AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Moderator: James Steele
Forum rules
This forum is for most discussion related to the use and optimization of Digital Performer [MacOS] and plug-ins as well as tips and techniques. It is NOT for troubleshooting technical issues, complaints, feature requests, or "Comparative DAW 101."
This forum is for most discussion related to the use and optimization of Digital Performer [MacOS] and plug-ins as well as tips and techniques. It is NOT for troubleshooting technical issues, complaints, feature requests, or "Comparative DAW 101."
AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
I have recently purchased some upgrades to be able to feed the Live Room with 16 channel headphone mixers for each musician.
I do a lot of live band recordings and having 16 channels vs 8 (or even just a 2Mix) is going to be a good upgrade.
As of now, I'm using a 2408mk3. It uses CUEMIX (not CUEMIX FX) and for the vocals, I'll run the vocal line through an outboard reverb to the singer's preference.
I emailed Magic Dave and he suggested I look into the new AVB series.
I'm looking to get into another interface to increase my input/outputs. I am just getting used to CUEMIX as I used to use an external mixer to route my headphone cues. But that digital board has died.
Dave mentioned the AVB app does a LOT more than CUEMIX ever did but I did some research and noticed some odd things.
1. "DIRECT HARDWARE PATCH THRU" is no longer an option when using the AVB interfaces. Is this true? If so, this is a big deal for me IMO. ZERO latency monitoring is paramount for my situation.
2. Talkback feature on CUEMIX is a big plus. AVB doesn't have a dedicated talkback feature.
3. THUNDERBOLT. My Mac Pro (circa 2008) doesn't have Thunderbolt. I could purchase a TBOLT interface and prep for the future when I eventually get a new mac. But thats a while down the road. I'm afraid USB can't realistically handle 24 inputs at 48k/24bit.
My question is...would your suggestion be to go ahead and dive into the AVB systems? Or add another 2408mk3 to my current one and stick with PCI based system?
I'd LOVE to get into CUEMIX FX and utilize the onboard DSP of a unit with CUEMIX FX so I don't have to use the Analog section of my 2408 and stay in the digital realm with ADAT. But alas, 2408mk3 is only CUEMIX. Not "FX".
Any suggestions are appreciated.
I do a lot of live band recordings and having 16 channels vs 8 (or even just a 2Mix) is going to be a good upgrade.
As of now, I'm using a 2408mk3. It uses CUEMIX (not CUEMIX FX) and for the vocals, I'll run the vocal line through an outboard reverb to the singer's preference.
I emailed Magic Dave and he suggested I look into the new AVB series.
I'm looking to get into another interface to increase my input/outputs. I am just getting used to CUEMIX as I used to use an external mixer to route my headphone cues. But that digital board has died.
Dave mentioned the AVB app does a LOT more than CUEMIX ever did but I did some research and noticed some odd things.
1. "DIRECT HARDWARE PATCH THRU" is no longer an option when using the AVB interfaces. Is this true? If so, this is a big deal for me IMO. ZERO latency monitoring is paramount for my situation.
2. Talkback feature on CUEMIX is a big plus. AVB doesn't have a dedicated talkback feature.
3. THUNDERBOLT. My Mac Pro (circa 2008) doesn't have Thunderbolt. I could purchase a TBOLT interface and prep for the future when I eventually get a new mac. But thats a while down the road. I'm afraid USB can't realistically handle 24 inputs at 48k/24bit.
My question is...would your suggestion be to go ahead and dive into the AVB systems? Or add another 2408mk3 to my current one and stick with PCI based system?
I'd LOVE to get into CUEMIX FX and utilize the onboard DSP of a unit with CUEMIX FX so I don't have to use the Analog section of my 2408 and stay in the digital realm with ADAT. But alas, 2408mk3 is only CUEMIX. Not "FX".
Any suggestions are appreciated.
Dual Quad-Core 2.8 GHz Mac Pro 3,1 • Yosemite • 24 GB RAM • MOTU 2408mk3 (x's 2) • DP 10.xx • Finale 25 • Logic • PT 12 • +outboard gear
- mikehalloran
- Posts: 15211
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:08 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Sillie Con Valley
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Have you read this thread? There's a firmware update for the AVB series that adds functionality.
