is the weak link on the Carbon and the Apollo X DA is much better…guess I’m gonna have to compare myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 0:18:10 GMT -6
That review of Carbon did not make me feel good about my purchase.
|
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Mar 9, 2024 1:53:35 GMT -6
Cubase Pro 13 delay compensation is rock solid. 100% spot on. But for all tracking and over dubbing I use an analog monitoring mixer for true ZERO latency tracking  Sorry, should have explained more. As you know I've got an SSL Big Six, it's not "true" zero latency tracking as your converters need to output the audio and you still have to record it (hence an RT). The benefit to this approach is you're only listening to the output latency so you'll get closer but it doesn't mean it would match like in HDX unless you have an interface that can do sub ms round trip. When you add plugins into this situation it will just exascerbate the issue and overdubs are still not exactly possible unless you start bypassing, I'm sure someone will say well it's not much so I can compensate. However I'll paraphrase the SOS review, it's not noticeable because you get used to it but it doesn't mean it isn't there.
Look, I'm not an Avid defender. I think the price of any HDX solution is extortionate, also it's not impossible to build a tool to convert C++ to Assembly, C or whatever language you prefer (multiple engines do this) so if someone had the expertise they could create an easy way to convert plugs to DSP then undermine Avid. To create the interface etc. would be a task and to standardise it would take a lot of effort but again it's not impossible.
What I'm saying is it's like recording from analog to tape, the amount of latency across the board is imperceptible and it's something you understand once you've tried it. Whether this should be the case anyway, well that's another question. I'm not the only one saying it though, again the SOS review.
Hi Shadow, I don't understand how the DAW doesn't compensate for overdubs?? Most interfaces have sub 1ms "direct" monitoring but that doesn't have anything to do with the sample alignment of the DAW. That should be spot on everytime shouldn't it?? For many years I have trusted that my DAW will compensate for all latency if my interface is reporting correctly. I'm only looking at this from a cubase perspective I haven't used pro tools in years. The only issue I've had was with Apollo not reporting adc bus latency. But RME is 100%. Interested to know if I'm missing something? |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Mar 9, 2024 3:27:49 GMT -6
Sorry, should have explained more. As you know I've got an SSL Big Six, it's not "true" zero latency tracking as your converters need to output the audio and you still have to record it (hence an RT). The benefit to this approach is you're only listening to the output latency so you'll get closer but it doesn't mean it would match like in HDX unless you have an interface that can do sub ms round trip. When you add plugins into this situation it will just exascerbate the issue and overdubs are still not exactly possible unless you start bypassing, I'm sure someone will say well it's not much so I can compensate. However I'll paraphrase the SOS review, it's not noticeable because you get used to it but it doesn't mean it isn't there.
Look, I'm not an Avid defender. I think the price of any HDX solution is extortionate, also it's not impossible to build a tool to convert C++ to Assembly, C or whatever language you prefer (multiple engines do this) so if someone had the expertise they could create an easy way to convert plugs to DSP then undermine Avid. To create the interface etc. would be a task and to standardise it would take a lot of effort but again it's not impossible.
What I'm saying is it's like recording from analog to tape, the amount of latency across the board is imperceptible and it's something you understand once you've tried it. Whether this should be the case anyway, well that's another question. I'm not the only one saying it though, again the SOS review.
