Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If you hate piracy, then you'll hate the iLok, for which cracks are widely available.

I don't care about absolutes. The software companies trust iLok because that way they can get *reasonable* percentage of users to actually buy the license. Before iLok when most plugins were authorized via serial number, many audio professionals used hacked plugins and didn't care about it. Now even most small studios have iLoks and play fair. Software companies have never worried about hobbyists that cannot make money with the plugins anyway, but instead are grateful that they are now supporting the companies that make them profit.

It's great even though some hobbyists can have the same tools for free. I don't care. The hobbyists do not make nearly as much money from their piracy-enabled hobby and most probably are not making a living with it.

It's an imperfect world we're living in. That's why there are copy protection systems and LE software. Were this perfect world we'd all be using Protools HD ;)
 
I don't care about absolutes. The software companies trust iLok because that way they can get *reasonable* percentage of users to actually buy the license. Before iLok when most plugins were authorized via serial number, many audio professionals used hacked plugins and didn't care about it. Now even most small studios have iLoks and play fair. Software companies have never worried about hobbyists that cannot make money with the plugins anyway, but instead are grateful that they are now supporting the companies that make them profit.

It's great even though some hobbyists can have the same tools for free. I don't care. The hobbyists do not make nearly as much money from their piracy-enabled hobby and most probably are not making a living with it.

True; hobbyists aren't the problem here. If they didn't have access to cracks, they would be going out and buying the Waves Diamond bundle for $2000; Waves doesn't lose a dime because of hobbyists pirating their software. But there are people with $25000 HD Accel rigs who will pirate whatever they can get their hands on, and these plugs get used on commercial releases. THIS is where the problem is.

With regards to the iLok specifically, there has been a lot of complaints over how PACE handles things; a lot of complaining over at KVR and Gearslutz. A lot of people won't use iLok at all. Not to mention all the issues with WUP from Waves (which, I understand, is a nightmare...I don't have any Waves plugs).

It's an imperfect world we're living in. That's why there are copy protection systems and LE software. Were this perfect world we'd all be using Protools HD ;)

...or a 96-in/out AD-16X/DA-16X Symphony system; if only Apple would give us a stable version of Logic (which was the whole point of this thread to begin with!)
 
if only Apple would give us a stable version of Logic (which was the whole point of this thread to begin with!)

Bingo! Frankly I'm a 100% Protools user, but as biased as I am, I have to wonder why on earth the competition cannot release stable software. Who cares about all the whiz-bang if the system itself is not stable? The beef is in being able to do what you do at all times. Protools HD gives me that and I don't care about the 160 i/o limitation as I only use 32 at once.
 
Bingo! Frankly I'm a 100% Protools user, but as biased as I am, I have to wonder why on earth the competition cannot release stable software. Who cares about all the whiz-bang if the system itself is not stable? The beef is in being able to do what you do at all times. Protools HD gives me that and I don't care about the 160 i/o limitation as I only use 32 at once.

Because "frills" sell. Pro Tools caters to people who need their DAW to function day in, day out, without fail. People who need as close to zero latency as possible, and don't need yet another softsynth or convolution reverb.

The advantage Digi has is the same one that Apple has in the PC world: they make the whole package, software and hardware. Yes, you can get Apogee or Prism or Lynx interfaces with HD cards, but they're very tightly spec'd by Digi. With native DAWs, you've got pesky driver software and any number of other variables to consider. Plus, the manufacturers value frills over function, as I mentioned. Modern computers are immensely powerful beasts; but we still can't get stable latencies on native DAWs below 64 samples? The Symphony is the first real challenger to PT, I think. The benefit of PT, AFAIK, isn't so much that it's more powerful than a native DAW, but that everything is instant; just like using a tape machine. Virtually no latency when tracking through plugs. Even if you max out an HD system, the zero latency performance will nto be compromised; yes, this means you'll hit the ceiling earlier than on a native system, but latency will be absent.

