MADI- cost of admission

[Perfect Record]

Whilst I understand and respect the fact that merging has to have a workable buisiness model, and quality comes at a price,
The possibility now to use an Rme madi card or the new ssl dual madi card with native software, makes pyramix reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally expensive in comparison..
Like, really really expensive....
Like for the cost of 1 madi card plus X30, you can probably buy a dual madi native system with computer and all..

I posted this thread a bit cautiously; I didn't just want to grouse about price. It's just that it would be great to get access to those enormous track counts in Mass Core when doing live events, and MADI is the only serious game available.

[red_ollie]

I Agree with Huub, we just had a quote to upgrade to Mass Core, as our older version MADI cards do not work with Mass Core we would have had to upgrade them as well.
The total upgrade was going to cost nearly £7500, which we can't justify.
I find it very annoying, as one of the early users in the UK, for years we have been telling all the people around the world how good Pyramix is, battling against the trend.
Now it looks like we may switch to ProTools, as it is easier to get technical support, which we don't have to pay for, it runs quicktime free of charge (all the post houses give us QTs now), and our client from the other side of the Atlantic don't walk in and ask "what the hell is that".

[gabriel]

As posted in other threads, beeing a Mykerinos user for a long time, I'm now using a MBP17 running Pyramix Native with MADIface. Why? For mobile applications, it was clear to use a relative lightweight notebook with high resolution screen. And talking about cost, in that scenario the host is no more the expensive part of the system. What's still expensive if you require high quality, is the micamp part of the MADI system, especially with high count of channels. Because of the remote control over MADI and the flexibility to place several micamps at different locations on the stage (always with monitoring return channels), I decided for Micstasy.

So, what is the practical experience? It works technically perfect, but needs some careful considerations regarding delay and live operation. Roundtrip delay from mic input to monitoring output routed through Pyramix native is actually around 12ms. Routing from mic input over MADIface HDSPe Mixer (hardware path) will result in roundtrip delay of less than 5ms. For a recent recording of a 60 person orchestra with more than 24 mic channels, I used the HDSPe Mixer to provide the monitoring mix to the conductor, while recording and controlroom mixing with Pyramix native. It was quite successful in general and sounded great, but as you can imagine, live operation by mouse turned out not very easy with that setup. You always have to taskswitch between several applications: HDSPe Mixer for monitoring mix and talkback, MIDI Remote for remote control of micamps (in the beginning of the session) and Pyramix for recording.

Some improvements are close: I'd really like to try an iPad audio controller like Saitara AC-7 for most important faders during recording or to control fader automation during downmixing. Has anyone experience with AC-7 controlling Pyramix, RME or other DAWs?

Gabriel

[Johan_Wadsten]

Hi Guys

I wanted to add my two cents in if I could, as the way i see it, when comparing the masscore/madi option as a package price to other similar technologies, it is actually pretty fair in my eyes. the consideration of comparative technology becomes more focused when you look at system latencies that are involved. For any professional music application with tons of overdubs and the need for very low latencies, ASIO products just wont cut it (IMO). with a minimum of about 10ms and heading very quickly up from that point, it becomes reasonable that this technology is going to be sold cheaper.. because it is capable of less.

the similar costing for a Protools 9 MADI option is £3,500 just for the MADI box... then more for the HD core card etc...

MassCore with the MADI card isnt cheap. but it is not a cheap product. It can get latencies from Live in to Live our all the way down to 1.3ms! and with a single DSP card and MassCore, you can run over 300 tracks with plugins on them and the system wont even bat an eyelash. try that with a single HD card in a Protools rig:-)

the other thing to keep in mind here is the ease with which you can upgrade your processing power with MassCore as opposed to other DSP systems.. for the cost of a new Intel Chip, you can have a new rocketship Audio engine every couple of years.. without having to buy and replace all your cards.. now thats a real advantage as well.

