http://airusersblog.squarespace.com/home-page/2010/10/30/pro-tools-9-at-ae s-what-to-expect.html

its not gonna be cheap tho..






Edited by Forum Admin (08/11/10 07:03 PM)

hahahah! That'll be the day.


I love those "make it up blog" posts......

Much ado about PT 9 apparently on its way at this coming AES, over at ** cough **

- could be rubbish, always entertaining reading if nothing else.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/pro-tools-hd-goes-native/542435-pro-tools-9 -coming-9.html

--------------------

I read it on Ultimate Metal forum

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/production-tips/636231-pro-tools-withou t-digidesign-m-audio-interface.html

When I said it won't be cheap, I didn't see the price on the first link I posted. Apparently Avid have said they value the Pro Tools software in the region of $2500, so It'll be interesting to see whether they price it that high, or come down to Logic / Cubase territory..

.... pretty much the amount of money I'd bet against it

Just wierdos talking crap. Of course it's rubbish.

I don't really see the point in making it non hardware compliant, I like the fact that its reliable and I don't really have to [ ****** ] with drivers to get things to work.

I'm not the only one either.

--------------------
Squarehead Jam Jar Facebook Jam Jar

They won't do it for the same reason UAD won't.

There are no cracked copies, no pirates.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Except that there are cracked copies of LE.... expanded to have the full track count of HD, minus the rest of the HD goodies.



But I know what you mean.

--------------------
Squarehead Jam Jar Facebook Jam Jar

That hacked thing is not functional. You couldn't actually use it for work. Not the same.

J

--------------------
www.jackruston.com

Anything without automatic plug-in delay compensation is unusable in a work context.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Anything without automatic plug-in delay compensation is unusable in a work context.

---

It's nice to see someone else who understands this point. How anyone manages without it, short of throwing the PC through a window, is beyond me.

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Anything without automatic plug-in delay compensation is unusable in a work context.

---

Seconded!

--------------------
Imagination is more important than knowledge - A. Einstein

.... think that might be taking it a BIT too far!!

I used to get round it - back in Mix Cubed days - with the same plugin on each channel. Mind you - ITB mixing generally was oafish back then so it was more a pre-processing to a console.

It's clunky, it's irritating, its more than a mild annoyance, but its hardly "unworkable"?

And it's only unworkable as far as ITB mixing is concerned, tracking, editing, overdubbing, it's fine.




NOT to say that it isn't a PITA, and I would like to see adc added to LE even if its some sort of restricted nonsense.

--------------------
Squarehead Jam Jar Facebook Jam Jar

I'm not sure I understand why everyone has recently taken to saying that a mix engine without plug-in delay compensation is 'unworkable' or 'unusable'. Thousands of perfectly good records were made on old Pro Tools Mix systems without it. And with Pro Tools native systems, there's no need for it unless you're using plug-ins that require a lookahead buffer. Yes it's a pain if you want to do parallel processing with some third-party plug-ins that use lookahead. Otherwise... is it really such a big deal?

The first time I used Pro Tools LE I dropped a couple of plug-ins on a drum track and it came out late. I didn’t know that LE lacked ADC and that came as a nasty shock. The official PT solution suggested to manually apply a delay to all the other tracks - I know there are better ways to handle this now, but at the time I was trusting the word from the horse’s mouth.

Then I added a couple of plug-ins to a bass track and that was now also arriving late, but with a different latency. More calculations to sort that one out…

Then I added a couple of plug-ins to a snare track. Aargh! Worse still, if I changed or removed plug-ins I had to calculate all over again!

It only took a few more of these calculations and re-calculations each time I added/changed/removed plug-ins to realise I simply couldn’t work this way.

I dropped PT LE like a hot potato and I’ve no intention of going back. I simply use it convert projects to a DAW that has ADC.

Before anyone begins telling me that there are easy ways to manage around this I’ll say that yes, I do know that now, and if folks have ways of getting around and working through it, then good luck to you. For myself I’ve absolutely no intentions of ever again working with a DAW without ADC. Life is simply too short.

Just my opinion.

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Are you sure that was Pro Tools LE? And which plug-ins were you using?

Like I say -- apart from plug-ins that use lookahead, or need to be routed out to DSP hardware, there shouldn't be any delay.

Just to check I am not going mad, I've just loaded up a drum multitrack session in LE, duplicated the snare track and placed some stock Digirack plug-ins on one copy. Sure enough there is no phasing and the tracks null completely when I reverse the polarity of one.

From what I remember, the business of calculating delay times and having them reported in the Mix window was something you needed to do in PT Mix systems, but that was to do with bussing delays within the TDM mixer and didn't affect LE systems.