There is no pressure on native DAW makers to produce more stable DAWs; the pressure is to deliver a new reverb or plug-in that sounds 5% better than last year's model. Apple seem to be on the right track with Apogee; now they just need to give us a great DAW to go with the great interface and the great computer.
 
Bingo! Frankly I'm a 100% Protools user, but as biased as I am, I have to wonder why on earth the competition cannot release stable software. Who cares about all the whiz-bang if the system itself is not stable? The beef is in being able to do what you do at all times. Protools HD gives me that and I don't care about the 160 i/o limitation as I only use 32 at once.

These days, Logic is rock solid for me while PTHD gives me the occasional crashing and freaking out.

I have improvements I'd love to see in Logic, but stability simply isn't an issue.
 
Logic and PT complement one another

Logic definitely is lacking in user experience and layout but it is a superior instrumentation and midi environment. The EXS24 and the audio instruments are insanely good, as are many of the bundled plugs.

Pro Tools is better laid out, more efficient and a better environment for pulling everything together and setting up final mixes.

I wish there were one platform that did it all equally well but it just isn't like that. These days I'm starting songs in Ableton Live, going to Reason 3 to construct some loops, syncing to Live to play additional parts via ReWire and then moving the whole thing over to Logic Pro and/or Pro Tools to continue the arrangement before setting up the mix in PT.

For the kind of music I produce, neither Logic Pro nor PT can do it all...I need Live and Reason as well.

I hope that when Apple finally does upgrade Logic Pro it will be a total top to bottom re-engineering that changes its layout and makes streamlines its operation; retaining its excellent sound and creative tools while making the UI more PT-like.
 
I think it says a lot about the (perceived) level of piracy of audio apps vs the other pro app markets.

That's because the audio software/plug ins you can buy is virtually unlimited, while graphic designers only have to buy Photoshop.

You always want more software when working in audio, so if you can get some for free... you'll get it.

XSKey is inevitable.
 
That's because the audio software/plug ins you can buy is virtually unlimited, while graphic designers only have to buy Photoshop.

You always want more software when working in audio, so if you can get some for free... you'll get it.

XSKey is inevitable.

Aren't there plenty of Photoshop plugins and other addons? Even things like fonts? I think everyone always wants more software and I'd bet there's plenty of piracy going on amongst graphic designers.

Maybe the CP for audio stuff is because it's a much smaller market than graphic design and the companies are more sensitive to lost sales?
 
That's because the audio software/plug ins you can buy is virtually unlimited, while graphic designers only have to buy Photoshop.

What you said about graphic designers and Photoshop, I could easily also say that audio engineers only have to buy Protools. The basic functionality is there and the interface is the easiest to use in the whole industry.

Plugins is the key. Photoshop is the #1 plugin platform for the graphic designers, there is no competition. The audio industry, however; there is so much more going on. There are standardised plugin formats such as TDM/RTAS/VST/AU and the only thing to differentiate one from another is that TDM plugins are run via dedicated hardware while others are run on a host cpu. Dedicated processing leads to smaller latency, but for many people that is not a preference. There are also quality factors, which we could discuss if someone were interested.

Point being, while nowadays many top plugin vendors are providing VST/AU format and supporting Windows, it has not always been so. Most top plugin vendors are Mac-only or Mac-first, and also TDM/RTAS-only or TDM/RTAS-first. If one is serious about audio (compared to someone buying Photoshop because one is serious about graphical design) that person will likely buy a Mac-based Protools HD system. That's because being able to use near-zero latency and TDM/RTAS exclusive plugins. There are a lot of companies (Eventide, Princeton Digital, Chandler Limited, Soundtoys and McDSP for example) that only develop for the Protools platform. Those are some of the best companies in the whole audio plugin industry! If one wishes to use their products, one *MUST* use Protools.

XSKey is inevitable.

iLok is inevitable ;)
 
Maybe the CP for audio stuff is because it's a much smaller market than graphic design and the companies are more sensitive to lost sales?

