I've read that the would release Revibe native with Pt10? Anyone can confirm that? If so that alone is worth the upgrade :d
AVID Pro Tools 10 & new hardware!
- Thread starter crillemannen
- Start date
jipchen
ForesterStudio
Actually, there is a need for that. Because it's a fact. Just because they're considered "industry standard" in the US doesn't mean they can rest on their laurels. PT was once ahead of the others and now they are just lacking basic features, and charge ridiculous prices for some features that other DAWs have since 12 years (clip gain i.e.). That's the worst customer policy ever and they just get away with it. For the record, PT9 is still buggy for a lot of users, and even unusable for others - there isn't even a final release for OS X Lion yet, and they shell out the next "big" version to make some quick cash. Look at their shoutbox (https://www.facebook.com/AvidProToolsFamily) and the shitstorm there. I do hope they realize that their customers are neither stupid nor lacking alternatives. I bought PT9 because I had hoped they realized that not listening to the customers and being ass-backwards protective about their software is a shitty attitude and ultimately not good for their business. Look at their stock value, it was at $66/share a few years ago and it's barely $7/share now. PT9 was a step in the right direction, but this is just retarded.And guys there really is no need for the "cubase, sonar, logic, reaper etc has had this or that feature for year blah blah blah" every time a new version comes out, yes the price may be high if you have just upgraded to 9 but if you want it you'll buy it if you dont....then dont
I think its worth the upgrade price just for channel strip.
uke:By the way if they really do discontinue support for the 96 and 192 I/Os with the next version, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be so supportive would you?
Also: Still no 64bit? Seriously?
Still no possibility to turn off the software monitoring? (without the Production Toolkit) What the...
Rant over
Jaymz
Stymphalian Productions
DigitalMetal
Building a Mini SSL
Actually, there is a need for that. Because it's a fact. Just because they're considered "industry standard" in the US doesn't mean they can rest on their laurels. PT was once ahead of the others and now they are just lacking basic features, and charge ridiculous prices for some features that other DAWs have since 12 years (clip gain i.e.). That's the worst customer policy ever and they just get away with it. For the record, PT9 is still buggy for a lot of users, and even unusable for others - there isn't even a final release for OS X Lion yet, and they shell out the next "big" version to make some quick cash. Look at their shoutbox (https://www.facebook.com/AvidProToolsFamily) and the shitstorm there. I do hope they realize that their customers are neither stupid nor lacking alternatives. I bought PT9 because I had hoped they realized that not listening to the customers and being ass-backwards protective about their software is a shitty attitude and ultimately not good for their business. Look at their stock value, it was at $66/share a few years ago and it's barely $7/share now. PT9 was a step in the right direction, but this is just retarded.
By the way if they really do discontinue support for the 96 and 192 I/Os with the next version, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be so supportive would you?
Also: Still no 64bit? Seriously?
Still no possibility to turn off the software monitoring? (without the Production Toolkit) What the...
Rant over
Ive lived through PT since version 5, the hardware changing an being no longer supported is inevitable,
However unsupported does not mean "will not work with" Control 24 and Pro control are a fine example of this.
But if Accel and blue fronted interfaces no longer work after PT10 so be it, whats the difference between that and When HD hardware super-ceded Mix hardware back in PT6,
i was there and saw it happen, users just dealt with it because it was a development and progression,
we just happen to be in a lucky situation these days where its not so essential to upgrade because native processing is fast enough for most users.
When my hardware becomes no longer usable in PT i may go native if the TDM plugins i want to use have gone native or i may not i havent decided but im not going to cry about it , its progression.
If its too expensive for you or doesnt fit you tastes stick with something cheaper that works for you, nobody is forcing to to buy anything.
Are there any other DAW's that can load an entire session into RAM disk cache and can run a massive session from a low speed NAS drive?
Have Avid stolen that from Cubase Sonar Logic Reaper or whoever?
i dont know but please to tell me if you do.
By releasing new versions of their software so soon after the previous one to me is a perfect example that they are not resting on theit laurels at all and are just getting on with improving their product, i dont care what their stock is worth, i care if PT does what i want it to do for me to get my work done faster in a more efficient way, if they fail to meet that expectation for me i might go elsewhere, but for now im perfectly happy thanks.
And 64bit? i dont have ears like a wolf, and i dont need extra headroom above what PT10 offers, do you? ....do you really?
would it be a life changing moment for you? i doubt it.
Any way im quite happy without for now thanks.
BLUElightCory
Member
PTHD and HDX don't officially support third-party interfaces, but third party manufacturers will still make compatible devices as they always have.
kaomao
Member
::XeS::
Member
Still no possibility to turn off the software monitoring? (without the Production Toolkit) What the...
Rant over
It seems it's included in PT10 (without Complete production)...but I can be wrong
jipchen
ForesterStudio
Don't get me wrong I like ProTools, just not Avid's policy behind it. The RAM disk cache thing is pretty cool, and I already said I would like to have the features coming with PT 10 (not only because most of them are really old news but because they are indeed helpful and needed). Releasing updates is no sign of resting of laurels of course, but take a look at PT9 and how they charged people for basically no new features (I remember especially HD users to be upset) other than making it compatible with 3rd party interfaces and earning a big load of money with it. It's actually great that they work on PT so quickly - but $300? After not even a year of PT9, before it even run stable on most systems and still has known bugs? They had what, two patches for PT9? Making this update a new version and charging the full price, that's a pretty clear sign for resting laurels to me. I pointed out the stock because they obviously made wrong decisions in the past and need money, otherwise they could've released PT10 for less or for free. Also if they continue to loose worth it will eventually have an impact on the product, and I'm guessing it would mean letting a lot of people in quality-control, beta testing, etc go first.