Hi Shadow, I don't understand how the DAW doesn't compensate for overdubs?? Most interfaces have sub 1ms "direct" monitoring but that doesn't have anything to do with the sample alignment of the DAW. That should be spot on everytime shouldn't it?? For many years I have trusted that my DAW will compensate for all latency if my interface is reporting correctly. I'm only looking at this from a cubase perspective I haven't used pro tools in years. The only issue I've had was with Apollo not reporting adc bus latency. But RME is 100%. Interested to know if I'm missing something? Cubase pro 13 delay compensation is perfection on every single aspect of application. Tracking, overdubbing, hardware inserts. I have sent extremely complex signal tests through extremely complex routings and the delay compensation system is 100% rock solid and 100% phase aligned. As it should be it’s only maths! That said, I never monitor through plug-ins or my DAW for tracking cue sends as I have an analog monitoring rig for that purpose, as I wish to absolute zero latency monitoring whilst tracking the same as an actual analog mixing desk. In my experience of HDX and tracking bands, HDX acts as an on board digital mixer (in effect) and provides extremely low latency monitor cues - it’s fantastic for that application avoiding the need for an analog monitor mixer. Cubase’s hybrid engine means over dubbing VI keyboards into a full mix with hundreds of plug-ins I still have extremely low latency for the overdub - Cubase has an extremely effective hybrid audio engine. I don’t actually see the advantage to Carbon in this respect other than of course it being a great interface and a great companion if you’re a Pro Tools DAW user. I have a good friend with Carbon and I think it’s an excellent solution for a PT user. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Mar 9, 2024 4:20:58 GMT -6
The owner of the UAD forum…I’ve always thought he was pretty straight up…but this makes me wonder about his opinion at around 7:00. Claims the DA is the weak link on the Carbon and the Apollo X DA is much better…guess I’m gonna have to compare myself. You know me by now, I'm not exactly biased about my own purchases. For a start they quote spec's and the Aurora(n) has the same D/A specs (dynamic range) as the Carbon, hands up here, who thinks the Apollo sounds better than the Aurora? I've shifted through a lot of interfaces (for various reason), Aurora, MOTU, Symphony MK1, SSL Big Six, Pro Tools MBox, Carbon, Metric Halo ULN-8, RME UFX-2, Apollo and there's only two interfaces out of that list where the AD / DA irked me and one of them is the Apollo X6.
Don't get me wrong when it comes to plugs the Apollo has a lot of advantages but when it comes to sound quality I really wouldn't use the Apollo X6 I had as any sort of benchmark. Sorry if that bothers anyone, although the cool stuff factor outweighs the sound IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Mar 9, 2024 8:29:44 GMT -6
Hi Shadow, I don't understand how the DAW doesn't compensate for overdubs?? Most interfaces have sub 1ms "direct" monitoring but that doesn't have anything to do with the sample alignment of the DAW. That should be spot on everytime shouldn't it?? For many years I have trusted that my DAW will compensate for all latency if my interface is reporting correctly. I'm only looking at this from a cubase perspective I haven't used pro tools in years. The only issue I've had was with Apollo not reporting adc bus latency. But RME is 100%. Interested to know if I'm missing something? I often don't trust them, I've had it where a DAW's (plural) don't even compensate properly for their own internal mixers latency or drift out as the session gets longer. Never mind interface issues. Also direct / HW monitoring does have an impact as the DAW in theory is supposed to subtract the RTT loop delay. With software based & PDC again in theory it's supposed to do the same minus the additional plugin delay.
How it all works in practice with plugin loads, buffers hitting CPU limits etc. well.. IME it can be a mixed bag. No matter how powerful the CPU it's always laden by background operations and the per channel multithreading operations of ANY DAW. MT is a complex subject at the best of times, so it can range from hundereds of plugins without issue all the way to tripping up with not all that many. I've been programming even for fun sometimes over many, many years and again it's complicated.
RME sure is good for reporting accurate latencies etc. and that's because they know how to make decent drivers.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Mar 9, 2024 8:53:56 GMT -6
Hi Shadow, I don't understand how the DAW doesn't compensate for overdubs?? Most interfaces have sub 1ms "direct" monitoring but that doesn't have anything to do with the sample alignment of the DAW. That should be spot on everytime shouldn't it?? For many years I have trusted that my DAW will compensate for all latency if my interface is reporting correctly. I'm only looking at this from a cubase perspective I haven't used pro tools in years. The only issue I've had was with Apollo not reporting adc bus latency. But RME is 100%. Interested to know if I'm missing something? I often don't trust them, I've had it where a DAW's (plural) don't even compensate properly for their own internal mixers latency or drift out as the session gets longer. Never mind interface issues. Also direct / HW monitoring does have an impact as the DAW in theory is supposed to subtract the RTT loop delay. With software based & PDC again in theory it's supposed to do the same minus the additional plugin delay.