Indeed Sam is right. Plugin delay isn't an issue affecting PT LE any more than any other native DAW...... never understood why people go on about that. It was a TDM issue. The ONLY time it's an LE issue is when LE plugins don't report their delay correctly - and in that instance you'll find you get the same problem in Logic and other native DAWs.

Or to put it more simply - LE has ADC. Always has.

From official Digidesign documentation:

"A few years ago, Automatic Delay Compensation was added to Pro Tools|HD systems to improve mixing and increase recording accuracy with Pro Tools TDM systems.
When activated, the Automatic Delay Compensation feature automatically makes adjustments in Pro Tools HD software to compensate for all latencies in the I/O, internal and external routing, and plug-in algorithm processing, ensuring that recordings and mixes stay perfectly time aligned and phase accurate.
Host-based Pro Tools systems such as Pro Tools LE and Pro Tools M-Powered, on the other hand, do not have this Automatic Delay Compensation feature. In most cases, however, mixer latencies with host-based systems are not a factor. In cases where delay compensation is necessary to ensure that audio stays time aligned, there is a way to manually compensate for plug-in latencies by using the DigiRack Time Adjuster plug-in, or by slightly moving or “nudging” tracks."

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

The point is that in an LE system, delay compensation is not *needed* unless plug-ins impose a significant delay (greater than that imposed by the buffer size).

In any native system, the input and output buffers provide what you might call processing 'headroom' -- a certain amount of time for the CPU to get all the necessary audio processing done before the audio is returned to the outputs. This includes plug-in processing, but also things like routing and gain changes applied by faders. And with nearly all plug-ins, the CPU doesn't *need* extra time above and beyond this to get the processing done. So it can return the processed audio in perfect sync with unprocessed audio.

The problems arise with plug-ins that require lookahead or bussing out to a DSP card.

I'm going back a long time, so no idea what plugs I used, but they were not external or DSP plugs - but they knocked my drum mic's out of alignment.

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

If you set your buffer to as long as possible, i think its 2000samples now in LE?


Most plugins are fine, Waves, Digirack, Massey, etc.

PSP plugins, cause a huge delay and they completely [ ****** ] with the sound, but i like em enough to compensate.

--------------------
Squarehead Jam Jar Facebook Jam Jar

Quote The Elf:

---

I'm going back a long time, so no idea what plugs I used, but they were not external or DSP plugs - but they knocked my drum mic's out of alignment.

---

sure - but that'll be because you had the latency set too low......

Quote narcoman:

---

Quote The Elf:

---

I'm going back a long time, so no idea what plugs I used, but they were not external or DSP plugs - but they knocked my drum mic's out of alignment.

---

sure - but that'll be because you had the latency set too low......

---

Nobody gave me that advice when I asked here at the time I discovered the problem!

Nothing spoiled. I'm more than happy with my DAW of choice!

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

hahah!! Well - there's far more wrong with LE than just that!! It's missing nearly all of the good stuff init?

Quote Sam Inglis:

---

The point is that in an LE system, delay compensation is not *needed* unless plug-ins impose a significant delay (greater than that imposed by the buffer size).

In any native system, the input and output buffers provide what you might call processing 'headroom' -- a certain amount of time for the CPU to get all the necessary audio processing done before the audio is returned to the outputs. This includes plug-in processing, but also things like routing and gain changes applied by faders. And with nearly all plug-ins, the CPU doesn't *need* extra time above and beyond this to get the processing done. So it can return the processed audio in perfect sync with unprocessed audio.

The problems arise with plug-ins that require lookahead or bussing out to a DSP card.

---

I always thought that this wasn't true. If a plugin caused a 1 sample delay it was always a 1 sample delay regardless of the buffer size.

Come to think of it you might be right. I suppose the point might be better put by saying that most plug-ins don't actually cause any delay, even one sample, so most of the time there is nothing to compensate for in LE systems.

Quote thenaturallevel:

---

I always thought that this wasn't true. If a plugin caused a 1 sample delay it was always a 1 sample delay regardless of the buffer size.

---

sure - but the audio engine can shuffle things around UP to the buffer delay.

Quote narcoman:

---

Quote thenaturallevel:

---

I always thought that this wasn't true. If a plugin caused a 1 sample delay it was always a 1 sample delay regardless of the buffer size.

---

sure - but the audio engine can shuffle things around UP to the buffer delay.

---

I am well confused, does it shuffle things around? Or does it not?

I appear to have spouted my mouth off elsewhere saying that it does, (i've always just used 1sample or nearly zero sample plugins and anything that uses a bigger delay i've used the time adjuster plugin.

--------------------
Squarehead Jam Jar Facebook Jam Jar

youve got me thinking now. I'll do an experiment tomorrow.

What a tease! Totally ridiculous that PT is hardware reliant.



