Hi all been re-directed a couple of time to here, hope I'm in the right place...
We are currently using the software version of ATMOS, using send / return pluggins to communicate with the renderer.
We were having issues with delay compensation, which we were told is a known issue due to audio being hijacked on the insert rather than out of the output of a track where delay is calculated and adjusted.
Moving the Renderer onto a second machine fixed this issue. However, we are finding a couple of issues here:
Is there a way to control the panning of objects from the original mix machine or do the objects have to be solely on the Recorder machine with the Renderer? We are able to get object audio across but cannot seem to get the object metadata to pass to the renderer - even if the original mix system is also linked to the Renderer in the peripherals. When have the green arrow for metadata enabled on the mix machine, which is also showing a solid green in the peripherals line that it 'sees' the renderer on the second machine.
A second issue we have been noticing all along and were hoping the second machine would fix, is that there is a 11m/s delay between bed tracks and objects, is this a known issue? If we place a 2pop on a bed track with no plugins and an object track also with no pluggins we are seeing the delay.
Our last question is RMU related, is we bit the bullet and get the RMU sooner rather than later. Is the RMU able to be 64 channels of MADI from one machine and 64 channels from another machine. What is the recommended workflow for a multi machine ATMOS setup. Do you have any block diagrams etc that could help this matter.
Thank you so much in advance!
Thanks for posting to the forums!
If you want to use the Production Suite on a 2nd MAC to record panning automation, the Pro Tools session on the 2nd MAC would need to have the Objects placed into record. From the Object column toggle the switch to the right of the Object/Bus button and cycle through green "play" to red "record". This will record automation from the 1st Pro Tools to the 2nd Pro Tools system.
This is not exactly a supported workflow but will work. The renderer running on a hardware RMU is recommended for this use case.
One the 2nd question this isn't a known issue so any details would be helpful on what kind of session exhibits this issue. Is this a simple one bed/one object session or more complex? Any information about routing in Pro Tools would help. Or better, if you can provide a sample session that would be useful. How are you verifying this? Recording the speaker returns from the renderer or re-render returns?
Re: RMU. The Renderer running on an RMU can indeed record 64 tracks of MADI from one Pro Tools system and 64 from another.
If the 2nd MAC you are currently running the Production Suite on meets specs this could become a DANTE RMU and MADI<->DANTE converters used with existing interfaces. That could be a option as native MADI support is limited to the PC RMU.
I'll see what I can find or come up with for a workflow diagram. In the past when using two or more Pro Tools systems, one was designated as the Pro Tool master recorder. With the ability to import an ADM BWF printmaster into Pro Tools v12.8.3 and upwards this is no longer required depending on personal preferences and both Pro Tools systems can be used a source for the RMU.
I hope this helps.
Thank so much. We have internally figured out the sync issue as a delay compensation issue.
However, we are still unable to get the metadata across from the first machine to the 2nd for object panning. The only way the render on the second machine sees metadata (has the blue ring around the 'channel') is when the object track on the second machine is in 'play'.
Also as the first machine is in object mode (to create the metadata I assume this must be the case), how is the audio sent to the second machine? As placing in object mode toggles off the protools I/O bussing.
We have tried every combination of 'play' 'record' modes on both machines and aren't getting anywhere unfortunately.
All the best,
I also suppose my question really regarding the RMU is.
If I want an FX machine and a DIalogue / Music machine feeding the RMU. Do they need to they each need to have their individual MADI feeding the RMU (lets just say a separate PC RMU for the sake of simplicity).
Or would I have one machine feed the other (As they are currently via a DADax32) And the primary mix machine feed the RMU.
Would the secondary machine be able to control objects this way? Beds I understand I would just bus a 7.1.2 from one machine to the other and out to the RMU. It's the objects I find more vexing.
Re: your previous post
The first Pro Tools system is the source. The second Pro Tools system is running the Production Suite with the send/return plug-ins. You previously said that you had audio going between the two. Is that no longer the case? What is the audio interface between the first and second rigs? If the second Pro Tools rig has tracks in input from the output of the first system you should be passing audio to the renderer via the send plug-ins. For metadata the first Pro Tools system is connected to the 2nd by setting peripherals/Atmos to the ip address/host name of the second Pro Tools system.
On the second Pro Tools rig the object/bus should be in object. As long as the objects are mapped to inputs in the I/O you should see a blue ring on the corresponding objects in the Renderer. If the objects on the second Pro Tool system is placed into record it will be passing along the metadata from the same object mapping on the first Pro Tools system to the Renderer.
If you want two Pro Tools systems to feed the renderer each with 64 tracks then the would need to be connected to the RMU individually. As long as there is no overlaps in object assignments both Pro Tools systems can send panning metadata to the RMU.
The two machine are connected using an DADax32, currently 32 channels of audio via digilink - though I don't think this is related to the issue.
'You previously said that you had audio going between the two. Is that no longer the case?' yes, there is audio going between the two machines if the track on the first rig is NOT in object as is it bussed out normally. Once you place that track in object mode the i/o buss is toggled off so the audio is then stopped.
This has always been the case, I can send a mono track of audio and pan from the render machine fine. The set up is correct.
On the second Pro Tools rig the object/bus should be in object. As long as the objects are mapped to inputs in the I/O you should see a blue ring on the corresponding objects in the Renderer. If the objects on the second Pro Tool system is placed into record it will be passing along the metadata from the same object mapping on the first Pro Tools system to the Renderer. When the object on the renderer machine is placed in 'record' rather than 'play' the metadata ring disappears.
Can we set up a call?
Though this a little old, the only information I can find on this is in the release notes of Production Suite 2.5.1
The Recorder mode button in the Dolby Atmos Panner plug-in does not work with Dolby
Atmos Production Suite . This means that metadata cannot be recorded from one Pro
Tools system to another system using plug-in communication. If you need to perform source-to-destination recording of metadata. source-to-destination recording of metadata, use a Dolby Atmos Rendering and
Mastering Unit as your renderer. [DACT-4983]
It sounds like you have the Pro Tools session on the first system set up to use the Production Suite. This isn't what you want when using it as and audio/metadata source for an external renderer.
On the first system ditch the aux sends/returns and Pro Tools. On the first system Pro Tools I/O have the object busses mapped to both physical outputs and mapped to objects. Then when you toggle to object in the track you will be sending out audio and panning metadata.
Please give that a try.
Did a few more tests. The best bet is to leave the object automation turned off entirely on the 2nd Pro Tools systems and just have the renderer record the pan automation from the first Pro Tools system. Otherwise it seems like it can fight and offset from any pre-existing automation.
Again this is an unsupported workflow but using a 2nd Pro Tools system with the audio tracks in input for routing via send plugins to the renderer while using audio and panning metadata from the first system basically works. I think you could run into some anomalies that don't make this the best workflow.