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... 26&t=61618
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... 26&t=61618
DP 11.31; 828mkII FW, micro lite, M4, MTP/AV USB Firmware 2.0.1
2023 Mac Studio M2 8TB, 192GB RAM, OS Sonoma 14.4.1, USB4 8TB external, M-Audio AIR 192|14, Mackie ProFxv3 6/10/12; 2012 MBPs Catalina, Mojave
IK-NI-Izotope-PSP-Garritan-Antares, LogicPro X, Finale 27.4, Dorico 5.2, Notion 6, Overture 5, TwistedWave, DSP-Q 5, SmartScore64 Pro, Toast 20 Pro
2023 Mac Studio M2 8TB, 192GB RAM, OS Sonoma 14.4.1, USB4 8TB external, M-Audio AIR 192|14, Mackie ProFxv3 6/10/12; 2012 MBPs Catalina, Mojave
IK-NI-Izotope-PSP-Garritan-Antares, LogicPro X, Finale 27.4, Dorico 5.2, Notion 6, Overture 5, TwistedWave, DSP-Q 5, SmartScore64 Pro, Toast 20 Pro
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Thanks for the link. Some informative stuff in there.
While I'm aware the AVB runs on USB and Ethernet, my main concern is the Direct Hardware Playthru for "No" latency headphone mixes.
As of now, my CUEMIX is feeding the live inputs directly back to my headphone cues. And while convenient, the mixes sound fairly harsh ... to which I'd like to be able to add some compression and EQ and Verb to sweeten the mixes a bit ... hence the want for CUEMIX FX or the new AVB functionality with DSP processing.
Ive read online about Direct Playthru not being available on the AVB systems and there being latency. Which would kill the reason for upgrading.
While I'm aware the AVB runs on USB and Ethernet, my main concern is the Direct Hardware Playthru for "No" latency headphone mixes.
As of now, my CUEMIX is feeding the live inputs directly back to my headphone cues. And while convenient, the mixes sound fairly harsh ... to which I'd like to be able to add some compression and EQ and Verb to sweeten the mixes a bit ... hence the want for CUEMIX FX or the new AVB functionality with DSP processing.
Ive read online about Direct Playthru not being available on the AVB systems and there being latency. Which would kill the reason for upgrading.
Dual Quad-Core 2.8 GHz Mac Pro 3,1 • Yosemite • 24 GB RAM • MOTU 2408mk3 (x's 2) • DP 10.xx • Finale 25 • Logic • PT 12 • +outboard gear
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
If you are using Cuemix, you aren't really using DHP. Cuemix works for situations where you aren't using DHP. At least in my mind. I used PCI series with an analog mixer, DHP turned on, and never once opened Cuemix, because you don't have to. AVB line, you have to use the AVB mixer since there is no DHP.
Doug Williams
Electromagnetic Radiation Recorders
The Martha Bassett Show broadcast mixer
Tape Op issue 73
DP 11.31
Studio M1 Max OS12.7.3
MOTU 16A and Monitor 8
M1 Pro MBP for remotes and editing
Electromagnetic Radiation Recorders
The Martha Bassett Show broadcast mixer
Tape Op issue 73
DP 11.31
Studio M1 Max OS12.7.3
MOTU 16A and Monitor 8
M1 Pro MBP for remotes and editing
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Interesting.
Well then maybe I'm just using cuemix for the ease of sending inputs to specific outputs?
If DP were easier to MASS CHANGE aux sends, I'd route everything in DP.
?
Well then maybe I'm just using cuemix for the ease of sending inputs to specific outputs?
If DP were easier to MASS CHANGE aux sends, I'd route everything in DP.
?
Dual Quad-Core 2.8 GHz Mac Pro 3,1 • Yosemite • 24 GB RAM • MOTU 2408mk3 (x's 2) • DP 10.xx • Finale 25 • Logic • PT 12 • +outboard gear
- Shooshie
- Posts: 19820
- Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
You sure about that? I'm under the impression that CueMix is DHP. You can take away the computer and still use CueMix in the box. That's DHP.EMRR wrote:If you are using Cuemix, you aren't really using DHP. Cuemix works for situations where you aren't using DHP. At least in my mind. I used PCI series with an analog mixer, DHP turned on, and never once opened Cuemix, because you don't have to. AVB line, you have to use the AVB mixer since there is no DHP.