--------------------
Sound Effects

Just to muddy this debate further... it's not just plug-ins. Any routing out to hardware and back suffers from latency. We're not always talking huge delays here; just enough to smear things a little bit... and cumulatively suck life out of things

I suppose it hasn't been in the developers' interest to make available a platform that allow people to have a professional setup with someone else's dsp plug-ins. I'm sure they'll wake up and smell the coffee.

Quote soundbyter:

---

What a tease! Totally ridiculous that PT is hardware reliant.

---

makes them money !! Thats ALL that matters to a company and the bottom line! I hope we never see PT without its hardware "dongle".

Quote narcoman:

---

Quote soundbyter:

---

What a tease! Totally ridiculous that PT is hardware reliant.

---

makes them money !! Thats ALL that matters to a company and the bottom line! I hope we never see PT without its hardware "dongle".

---

If the rumours are to believed PT9 will be hardware free and cost $2500.

The very fact that the bedroom hero can’t afford to get his hands on ‘serious’ PT is part of its success, and this has been skilfully managed. You’ve got to take your hat off to that.

Both Avid and its customers have the same agenda - to convince the world that PT has something special about it, for which you can then charge a premium.

If you have both the manufacturer and its customers all telling you the same thing - ‘PT is for professionals; if you don’t use PT you are not a professional’ – it becomes a powerful, self-fulfilling message. To those who only know half the story (which is the case with many, if not most in the audio industry, I would suggest) it has become an unassailable, accepted ‘fact’.

Love it or hate it, the hardware reliance helps to justify the price. If I were Avid I’d be wary of losing my grip on such a market advantage, but what do I know?!

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Quote soundbyter:

---

What a tease! Totally ridiculous that PT is hardware reliant.

---

Everything is hardware reliant, unless you have some way of using software on some ethereal astral plane.

PT's historical strength has been its ability to substantially add to the power of a computer to deliver a stable, world class product which it established itself as brand leader (in the non-bedroom market).

I know computers are more powerful these days, but they can still struggle with a serious project. Even with a UAD Quad card on my 8-core Mac Pro there are only so many Manley Massive Passives I can use at once.

Avid would be crazy to abandon a successful corporate strategy unless they have also found a magic bullet to stop cracking.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

---

Everything is hardware reliant, unless you have some way of using software on some ethereal astral plane.

---

hahaha...

Mellowmuse ATA fixes this?
Atleast without too much hassle...

--------------------
* wossname * ...if .sig's were fish, this would stink *

Quote The Elf:

---

The very fact that the bedroom hero can’t afford to get his hands on ‘serious’ PT is part of its success, and this has been skilfully managed. You’ve got to take your hat off to that.

Both Avid and its customers have the same agenda - to convince the world that PT has something special about it, for which you can then charge a premium.

If you have both the manufacturer and its customers all telling you the same thing - ‘PT is for professionals; if you don’t use PT you are not a professional’ – it becomes a powerful, self-fulfilling message. To those who only know half the story (which is the case with many, if not most in the audio industry, I would suggest) it has become an unassailable, accepted ‘fact’.

Love it or hate it, the hardware reliance helps to justify the price. If I were Avid I’d be wary of losing my grip on such a market advantage, but what do I know?!

---

Heck of a lot of truth in that.

Mind you - Digidesign {and hopefully now Avid full time} have been one o the few DAW makers that actually LISTEN to the professional end user. they have been the only people to concentrate {well - along with Sadie and Fairlight} to implement tools that were being requested from the professional marketplace only. Logic, Sonar, cubase etc - did some of this - but they also listened to what "home punters" want.

A professional system has the tools a professional needs. PT isnt aimed at composers - but you can use it if you like. Its a production and post production tools. It's excellent routing, rims, VCAs and robust hardware interfaces pretty much make that a forgone conclusion. Less sexy - sure. Less bells and whistle. But the money earning end doesn't request bells and whistles.....

So - to be honest it's a fact and "fact" in equal measures.

Put trims, VCAs, better routing, less buttons, proper spotting, dedicated high end controller and decent mixer page into Logic - and I'll be there.

Yeah me too. I've tried a number of times to sort out another more flexible solution for work. But everytime I do, I hit a brick wall. I make a list of the fundamental things that I need the software to do...functions which make intuitive sense to me and are part of my workflow. I take that list to whatever manufacturer seems to be doing good stuff and everytime it's the same story... I get a reply which basically tells me that I can do some, perhaps most, but not all of the things on my list. There's usually an additional list of other cool things that the software can do. I'm always impressed but fundamentally I still need it to do certain basic things. And in every case so far, the most sensible solution is to stay where I am. So for me, it's not the stability and dedicated hardware that are such a draw...It's actually a functional issue. And a lot of non-PT people dont get this. Anyway, hopefully now it's opening up a bit.

J

--------------------
www.jackruston.com