There is also much more profit to be made for the audio companies many of which pirated their tools during the 90's. One average audio project can easily earn 10 grand, but how much do you get from a graphic design?

It's not so simple, though. Graphic design can be made in an hour (the best case scenario) but audio project usually requires a week. The nature of work is different, but anyway: per client, audio projects earn more.
 
Logic definitely is lacking in user experience and layout but it is a superior instrumentation and midi environment. The EXS24 and the audio instruments are insanely good, as are many of the bundled plugs. Pro Tools is better laid out, more efficient and a better environment for pulling everything together and setting up final mixes.

Yes!

Protools excels in audio, Logic excels in MIDI. At least that has been the past. Digidesign has improved Protools MIDI capabilities with the PT7.3 release and will soon release an EXS24-compatible sampler, so that'd make many Logic users consider switcing to the industry standard. With the Sibelius integration, Protools attracts many composers as well; the Logic MIDI is not so great compared to Sibelius notation.

As you said, most pro studios use Protools for laying the final mixes. That says a lot. You can produce audio with anything, but what you use to make the final product, that counts. Some great recordings have been made with 100-dollar instruments, so one could easily say 1000-dollar Logic is not a bad instrument in comparison. But Protools is the king of audio, period.
 
Because "frills" sell. Pro Tools caters to people who need their DAW to function day in, day out, without fail. People who need as close to zero latency as possible, and don't need yet another softsynth or convolution reverb.

"It just works". Enough said? Protools is same to audio industry as Mac is to information technology. Sure, there are alternatives, but whoever wants to use what works, uses Protools/Macintosh. I don't want to explain this futher.

Apple will have to do a *LOT* of work to get Logic to the same level as Protools. Currently, Protools is the most "Mac-like" software in the whole audio industry. The ease of use cannot be matched easily.

But they can surely try.
 
"It just works". Enough said? Protools is same to audio industry as Mac is to information technology. Sure, there are alternatives, but whoever wants to use what works, uses Protools/Macintosh. I don't want to explain this futher.

Apple will have to do a *LOT* of work to get Logic to the same level as Protools. Currently, Protools is the most "Mac-like" software in the whole audio industry. The ease of use cannot be matched easily.

But they can surely try.

While I agree with you regarding the need for Logic to "catch up", I don't agree that ProTools is (a) the only game in town or (b) the absolute ideal of what a DAW should or can be. Nuendo is used by a large and growing number of surround mixers, while DP is a big favourite with the film crowd. The advantage of DP is that it can use PT hardware as a front end. Digi's real value isn't in the PT software, it's the hardware.

Digidesign has, to be perfectly honest with you, had a pretty easy go of things. PT came out when native systems just couldn't provide the power necessary to run real-time audio at useable latencies. Today, we have that power. But no other DAW maker has taken it upon themselves to make a DAW that features low latency over the newest frill plug-in. The issue, IMHO and as I've pointed out, is that Digi makes the whole product; hardware and software, and thus can tailor it to the best performance possible. Ever try to use DAE hardware with Digi's CoreAudio driver? Terrible performance! This isn't really a fair comparison, but you see where I'm going?

I think Apple are going the right way with the Apogee thing. Apogee is a highly respected manufacturer, which makes top-notch hardware for native AND HD-based DAWs. If the Apple/Apogee combo can produce a system that is competitive with PT on latency and price, they'll have a winner. And apparently, with Symphony and Logic Pro 7, they've nearly done it. To me, the only missing piece is a version of Logic that can truly match the quality of the hardware. Hopefully, this will be Logic 8.

And it's not totally the fault of the DAW and interface makers; they're doing the best they can to bring two products together to form a complete system. Digi makes it all, and thus can have perfect integration, and can use the power of the HD system to minimize latency above all else. Native DAW and interface makers haven't done that yet; well, at least not until the Symphony system arrived. Symphony is getting real-world latencies THROUGH PLUG-INS of 1.6ms at 96kHz, with 32 tracks of simultaneous i/o. That's impressive for a native DAW, and is absolutely in-line with HD systems.