Anyway.. my two cents are in:-)

Cheers
Johan

[gabriel]

I wanted to add my two cents in if I could, as the way i see it, when comparing the masscore/madi option as a package price to other similar technologies, it is actually pretty fair in my eyes. the consideration of comparative technology becomes more focused when you look at system latencies that are involved. For any professional music application with tons of overdubs and the need for very low latencies, ASIO products just wont cut it (IMO). with a minimum of about 10ms and heading very quickly up from that point, it becomes reasonable that this technology is going to be sold cheaper.. because it is capable of less.

Absolutely, agreed!

MassCore with the MADI card isnt cheap. but it is not a cheap product. It can get latencies from Live in to Live our all the way down to 1.3ms! and with a single DSP card and MassCore, you can run over 300 tracks with plugins on them and the system wont even bat an eyelash. try that with a single HD card in a Protools rig:-)

Latency values discussed are somehow misleading: for an artist, the total time analogue-to-analogue counts. If you take 2-3 ms delay just for the AD-DA process, even with 1.3 ms latency you will end up with around 4 ms total delay for the artist. For critical applications the limit is about 5 ms (equal to 1.7 m air distance). The (HW) path through the HDSPe Mixer used for monitoring purposes is in the same range, but not as simple to operate as a full-blown Masscore solution, of course.

Gabriel

[Bernhard Guettler]

Hi Guys

I wanted to add my two cents in if I could, as the way i see it, when comparing the masscore/madi option as a package price to other similar technologies, it is actually pretty fair in my eyes. the consideration of comparative technology becomes more focused when you look at system latencies that are involved. For any professional music application with tons of overdubs and the need for very low latencies, ASIO products just wont cut it (IMO). with a minimum of about 10ms and heading very quickly up from that point, it becomes reasonable that this technology is going to be sold cheaper.. because it is capable of less.

the similar costing for a Protools 9 MADI option is £3,500 just for the MADI box... then more for the HD core card etc...

MassCore with the MADI card isnt cheap. but it is not a cheap product. It can get latencies from Live in to Live our all the way down to 1.3ms! and with a single DSP card and MassCore, you can run over 300 tracks with plugins on them and the system wont even bat an eyelash. try that with a single HD card in a Protools rig:-)

the other thing to keep in mind here is the ease with which you can upgrade your processing power with MassCore as opposed to other DSP systems.. for the cost of a new Intel Chip, you can have a new rocketship Audio engine every couple of years.. without having to buy and replace all your cards.. now thats a real advantage as well.

Anyway.. my two cents are in:-)

Cheers
Johan

Hi Johan, my one cent against your two cent.
Low latencies during recording are not a deal breaking issue for everyone. Looking at the Merging worldwide customer base I see a lot of classical/acoustical music recording houses, mastering studios, broadcasters, who do rarely overdubs with Pyramix but record straight to multitrack "only".

Comparing Pyramix to ProTools is moot, when you consider that Pyramix wants to get a bigger share in that market and ProTools has the de facto monopoly there. ProTools has market power to make prices (unfortunately), Pyramix not so much. The other side of the market to look at are SSL/RME MADI solutions with Native software like Nuendo etc.

Huub mentioned above the huuuuuge price differences for MADI I/O solutions. Development and manufacturing of MADI cards is not more expensive than for other cards. It's a 'scaled to imagined customer wallet size' price, and Merging is shooting itself in the foot in today's market realities.

Another problem is that the "not cheap" Mykerinos hardware effectively blocks the upgrade path from Native to MassCore for many, who start with Native and 3rd party hardware and would have to buy new hardware to enjoy MassCore. Maybe a trade in option for those with 3rd party hardware would be a good idea?

Aside from pricing, which is only one factor of many in sales, marketing and communication is crucial. There are many reasons, you mentioned some, why Pyramix is not cheap but very much worth it. Imagine there is a superior system for acoustical music, mastering and sound-to-picture-postpro on the market, and many professionals don't know its advantages...

Cheers
B.

[NickM]

The next best way to get into MADI is the used route! If anyone needs one I am selling one...