How it all works in practice with plugin loads, buffers hitting CPU limits etc. well.. IME it can be a mixed bag. No matter how powerful the CPU it's always laden by background operations and the per channel multithreading operations of ANY DAW. MT is a complex subject at the best of times, so it can range from hundereds of plugins without issue all the way to tripping up with not all that many. I've been programming even for fun sometimes over many, many years and again it's complicated.
RME sure is good for reporting accurate latencies etc. and that's because they know how to make decent drivers.
That’s why I use Cubase with an RME AES interface - I have none of these issues. I’ve done extensive and intensive tests and the whole system under all possible circumstances I can generate is 100% phase accurate and predictable. But it has been for years (at least for me it has) I thought these issues were solved quite a few years ago. Maybe not all DAW’s and interfaces are equal. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Mar 9, 2024 9:09:24 GMT -6
That’s why I use Cubase with an RME AES interface - I have none of these issues. I’ve done extensive and intensive tests and the whole system under all possible circumstances I can generate is 100% phase accurate and predictable. But it has been for years (at least for me it has) I thought these issues were solved quite a few years ago. Maybe not all DAW’s and interfaces are equal. Yeah but I don't use Cubase so it's not really relevant .. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 10:00:05 GMT -6
The owner of the UAD forum…I’ve always thought he was pretty straight up…but this makes me wonder about his opinion at around 7:00. Claims the DA is the weak link on the Carbon and the Apollo X DA is much better…guess I’m gonna have to compare myself. You know me by now, I'm not exactly biased about my own purchases. For a start they quote spec's and the Aurora(n) has the same D/A specs (dynamic range) as the Carbon, hands up here, who thinks the Apollo sounds better than the Aurora? I've shifted through a lot of interfaces (for various reason), Aurora, MOTU, Symphony MK1, SSL Big Six, Pro Tools MBox, Carbon, Metric Halo ULN-8, RME UFX-2, Apollo and there's only two interfaces out of that list where the AD / DA irked me and one of them is the Apollo X6. Don't get me wrong when it comes to plugs the Apollo has a lot of advantages but when it comes to sound quality I really wouldn't use the Apollo X6 I had as any sort of benchmark. Sorry if that bothers anyone, although the cool stuff factor outweighs the sound IMO. Yeah I’m gonna do a bunch of listening. I trust you and your ears…and while all this is subjective, he talked like carbon sounded like a Steinberg DA. One of my current complaints about my own results is that sometimes I think my top end sounds “plastic-y” or fake or something. I’m being hypercritical there, but we obviously all evolve and grow. I literally got to listen for about 5 minutes last night. I had three initial impressions. 1. Holy shit this has a lot more max volume 2. Is the stereo image more defined? 3. It sounds more mid pushed. Number 3 could be me because big used to listening through the Trinnov. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 10:13:57 GMT -6
Hi Shadow, I don't understand how the DAW doesn't compensate for overdubs?? Most interfaces have sub 1ms "direct" monitoring but that doesn't have anything to do with the sample alignment of the DAW. That should be spot on everytime shouldn't it?? For many years I have trusted that my DAW will compensate for all latency if my interface is reporting correctly. I'm only looking at this from a cubase perspective I haven't used pro tools in years. The only issue I've had was with Apollo not reporting adc bus latency. But RME is 100%. Interested to know if I'm missing something? Cubase pro 13 delay compensation is perfection on every single aspect of application. Tracking, overdubbing, hardware inserts. I have sent extremely complex signal tests through extremely complex routings and the delay compensation system is 100% rock solid and 100% phase aligned. As it should be it’s only maths! That said, I never monitor through plug-ins or my DAW for tracking cue sends as I have an analog monitoring rig for that purpose, as I wish to absolute zero latency monitoring whilst tracking the same as an actual analog mixing desk. In my experience of HDX and tracking bands, HDX acts as an on board digital mixer (in effect) and provides extremely low latency monitor cues - it’s