I don't think PT is going anywhere; people know it, and they like it. But a native system like this could provide the first real challenge.
 
Yes!

Protools excels in audio, Logic excels in MIDI. At least that has been the past. Digidesign has improved Protools MIDI capabilities with the PT7.3 release and will soon release an EXS24-compatible sampler, so that'd make many Logic users consider switcing to the industry standard. With the Sibelius integration, Protools attracts many composers as well; the Logic MIDI is not so great compared to Sibelius notation.

Many users switching? I'm sure there will be a few but I doubt "many" will.

The full version of protools still costs an order of magnitude more than Logic, and LE isn't a great option. I think much of the reason for PT's popularity is that it reached a critical mass of "industry standard" when computers weren't powerful enough for native systems to compete, and since then people use it because everyone else does, not because it's the best (think windows and MS office).

The big question is when will Logic 8 ship and how big a jump will it be? My suspicion is that part of the reason they dumped Soundtrack Pro (or at least put it on ice for a couple years) was to bring Logic more in line with the audio editing functionality and interface of that app. If they could pull off a combination of the best aspects of each (along with other improvements obviously), they could definitely give digidesign a run for the money at a fraction of the price. Especially with integration of apogee hardware for those who want high end hardware.

Look at what's on the horizon - leopard plus 8 core macs with 16 gigs of ram (likely more in the future) plus an update of logic that supports all the ram plus apogee hardware designed to integrate? Why would I want to spend thousands more on protools?
 
If they could pull off a combination of the best aspects of each (along with other improvements obviously), they could definitely give digidesign a run for the money at a fraction of the price. Especially with integration of apogee hardware for those who want high end hardware.

The key isn't the software, per se; Pro Tools (the software) isn't Digi's ace-in-the-hole, the hardware is. Pro Tools (again, the software) is nice, and has some great features (especially in the audio editing realm), but modern production involves a lot of things that PT isn't particularly good at (jn relative terms), like MIDI sequencing/editing and virtual instruments.

BUT, PT hardware facilitates low latency performance, day in, day out. For this reason, I see the Apogee/Apple partnership as a much bigger deal than the release of Logic 8. I think Logic is a big part of the picture, and I hope elements of Soundtrack Pro get incorporated into Logic (minus the stability nightmares). But without integrated hardware, native DAWs will never compete with PT; they could be perfectly stable, cost $199, and come with 100% accurate plugin versions of Abbey Road; people still wouldn't switch in droves because if latency through plug-ins isn't less than a couple of ms AT MAX, this is unacceptable.
 
The key isn't the software, per se; Pro Tools (the software) isn't Digi's ace-in-the-hole, the hardware is. Pro Tools (again, the software) is nice, and has some great features (especially in the audio editing realm), but modern production involves a lot of things that PT isn't particularly good at (jn relative terms), like MIDI sequencing/editing and virtual instruments.

BUT, PT hardware facilitates low latency performance, day in, day out. For this reason, I see the Apogee/Apple partnership as a much bigger deal than the release of Logic 8. I think Logic is a big part of the picture, and I hope elements of Soundtrack Pro get incorporated into Logic (minus the stability nightmares). But without integrated hardware, native DAWs will never compete with PT; they could be perfectly stable, cost $199, and come with 100% accurate plugin versions of Abbey Road; people still wouldn't switch in droves because if latency through plug-ins isn't less than a couple of ms AT MAX, this is unacceptable.

I assume by "integrated" you just mean low-latency? Is there any reason a USB or firewire interface couldn't have latency as low as PT hardware? What is the lowest available latency on PT and the best available firewire (or USB)? Logic's lowest buffer is 32 samples, seems like pretty low latency as far as I can tell. What is the limiting factor on native systems, is there some reason latency can't be any lower? And "through plugins" you're going to have latency even with Pro Tools, with some of the beefier plugs you'll probably have more than a couple MS.
 