Shooshie
|l| OS X 10.12.6 |l| DP 10.0 |l| 2.4 GHz 12-Core MacPro Mid-2012 |l| 40GB RAM |l| Mach5.3 |l| Waves 9.x |l| Altiverb |l| Ivory 2 New York Steinway |l| Wallander WIVI 2.30 Winds, Brass, Saxes |l| Garritan Aria |l| VSL 5.3.1 and VSL Pro 2.3.1 |l| Yamaha WX-5 MIDI Wind Controller |l| Roland FC-300 |l|
- monkey man
- Posts: 13932
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Actually, Shoosh, I'd call that DHR - Direct Hardware Routing.
DHP is, as far as I'm aware, a longer path that goes through the 'puter (DP?) but bypasses whichever plugs may be instantiated along said path... whatever that is.
IOW, DHR would be the standard I-to-O routing done in CueMix, and DHP the slightly-more-circuitous route that allows interrupting of the former set of paths by the engaging of the recording process on a given track or set of tracks.
The AVB system currently permits the former, DHR usage, but not the automatic interruption during recording that DHP allows.
At least, this is my basic understanding of it. IRL, this would mean that using DHR one would always hear the "live" signal whilst monitoring, on top of the playback one (whatever's already recorded on the track/s concerned), regardless of whether or not the recording process is engaged. Obviously DHP would allow overriding, depending on your "Input-Monitoring" settings in DP (blend, override or whatever), of the playback signal in favour of the live one upon instantiation of actual recording... if this makes sense.
As always, I'm the first to admit that I could well be wrong about this. I do hope I'm not 'though or I may be in for some serious shocks when my AVB system arrives. Even 'though I've done a deal with the wholesaler whereby he'll accept a return if I simply cannot get it to work for me, I have to first buy a shedload of DB-25 connectors (with snakes) in order to connect the units to my synths (from another retailer), and these won't be returnable, so I'm risking losing a bunch of hard-saved dough if I'm completely wrong about all this. If I'm only slightly wrong, I think I'll be OK, but completely wrong? Forgeddaboudit!
DHP is, as far as I'm aware, a longer path that goes through the 'puter (DP?) but bypasses whichever plugs may be instantiated along said path... whatever that is.
IOW, DHR would be the standard I-to-O routing done in CueMix, and DHP the slightly-more-circuitous route that allows interrupting of the former set of paths by the engaging of the recording process on a given track or set of tracks.
The AVB system currently permits the former, DHR usage, but not the automatic interruption during recording that DHP allows.
At least, this is my basic understanding of it. IRL, this would mean that using DHR one would always hear the "live" signal whilst monitoring, on top of the playback one (whatever's already recorded on the track/s concerned), regardless of whether or not the recording process is engaged. Obviously DHP would allow overriding, depending on your "Input-Monitoring" settings in DP (blend, override or whatever), of the playback signal in favour of the live one upon instantiation of actual recording... if this makes sense.
As always, I'm the first to admit that I could well be wrong about this. I do hope I'm not 'though or I may be in for some serious shocks when my AVB system arrives. Even 'though I've done a deal with the wholesaler whereby he'll accept a return if I simply cannot get it to work for me, I have to first buy a shedload of DB-25 connectors (with snakes) in order to connect the units to my synths (from another retailer), and these won't be returnable, so I'm risking losing a bunch of hard-saved dough if I'm completely wrong about all this. If I'm only slightly wrong, I think I'll be OK, but completely wrong? Forgeddaboudit!
Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack
Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
MOTU hardware documentation only refers to arrangements where signals on the hardware inputs on audio devices are routed directly to the hardware monitoring outputs "bypassing the computer" altogether. It does not distinguish DHP, DHM, etc.
Does the signal pass through Cuemix? I don't think so. Cuemix is not a mixer or an effects unit in and of itself, but software that controls the MOTU digital hardware mixer and effects in the same manner that the front panel controls do, but with greater ease. The signal doesn't pass through it any more than it passes through a MCU.
Does it really matter if the new AVB units have DHP? Doesn't the built in mixer provide the routing necessary to get a near zero latency signal to monitoring equipment? Doesn't it more or less do what we've always done to overcome latency when tracking: monitor from the mixer.
Does the signal pass through Cuemix? I don't think so. Cuemix is not a mixer or an effects unit in and of itself, but software that controls the MOTU digital hardware mixer and effects in the same manner that the front panel controls do, but with greater ease. The signal doesn't pass through it any more than it passes through a MCU.