fantastic for that application avoiding the need for an analog monitor mixer. Cubase’s hybrid engine means over dubbing VI keyboards into a full mix with hundreds of plug-ins I still have extremely low latency for the overdub - Cubase has an extremely effective hybrid audio engine. I don’t actually see the advantage to Carbon in this respect other than of course it being a great interface and a great companion if you’re a Pro Tools DAW user. I have a good friend with Carbon and I think it’s an excellent solution for a PT user. I really couldn’t care less what I use, but I’ve now spent 20 years making the switch to PT. That’s 20 years of working in that daw day in day out (ok that’s a lie…not sure I’ve ever worked two days in a row…lol) I gave Cubase a go this last week and I mix stuff in it occasionally. But I’m just so slow. I’m sure I would speed up, but there’s nothing that pisses me off when I get stuck in another daw and all I can think is “shit, I wish I had done this in PT.” Not because Cubase sucks, but because Pro Tools is my native language. Honestly - THAT analogy is the best I’ve heard for DAWS. I was born in Cubaslandia, but moved to ProToolia when I was 5. I love the Cubasian people and love to visit - but ProToolsia is my home now and that’s where I’m raising my children, Latencya and Click. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 10:15:50 GMT -6
Wait. I was being nice…then I saw the Pro Tools dig.
|
|
|
|
Post by enlav on Mar 9, 2024 10:25:52 GMT -6
That review of Carbon did not make me feel good about my purchase. The review was interesting. There's definitely some really subjective takes on things, which is what a review generally has (to be fair), but I wouldn't worry so much about it unless some of the more objective points are ones that really make you reconsider your purchase.
What I'm really surprised about is specifically the report of AVID plugins causing that much latency on Carbon (as mentioned in the video). Is that actually the case? How is EQ3 (my glorified trim and polarity flipper) adding 10 samples of latency in AAX DSP when there's none in Pro Tools Studio? Do AAX DSP plugins all add significant delays?
Does VI/Midi instrument latency bother your ability to mix/overdub? If you're doing lots of critical midi controller overdubs, this may be a bigger issue here, but I'd personally load up your favorite piano VI and give it a test run before packing it back up. If you're already dealing with latency running Pianoteq on your past interface, the comparison here to Carbon may be negligible. The reviewer also mentions doing their monitoring through ADAT -- I'm not sure if they're factoring that into their review here, but running adat will likely add more latency into the equation.
Just to note, I'm sure I have Pro Tools bias showing, but I don't think my bias extends towards the Carbon. Not for the reasons listed - I originally was really tempted, I just don't want to pay for the extra preamps and I'd rather have AES/SPDIF over ADAT. (Also, Windows compatibility -- at some point I'm going back to PC-land)
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 9, 2024 10:29:23 GMT -6
Wait. I was being nice…then I saw the Pro Tools dig. What Pro Tools dig? |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 10:31:14 GMT -6
That review of Carbon did not make me feel good about my purchase. The review was interesting. There's definitely some really subjective takes on things, which is what a review generally has (to be fair), but I wouldn't worry so much about it unless some of the more objective points are ones that really make you reconsider your purchase. What I'm really surprised about is specifically the report of AVID plugins causing that much latency on Carbon (as mentioned in the video). Is that actually the case? How is EQ3 (my glorified trim and polarity flipper) adding 10 samples of latency in AAX DSP when there's none in Pro Tools Studio? Do AAX DSP plugins all add significant delays? Does VI/Midi instrument latency bother your ability to mix/overdub? If you're doing lots of critical midi controller overdubs, this may be a bigger issue here, but I'd personally load up your favorite piano VI and give it a test run before packing it back up. If you're already dealing with latency running Pianoteq on your past interface, the comparison here to Carbon may be negligible. The reviewer also mentions doing their monitoring through ADAT -- I'm not sure if they're factoring that into their review here, but running adat will likely add more latency into the equation.