I assume by "integrated" you just mean low-latency? Is there any reason a USB or firewire interface couldn't have latency as low as PT hardware? What is the lowest available latency on PT and the best available firewire (or USB)? Logic's lowest buffer is 32 samples, seems like pretty low latency as far as I can tell. What is the limiting factor on native systems, is there some reason latency can't be any lower? And "through plugins" you're going to have latency even with Pro Tools, with some of the beefier plugs you'll probably have more than a couple MS.

If you've ever used a PT HD system, you'll know what I'm about to describe.

Using an HD system (either with PT software, or using another host like Logic or DP) is like using a tape machine: everything feels instantanious. When you use Logic or any other native DAW, there is a slight hiccup on everything; starting playback, record-enable...everything. You don't notice it until you fire up an HD system and then you are amazed at how everything just works so fluidly.

But the real benefit of an HD system is the low latency. Yes, Logic can operate at 32 samples. 32 samples gives a total latency of about 1.5ms (in plus out) at 44.1kHz. BUT, whether you can get 32 samples to work with your specific soundcard is another thing. With some PCI-based soundcards, you can do this, but once you start adding the plug-ins, they all introduce latency on top of this (the system compromises latency to run the plug without clicks and pops in the audio...in PT, latency is never compromised). Add to that the latency due to the AD/DA conversion, and you can easily start to get into the multi-ms range, which is unacceptable because it kills the real-time nature of audio. For top-notch performances, you've got to keep latency at around 2-3ms, ROUND TRIP; that is from the source (mic, guitar, whatever), through the AD converter, into the DAW, through any plugins, through the DA converter. PT HD systems guarantee that you can run up to 160+ tracks at this level of latency, through plug-ins (!!!), without any stress on the host computer.

Until now, 32 sample operation hasn't been possible on native DAWs because, despite all the power of modern computers, that power is going to run ever more complex plugs; as you add the next convolution reverb, you add latency. For a typical Firewire-based interface, you'll be lucky if you get solid, stable operation at 64 samples (which is, in reality, 64 + 64 = 128 samples). At 44.1, that's 3ms of latency right off the bat. You might think that's not so much, but your converters are going to add about 1ms each or so (total = 5ms), and if you're monitoring through plugins like Guitar Rig, or Space Designer, or Altiverb, you're going to add even more latency.

This is all avoided, of course, if you don't monitor through any plug-ins. Then you're just dealing with the interface and driver latency, which can be a very useable 4-5ms; still about double that of an HD rig, but about the equivalent of standing 4-5 feet from a speaker. All-in-all, not too shabby, right? Except, with the HD rig, you can have 2ms through plug-ins!!! Read that again. Want to have your vocalist monitor through a nice reverb, delay, and compressor? Go ahead; you can do it, and not throw off their timing with latency. Yes, some of the beefier plugs may introduce a little latency, but the effects will be far less than on a native DAW because everything about an HD system is tailored to keeping latency low. You can also do this in a native DAW in one of two ways: direct monitoring through an analog console, in which case you've got virtually no latency but also no effects for the vocalist (well, you could use outboard), or monitor through the DAW, in which case you've got the effects, but you've got several additional ms of latency.

All in all, until now, it hasn't been possible to get VERY low latencies in native DAWs. You might be ok with working with even 10-15ms of latency, and many people use native DAWs at 256 sample buffers (256 in + 256 out = 512 samples = 11ms at 44.1kHz) and are quite happy. But for people who need the ultimate in low-latency performance, and who NEED to track with plug-ins, native DAWs don't cut it.

BUT, Apogee and Apple have developed the Symphony system that lets you track at 1.6ms ROUND-TRIP latency, with plug-ins!!! This is really a breakthrough, and is the first time a native DAW has challenged a PT system. I'll say it again, it's not that HD systems have more power than native systems (a dual dual-core 3.0GHz Mac Pro is many times more powerful than an HD system); but the HD system always operates at low latency. When you get to be a power user, THAT is what matters; not a new fancy reverb or compressor.