Does it really matter if the new AVB units have DHP? Doesn't the built in mixer provide the routing necessary to get a near zero latency signal to monitoring equipment? Doesn't it more or less do what we've always done to overcome latency when tracking: monitor from the mixer.
2018 Mini i7 32G 10.14.6, DP 11.3, Mixbus 9, Logic 10.5, Scarlett 18i8
- monkey man
- Posts: 13932
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Hmm... I think you might have confirmed my suspicion that the DHP aspect merely allows for mixing the existing track/s' content (from DP) with the hardware-direct-routed live input, Stoivo.
I thought I read somewhere more than 10 years ago that a more circuitous route was involved for this, and to me it made sense 'cause the existing track/s' output had to be mixed with the CueMix input signal for the given track, something that I assumed, based on what I read at the time, must've been taken care of natively.
Judging by what you've said 'though, as I suggested, I'm now wondering if it all gets mixed in CueMix. Then again, with the "override" Input-Monitoring selection in DP, there'd only be a switching between the direct and recorded signal (no mixing), and you'd think this wouldn't require any additional routing (in the background) of the input signal to or from the 'puter...
Definitely confused now.
In the end, all that matters is that I can do the direct-routing monitoring thing a-la CueMix. Hopefully this would suffice for wonder too.
On this last point, and to answer your final question, Stoiv, the difference is that when you hit record or the point at which you've programmed a drop-in, you still hear any existing programme material in the absence of DHP. The only workaround I can think of are to either:
1) Route existing audio to an easily-mutable channel such as one on a hardware monitoring mixer, or
2) Erase audio files in, say, the SE or TO, which'd be a painful and clumsy way to go.
Unfortunately in my case the latter method might be my only option due to a shortage of channels on my desk. Once again, I do hope that wonder can work around this more easily and indeed that some intelligent soul (hint, hint!) can provide a preferable alternative at some point.
OK... great to see you, mate. Logged in just to follow up on this AVB thing, so I'm off like a bucket of prawns, Stoivo. Cheers mate.
I thought I read somewhere more than 10 years ago that a more circuitous route was involved for this, and to me it made sense 'cause the existing track/s' output had to be mixed with the CueMix input signal for the given track, something that I assumed, based on what I read at the time, must've been taken care of natively.
Judging by what you've said 'though, as I suggested, I'm now wondering if it all gets mixed in CueMix. Then again, with the "override" Input-Monitoring selection in DP, there'd only be a switching between the direct and recorded signal (no mixing), and you'd think this wouldn't require any additional routing (in the background) of the input signal to or from the 'puter...
Definitely confused now.
In the end, all that matters is that I can do the direct-routing monitoring thing a-la CueMix. Hopefully this would suffice for wonder too.
On this last point, and to answer your final question, Stoiv, the difference is that when you hit record or the point at which you've programmed a drop-in, you still hear any existing programme material in the absence of DHP. The only workaround I can think of are to either:
1) Route existing audio to an easily-mutable channel such as one on a hardware monitoring mixer, or
2) Erase audio files in, say, the SE or TO, which'd be a painful and clumsy way to go.
Unfortunately in my case the latter method might be my only option due to a shortage of channels on my desk. Once again, I do hope that wonder can work around this more easily and indeed that some intelligent soul (hint, hint!) can provide a preferable alternative at some point.
OK... great to see you, mate. Logged in just to follow up on this AVB thing, so I'm off like a bucket of prawns, Stoivo. Cheers mate.
Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack
Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Well that won't do. So this would happen with any interface that does not do DHP? Seems odd.monkey man wrote:On this last point, and to answer your final question, Stoiv, the difference is that when you hit record or the point at which you've programmed a drop-in, you still hear any existing programme material in the absence of DHP.
Anyway, good that you're dropping in and making my brain work early on a Sunday morning.
2018 Mini i7 32G 10.14.6, DP 11.3, Mixbus 9, Logic 10.5, Scarlett 18i8
- HCMarkus
- Posts: 9745
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
- Contact:
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
When "dropping in" (punching in), you don't hear the previously recorded material because it is overwritten as soon as you begin recording.