Just to note, I'm sure I have Pro Tools bias showing, but I don't think my bias extends towards the Carbon. Not for the reasons listed - I originally was really tempted, I just don't want to pay for the extra preamps and I'd rather have AES/SPDIF over ADAT. (Also, Windows compatibility -- at some point I'm going back to PC-land)
Yeah my biggest regret so far is it missing a physical Spdif connection…but I can find a way around that. I had to make a quick decision on a used one (they said someone else was asking about it who knows)… I haven’t actually had time using it yet, so that could really sell me. We will see. |
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Mar 9, 2024 10:32:52 GMT -6
That review of Carbon did not make me feel good about my purchase. The review was interesting. There's definitely some really subjective takes on things, which is what a review generally has (to be fair), but I wouldn't worry so much about it unless some of the more objective points are ones that really make you reconsider your purchase.
What I'm really surprised about is specifically the report of AVID plugins causing that much latency on Carbon (as mentioned in the video). Is that actually the case? How is EQ3 (my glorified trim and polarity flipper) adding 10 samples of latency in AAX DSP when there's none in Pro Tools Studio? Do AAX DSP plugins all add significant delays?
Does VI/Midi instrument latency bother your ability to mix/overdub? If you're doing lots of critical midi controller overdubs, this may be a bigger issue here, but I'd personally load up your favorite piano VI and give it a test run before packing it back up. If you're already dealing with latency running Pianoteq on your past interface, the comparison here to Carbon may be negligible. The reviewer also mentions doing their monitoring through ADAT -- I'm not sure if they're factoring that into their review here, but running adat will likely add more latency into the equation.
Just to note, I'm sure I have Pro Tools bias showing, but I don't think my bias extends towards the Carbon. Not for the reasons listed - I originally was really tempted, I just don't want to pay for the extra preamps and I'd rather have AES/SPDIF over ADAT. (Also, Windows compatibility -- at some point I'm going back to PC-land)
I'd have to go back and watch that video again, but I do trust Matt with latency measurements. He knows what he's doing with that stuff. I think one of the biggest take home messages from that video was that IF Pro Tools is going to be your ONLY DAW, that might be a reason to go with Carbon but, IF Pro Tools is NOT going to be your only DAW, then you might want to consider the Apollo instead. Also, I'm not 100% sure, but I want to say that that video was released before Luna was updated to include automatic DSP to native switching for plugins, which also moves the needle a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 10:35:24 GMT -6
Wait. I was being nice…then I saw the Pro Tools dig. What Pro Tools dig? I mean - I really don’t care - but I took the post from Hightenor as kind of a PT dig. I mean I know I get frustrated when I try and give advice and people won’t listen…Yes. Cubase would be the easier solution…if I wanted to use Cubase. “That’s why I use Cubase with an RME AES interface - I have none of these issues. I’ve done extensive and intensive tests and the whole system under all possible circumstances I can generate is 100% phase accurate and predictable. But it has been for years (at least for me it has) I thought these issues were solved quite a few years ago. Maybe not all DAW’s and interfaces are equal.” |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Mar 9, 2024 11:13:17 GMT -6
I mean - I really don’t care - but I took the post from Hightenor as kind of a PT dig. I mean I know I get frustrated when I try and give advice and people won’t listen…Yes. Cubase would be the easier solution…if I wanted to use Cubase. “That’s why I use Cubase with an RME AES interface - I have none of these issues. I’ve done extensive and intensive tests and the whole system under all possible circumstances I can generate is 100% phase accurate and predictable. But it has been for years (at least for me it has) I thought these issues were solved quite a few years ago. Maybe not all DAW’s and interfaces are equal.” It’s not a dig a Pro Tools. Most of my muso friends use pro tools - it’s a great system. The point I was making as someone who’s focus is composition and songwriting (which is Cubase’s strength) is …. You don’t need Pro Tools anymore to have low latency, phase coherent delay compensation - native DAW’s have it too and have had for quite a few years. In fact it’s the other way around, I was defending Cubase against people knocking native DAW’s You have your wires crossed on this. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 9, 2024 11:13:20 GMT -6
|
|