HD systems have been the closest thing, in terms of latency and ease of use, to an SSL hooked up to a Studer 2" and top-notch outboard; the latency of that system is next to nothing, because you're just pushing electrons around. You've got the minimal latency of any DSP you're using, but for the most part, you're very close to zero latency. Native systems haven't come close to this...until now.
 
While I agree that latency is low in PT when you don't use plugs on the recording track, I don't agree that it's overall more responsive than Logic. I have had PT sessions that have choked and sputtered and taken a long time to play once you hit the spacebar, and Logic sessions that kicked in lightning fast.

And the delay caused by PT plugins varies widely. While some (especially the freebies that most people don't use) have very low latency, others are much higher, for example Maxim is over a thousand samples of delay, and more at higher sample rates. Plugins cause delay on any system, and the better plugs generally will cause more delay. It's not really true to say that TDM plugs are immune from causing delay when you put them on tracks (and auxes and masters) you're monitioring the live recording through.

Are you sure that on a native system, plugins on sends cause monitoring delay on the tracks being recorded? Do you have a source on that? I'd love to see actual numbers on the amount of delay caused by something like altiverb in the AU version versus the TDM version.
 
So I take it that the rumor was false?

I have been waiting for an updated to Logic forever. I HATE the user interface. It's ugly, confusing, hideous, excessively complicated, and it drives me freaking crazy. After a year, I STILL get confused about simple things.

Apple needs to get a few user interface experts to revamp the whole thing. I don't care if the insides change one bit--I'd pay a $200 or $300 upgrade fee just for a complete UI redesign. Emulating the look of audio hardware is so stupid and all the ****ing knobs in this program, as well as the dark colors and tiny spaces drive me nuts. I STILL have trouble getting the damn SPL in the right position.


And, for the record, all of this discussion about ProTools vs. Logic vs. DP would be completely moot if Studio Vision Pro were still alive. The user interface of that software was by far the best back then, and it would be even better with 8 more years of updates.
 
And the delay caused by PT plugins varies widely. While some (especially the freebies that most people don't use) have very low latency, others are much higher

True and false. Yes, it is true that plugin delay varies. Some are as low as 2 samples and some introduce delay closer to 100 samples. But the rest of your statement is false information. Many freebies introduce large delay, because of how the algorithm has been designed or that the designer didn't have time to optimise. Then there are some high-end plugins that introduce very little latency, because the algorithms have been designed properly.

For example; Digidesign ReVibe surround reverb introduces 2 samples of latency at 96kHz. Digidesign Impact surround compressor introduces 2 samples of latency at 96kHz. Steven Massey L2007 limiter (which sounds great by the way) introduces 70 samples of latency at 44.1kHz.

Yes it varies, but no, the cost does not correlate to the amount of latency. The L2007 limiter costs less than a hundred (and has large latency) while the ReVibe costs about a thousand (and has almost zero latency). It's only about how the plugins has been designed.

for example Maxim is over a thousand samples of delay, and more at higher sample rates.

Nobody uses Maxim anymore, it's so 90's and pretty much every limiter out there sound better than that. But yes, it was a terrible plugin in every way.

Plugins cause delay on any system, and the better plugs generally will cause more delay. It's not really true to say that TDM plugs are immune from causing delay when you put them on tracks

Again, true and false. What I said about ReVibe earlier applies here too. It's one of the better reverb plugins and it causes very little delay. Also, the L2007 limiter is one of the better limiters but that plug has a big latency. If what you said was true, then L2007 should be really mind-blowing thing -- it has 35 times the latency compared to ReVibe, so according to your logic it must be 35 times as good as ReVibe. If you compare ReVibe to a regular 2000 dollar real-world reverb device (say, Lexicon PCM91) then you should think L2007 as a mastering limiter that costs 70 grand. No, it doesn't go that way.

