[Dream] DSP vs CPU (Was Timestretch)

[UnderTow]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Mark wrote:

> Admittedly, the subject of the thread has changed.  However,
> considering good netiquette in that the listowner is one of its
> participants, I left changing the subject field to his discretion.
> I'm old school like that :)

I'm getting very lax on my netiquette. :)

> Not that dedicated hardware doesn't use general purpose
> microprocessors as well, but yes, the CPU's in Macs and PC are much
> more powerful.  They also have much more to do.  They have to run OS
> X or Windows and whatever else is installed.  Running DSP on
> dedicated hardware avoids all sorts of problems that can occur due to
> software and hardware conflicts.

I still don't agree. The new Intel chips (and even the Opteron chips) pack 
alot more punch than an Accel card.

The main reason I wrote "(most)" in my previous posts was because of the 
Fairlight CC-1 card. Then again, the CC-1 card is based on FPGA technology 
which is general purpouse by nature. It doesn't use a DSP chip.

> Well, it certainly appears to be.  For example, TC Electronics, a
> company famous for its DSP hardware, released Spark XL -- a DSP and
> editing application that ran native. It was an awesome program, imho,
> way better than Peak or using the editor in Pro Tools.  According to
> them, they discontinued development and stopped selling it because of
> piracy.   Yet, they continue to sell Powercore, which requires
> dedicated hardware.  Eventide and Lexicon have followed similar
> paths.  Even companies traditionally known for top-shelf analogue,
> such as Focusrite, Universal Audio, and SSL, have introduced DSP
> products that work with DAW's but still require dedicated hardware.

Fair point. On the other hand, CakeWalk have more than a million paying 
Sonar users so it seems it is possible to successfully develope and sell 
native based programs despite the piracy.

> Stand-alone DSP is so much more stable it's not even funny.  Even
> with systems that use both PC's and dedicated hardware, the problem
> is almost always with the software functions that run on the PC's
> hardware.

The ProTools hardware often causes problems. Not just the stuff running on 
the PC! Maybe Digidesign isn't the best example of flawless DSP based 
processing. ;)

>> Mark, you seem out of touch with the current market. I earn my living
>> being paid by the hour to work on ProTool rigs running inside general
>> purpouse computers!
>
> No, you don't.

Yes I do. The edit suites (as opposed to the mixing suites) tend to run PT 
LE. Admitedly I am rarely in the edit suites these days.

> Well, it runs *inside* a computer.  It doesn't run on
> it.  ProTools runs on bespoke, dedicated, specifically designed
> hardware that you can only get from them.  We are talking about DSP,
> not the GUI or file management.  All the DSP runs on their hardware.
> Which has all three advantages I've been writing about:
>
> 1.  The software is optimized for the hardware.
> 2.  While cracking the ProTools software might evade an update fee,
> it cannot be run without the hardware.
> 3.  The hardware is optimized for specific tasks.

Agreed with all that but I was refering to LE as much as HD. And even in 
HD, I'll use RTAS plugins when the HD cards max out.

>> Many many professionals are using general purpouse computers as the core
>> of their studios. I would say for every pro running dedicated hardware
>> there are 10 pros running on PCs.
>
> And I would say that 9 out of those 10 are running ProTools using
> dedicated hardware installed in a Mac.

These days, in the Netherlands at least, most studios, especially in post 
production, have moved to Windows based PCs. (Btw, when I write PC, unless 
otherwise specified I mean Personal Computers. That includes Macs).

Anyway, on a side note, Nuendo is making ground in the Post world. Not in 
the studios I work at as they tend to be heavily integrated with Avid 
systems. My main clients were the first in the world to implement the Avid 
Interplay system. We are guinea pigs. :) But quite a few studios I know 
have switched to Nuendo for cost reasons.

> Yes, but if I had to pick a number, I'd say psy-trance is around
> .001% of the DSP market :)

Oh absolutely. That was a bit of a tongue in cheek remark. :)

UnderTow