Proper 96k Support

[Greyanaroth]

Hi!

 

I’d like to earnerstly request you support 96k fully(with internal undersampling if need be) so the unit is fully operational when working at 96k. Our studio has 2 H9000s and we work solely on 96k across the facility. Currently, we’re using all 8 AES IO through DB25 connections as well as the 8 analog IO. Clock is set to external, since sending AES @96k to a device clocked @48k won’t work. If I’ve to use the H9000 at 48k I lose my digital IO, which IMO, I’d prefer. This can be a switchable feature, if you’d like, but it really needs to be there. My setup right now is leaning towards 8 stereo busses permanently being a part of my mix chain, and I can’t wait to use it to it’s fullest, but this is a bit of a buzzkill. 

 

Thanks!

[jbamberg]

greyanaroth wrote:

I'd like to earnerstly request you support 96k fully(with internal undersampling if need be) so the unit is fully operational when working at 96k. Our studio has 2 H9000s and we work solely on 96k across the facility. Currently, we're using all 8 AES IO through DB25 connections as well as the 8 analog IO. Clock is set to external, since sending AES @96k to a device clocked @48k won't work. If I've to use the H9000 at 48k I lose my digital IO, which IMO, I'd prefer. This can be a switchable feature, if you'd like, but it really needs to be there. My setup right now is leaning towards 8 stereo busses permanently being a part of my mix chain, and I can't wait to use it to it's fullest, but this is a bit of a buzzkill. 

Yes, this is an important feature.  Our target for 1.1 is a bit close for us to be able to roll it into that release, but we'll put it on the list for 1.2.

 

 

[Greyanaroth]

Thanks for the speedy reply! Any (rough) timelines for 1.2?

[jbamberg]

Greyanaroth wrote:

Thanks for the speedy reply! Any (rough) timelines for 1.2?

Well, we have been (perhaps ambitiously) planning a six-monthly schedule for H9000 releases, which would mean September/October 2019.  This depends on what needs to go into it.  We'll have a better idea in a month or two.

[cyborgssc]

Wondering if someone could clarify what limitations exist at 96KHz. I am aware of the list of algorithms that don’t work at that sample rate, but are there other limitations of the H9000 at that sample rate?

[jbamberg]

cyborgssc wrote:

Wondering if someone could clarify what limitations exist at 96KHz. I am aware of the list of algorithms that don't work at that sample rate, but are there other limitations of the H9000 at that sample rate?

The optical digital audio IO is not supported at 96kHz (optical SPDIF or ADAT).  There is a 96kHz mode for ADAT (S/MUX) that supports 4 channels, but we don't currently implement that.  Other than that, the IO capabilites are the same at all sample rates.

There may be slight differences in some of our DSP code for the higher sample rates, but this shouldn't affect the sound of the algorithms.   For example, certain modules with long delay lines might reduce the maximum possible delay length for higher sample rates.

 

[macgee]

Thanks Joe, do you see yourselves adding the SMUX support for ADAT? I had brought this up sometime back and eventide appeared to add this to the roadmap – any view of timelines for that?

For example on a brand new UAD Apollo X8, the only digital option other than SPDIF RCA (which is unreliable at 96K) is ADAT so would be great for this to be supported in the not too distant future please.

[jbamberg]

macgee wrote:

Thanks Joe, do you see yourselves adding the SMUX support for ADAT? I had brought this up sometime back and eventide appeared to add this to the roadmap – any view of timelines for that?

For example on a brand new UAD Apollo X8, the only digital option other than SPDIF RCA (which is unreliable at 96K) is ADAT so would be great for this to be supported in the not too distant future please.

Yes, I have been meaning to find out how much work this would be.  Thanks for the reminder.  I will see if it's something we can roll into 1.2.

[macgee]

thanks joe

[Author]

Posts