You hear the previously recorded material PRIOR to punching in. I use the master fader in DP to adjust the mix level (including the pre-recorded material on the record-enabled track, which may also be adjusted further for monitoring purposes) to match the mic or other live input from CueMix.
You hear the previously recorded material PRIOR to punching in. I use the master fader in DP to adjust the mix level (including the pre-recorded material on the record-enabled track, which may also be adjusted further for monitoring purposes) to match the mic or other live input from CueMix.
- monkey man
- Posts: 13932
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Yup. I got out of "bed" (the couch in my case - don't ask, long story) before falling asleep in order to address this, Sir Markus. I'd hoped to be able to correct my post before you guys saw it.
With the Audio Patch Thru option set to "auto", track info is only passed prior to drop-in.
Shows how little I've actually used DP... in fact how little I've recorded. Only my old cassettes, really and my lil' brother for a Slash cover he insisted on doing years ago. I'd literally forgotten how DP behaved in this regard.
EDIT: How would I ensure I don't hear the latency-delayed live signal as well, HC? Would it be as simple as switching off the little blue IM button? I hope so. This'd make my day, actually.
Funny, I should have assumed that this sort of basic functionality would be there. I'm so conditioned through bad-purchasing decisions not to assume anything these days that said restriction seems to know no bounds.
See my late-night revelation above.
A strong coffee would surely be preferential, methinks...
With the Audio Patch Thru option set to "auto", track info is only passed prior to drop-in.
Shows how little I've actually used DP... in fact how little I've recorded. Only my old cassettes, really and my lil' brother for a Slash cover he insisted on doing years ago. I'd literally forgotten how DP behaved in this regard.
EDIT: How would I ensure I don't hear the latency-delayed live signal as well, HC? Would it be as simple as switching off the little blue IM button? I hope so. This'd make my day, actually.
Funny, I should have assumed that this sort of basic functionality would be there. I'm so conditioned through bad-purchasing decisions not to assume anything these days that said restriction seems to know no bounds.
You're right, Stoivo. Monkey see, Monkey won't do!bayswater wrote:Well that won't do. So this would happen with any interface that does not do DHP? Seems odd.monkey man wrote:On this last point, and to answer your final question, Stoiv, the difference is that when you hit record or the point at which you've programmed a drop-in, you still hear any existing programme material in the absence of DHP.
See my late-night revelation above.
An unintended consequence of sharing the quagmire that's resulted from the menagerie that constant-titty-tutes the frazzled hotchpotch that is the spurious neural conglomeration between my very-wet ears, Stoivo.bayswater wrote:Anyway, good that you're dropping in and making my brain work early on a Sunday morning.
A strong coffee would surely be preferential, methinks...
Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack
Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
- Shooshie
- Posts: 19820
- Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
Mmmm... constant-titty-tutes.monkey man wrote:An unintended consequence of sharing the quagmire that's resulted from the menagerie that constant-titty-tutes the frazzled hotchpotch that is the spurious neural conglomeration between my very-wet ears, Stoivo.
Whatever those are.
Shoosh
|l| OS X 10.12.6 |l| DP 10.0 |l| 2.4 GHz 12-Core MacPro Mid-2012 |l| 40GB RAM |l| Mach5.3 |l| Waves 9.x |l| Altiverb |l| Ivory 2 New York Steinway |l| Wallander WIVI 2.30 Winds, Brass, Saxes |l| Garritan Aria |l| VSL 5.3.1 and VSL Pro 2.3.1 |l| Yamaha WX-5 MIDI Wind Controller |l| Roland FC-300 |l|
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
It means Nicky's mind is wondering into places few of us go.
2018 Mini i7 32G 10.14.6, DP 11.3, Mixbus 9, Logic 10.5, Scarlett 18i8
- monkey man
- Posts: 13932
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: AVB vs. CUEMIX. Upgrade Question
I'll believe you Stoivo, even it thousands wouldn't. LOL
Many tutes required here, me reckons.
Well, after 24 years of celibacy, I reckon I could do with some of those (tutes).Shooshie wrote:Mmmm... constant-titty-tutes.monkey man wrote:An unintended consequence of sharing the quagmire that's resulted from the menagerie that constant-titty-tutes the frazzled hotchpotch that is the spurious neural conglomeration between my very-wet ears, Stoivo.
Whatever those are.
Shoosh
Many tutes required here, me reckons.
Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack
Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here