Yes, plugins cause delay. That's because they cannot predict the input. The plugin delay is always at least one sample. But the electrons do not move instantly either; agreed, they move at the speed of light which is fast, but it's a latency nevertheless. Maybe it's very much smaller latency than one sample at 44.1kHz, but the comparison can still be made. If you knew how many meters of copper your analog circuitry has used, you can calculate the equal sampling rate that digital system would need to be as fast. Probably that sampling rate would have to be insanely fast, but anyway, in theory analog and digital can be as fast.

So there are TDM plugs that have 1 or 2 samples latency. That's fast. Compare that to the "insanely fast" 32 sample buffer (which is 64 samples in and out) and you get the picture: TDM is at least 30x faster than native systems. Even when you use a great reverb.
 
Is there any reason a USB or firewire interface couldn't have latency as low as PT hardware?

Yes, there is. USB is clocked at 1kHz, Firewire is clocked at 8kHz, and PCI is clocked at 66MHz. That means PCI is 66 thousand times faster than USB and 8 thousand times faster than Firewire. That is also the reason why USB hard drives have hard time to keep up with streaming audio in real time whereas the 8-times faster Firewire drive just keeps on streaming. And the same reason why internal drives (connected via PCI) offer a completely different level of performance.

What is the lowest available latency on PT

Zero from plugins and "something" from the AD/DA conversion. But as you have "something" from AD/DA conversion with every comparable system, that can be left out; therefore, for the comparison, minimum PTHD latency is zero.
 
Yes, there is. USB is clocked at 1kHz, Firewire is clocked at 8kHz, and PCI is clocked at 66MHz. That means PCI is 66 thousand times faster than USB and 8 thousand times faster than Firewire. That is also the reason why USB hard drives have hard time to keep up with streaming audio in real time whereas the 8-times faster Firewire drive just keeps on streaming. And the same reason why internal drives (connected via PCI) offer a completely different level of performance.

This is a backwards way of looking at USB vs. FW vs. PCI throughput.

USB1.1 offers a maximum bandwidth of 12Mbps, which is about 7-8Mbps in reality. This means you can stream about 1MB/sec, which is about 7 tracks of 24/44.1 audio (24*44100 = 132.3 kbytes/sec).

USB2.0 offers a mximum bandwidth of 480Mbps, or 60MB/sec. In reality, you get about 18-20MB/sec, which is about 150 tracks of 24/44.1.

FW400 offers a max bandwidth of 400Mbps, or 50MB/sec. FW has less overhead than USB2.0, and so gets about 30MB/s in reality, which is about 226 tracks of 24/44.1.

All of this is great for considering how many tracks you can run at once. In reality, I can stream about 150 24/44.1 tracks via a single FW bus. I never deal with 150 track projects, per se, but when you consider that I'm streaming BFD, Stylus RMX, and other sample libraries from the same drive, I can easily approach this number.

The fact that an internal SATA drive can stream faster than a FW400 or 800 drive has nothing to do with the fact that it's internal or somehow closer to the main system bus. An eSATA drive will give you the same throughput. The limitation is the FW400/800 standard, which simply isn't able to offer the throughput. The full FW spec offers throughput over 3GB/sec (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewire) we just haven't seen this implemented yet (and it may never be, with the development of eSATA).

However, this has very little to do with the issue of latency. The problem with USB and FW interfaces is that they all have a safety buffer that keeps things running smoothly. On the RME FW interfaces, I believe they add 64 samples, just to keep things running nicely. MOTU adds less, I believe, which translates into lower overall latencies that many have described. However, MOTU FW interfaces don't SOUND as good as RME interfaces, so there's a trade off.

PCI interfaces plug straight into the PCI bus, and therefore don't need the safety buffer, and can generally offer lower latency operation.

For all practical purposes, a FW interface is very useable; I run a native DAW (Logic) with a MOTU 828mkII on a 2.0GHz CoreDuo iMac, and I can track at 64 samples pretty much all day long. For mixing, I go up to 1024 samples, since latency isn't an issue when mixing (as long as delay compensation is on, which it is). I've never had an issue tracking through pretty heavy plugs on this system, but I know that the levels of latency that I get may not be ok for some people; I've never had a problem, even up to 128 samples. At 256 samples, it starts to really bother me, particularly on rhythmic guitar parts and when sequencing MIDI drum parts.

But if you want the ultimate low latency operation, you need to run either an HD system or a Symphony/Logic system; both will get you down around 2ms, through plugs, at 24/96, and that's truly remarkable.
 
True and false. Yes, it is true that plugin delay varies. Some are as low as 2 samples and some introduce delay closer to 100 samples. But the rest of your statement is false information. Many freebies introduce large delay, because of how the algorithm has been designed or that the designer didn't have time to optimise. Then there are some high-end plugins that introduce very little latency, because the algorithms have been designed properly.

For example; Digidesign ReVibe surround reverb introduces 2 samples of latency at 96kHz. Digidesign Impact surround compressor introduces 2 samples of latency at 96kHz. Steven Massey L2007 limiter (which sounds great by the way) introduces 70 samples of latency at 44.1kHz.

Yes it varies, but no, the cost does not correlate to the amount of latency. The L2007 limiter costs less than a hundred (and has large latency) while the ReVibe costs about a thousand (and has almost zero latency). It's only about how the plugins has been designed.

I think you may have misunderstood my statement, I should have been more clear - by "freebies" I meant the standard plugins included free with protools. Most of those have a 4 sample latency. I didn't say anything about a correlation between price and latency. And I'm not sure why the notion that better designed plugs can cause less latency seemingly only applies to TDM and not native plugins as well.

So there are TDM plugs that have 1 or 2 samples latency. That's fast. Compare that to the "insanely fast" 32 sample buffer (which is 64 samples in and out) and you get the picture: TDM is at least 30x faster than native systems. Even when you use a great reverb.

That's not a legitimate comparison. You're comparing the full path of one to just a plugin on another. TDM systems don't have 1 or 2 samples of latency total, there's more caused by the converters themselves and probably some more caused by the hardware before plugins are even added. Find me numbers on those (I haven't found HD, but found a reference saying the previous PT hardware was 80 samples, slower than the 64 in Logic's lowest setting) and we'll compare. I'm a little suspicious of Digi not giving any specs on that, usually claiming either zero or very low latency.

Zero from plugins and "something" from the AD/DA conversion. But as you have "something" from AD/DA conversion with every comparable system, that can be left out; therefore, for the comparison, minimum PTHD latency is zero.

I'm skeptical about the zero, and the "something" doesn't really tell me anything, particularly since different converters don't have the same latency (meaning the digi stuff may have higher converter latency than other available options). Any source on the claim that other than the converters themselves, PT has zero latency?
 
Total analog-to-analog latency on a PT HD system is on the order of 2ms. Plugs add varying degrees of latency; Altiverb 6 TDM, for instance, adds 6 samples of latency at 44.1 or 48kHz; this is about 0.13ms. The latency goes up at higher sampling rates to 196 samples, or about 2ms. (http://www.audioease.com/Pages/Altiverb/AltiverbTech.html)

Compare this with 512 samples for the AudioUnit, and you can see we're talking about significant latencies. Now, monitoring through a convolution reverb probably isn't "necessary" for most people, but on an HD system, it can be done. You wont be able to run as many instances on an HD system, but you'll have drastically lower latency.

According to Apogee, you can run 32 tracks in and out of a Symphony/Logic system at 24/96, through 10 Adaptive Limiters, 10 Linear Phase EQs, and 6 Space Designers (default preset), and still get 1.6ms analog-to-analog (http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/symphony_performance.php). This is simply astounding, and suggests that when DAW and interface manufacturers work to harness the available power, low latencies are possible. I doubt you'll get as many total instances of these plugs on the Symphony system as on another PCI-based system, but you'll get very low latency, and that's the key.
 
Where do you get the number 512 samples for Altiverb AU? And with AU plugins, do they cause latency on a record track even if they are used as a send instead of sending the audio through them?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.