And 64bit: I was talking about the software running on 64 bit basis (like Windows 7 can, or OS X does), not recording or mixing with 64 bit bitdepth. I don't need any extra headroom either. PT can run on a 64 bit system but it's still 32bit, so it can't adress more than 4 GB of RAM and that would definitely improve the handling.
Also, do you think it's "by chance" that 3rd party interfaces for ProTools HD probably won't work with the program in the future? I think that's just a way to force people into buying AVID interfaces. again.
And 64bit: I was talking about the software running on 64 bit basis (like Windows 7 can, or OS X does), not recording or mixing with 64 bit bitdepth. I don't need any extra headroom either. PT can run on a 64 bit system but it's still 32bit, so it can't adress more than 4 GB of RAM and that would definitely improve the handling.
Also, do you think it's "by chance" that 3rd party interfaces for ProTools HD probably won't work with the program in the future? I think that's just a way to force people into buying AVID interfaces. again.
Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
AFAIK Avid never officially supported any 3rd party HD converter solutions, so I doubt much will change there.
I really don't get what's so awful about this. They're finally bringing in the features everyone has been asking for years. PT9 was the first step with automatic delay compensation and 3rd party hardware support. They're basically doing what everyone wants, but with a price. Avid/Digidesign was never about being affordable, that's no secret. There's a lot of fuss about Steinberg/Apple/Cockos giving the same (or even better) feature set for a cheaper price. Yeah, they do that, and if that's what you want, just use their products. I can't afford the upgrade right now either, so I'll just save until I can and decide if I really want or need to pay for the new stuff.
And HDX? Fuck, that's an excellent business move from their part. They're keeping the "elite series" of their product line while FINALLY dumping the obsolete TDM architecture, which admittedly still has a realistic demand especially in the post production world but was quickly becoming shamefully low-powered compared to native systems.
I really don't get what's so awful about this. They're finally bringing in the features everyone has been asking for years. PT9 was the first step with automatic delay compensation and 3rd party hardware support. They're basically doing what everyone wants, but with a price. Avid/Digidesign was never about being affordable, that's no secret. There's a lot of fuss about Steinberg/Apple/Cockos giving the same (or even better) feature set for a cheaper price. Yeah, they do that, and if that's what you want, just use their products. I can't afford the upgrade right now either, so I'll just save until I can and decide if I really want or need to pay for the new stuff.
And HDX? Fuck, that's an excellent business move from their part. They're keeping the "elite series" of their product line while FINALLY dumping the obsolete TDM architecture, which admittedly still has a realistic demand especially in the post production world but was quickly becoming shamefully low-powered compared to native systems.
jipchen
ForesterStudio
Just read the PDF (after I finally found it on their website), you're right!
That's good. Can't really be happy because why the fuck didn't they implement an "off" switch for the software monitoring right from the start? Would've been a 1kb, 10 seconds of work patch. Oh well, this is still good news.
By the way, calling the feature "low latency monitoring" will trick a lot of people into thinking the latency for software monitoring with PT is reduced, while it's actually just an off switch for the otherwise permanent software monitoring in PT (non-HD). That's close to fraud if you ask me.
Also, why only Output 1-2? What the fuck why don't they just program an off switch for the monitoring function as a whole? It makes no sense at all. I have my monitors hooked up to Out 1-2 and the musicians headphones to 3-4. Meaning I can't turn off the annoying software monitoring for the drummers headphones, so I have to turn off my dsp based mix from the RME TotalMix FX software and deal with the PT latency for no good reason at all. Great.
::XeS::
Member
Yes it's the feature used on LE systems...you monitor through the interface mixer, with the software monitor bypassed. It's usefull when you have to mute/unmute your tracks in PT to record with no latency using the interface mixer (like I do now)......as you said anyway it could be included in PT 9 with not much effort.
MetalJonesy
more metal, more booze!!!
doesn't seem as major of an upgrade doing 9-10 where as 8-9 was a pretty large step forward.. think i'll just stick with 9 and not bother upgrading for a while! can't justify the stupid price!
Lasse Lammert
HCAF Blitzkrieg
for me those are reason enough to upgrade
Avid said:
wow, abandoning TDM support?
sp Avid is turning their back on what used to be their biggest market?
not sure i that's a smart move...
then again there are still loads of studios working on PT7.4 etc, so I guess 10 will be fine for the next 10 years as well
DigitalMetal
Building a Mini SSL
You dont like Avids policy? do you actually know what their policy is?
The state of their stock value is more likley down to the Video Arm of the company than the audio division too.
Re: 64 bit, i dont have any RAM addressing problems and now that i can dedicate a chunk of my RAM to disk cache things work even faster than any RAM adressing improvements i could imagine, did you read the review link i posted above where the writer talks about 64 bit and the not so dire need for it now that the disk cache features have sped things up.
In my experience most RAM problems users have had were VI related and now the AAX format will address that, users have been asking for a revised version of RTAS and now thay have seen evidence that Avid are listening with the inclusion of AAX (which is 64bit ready).
Of course My HD hardware is perfectly usable and i dont need to upgrade to new converters, i havent seen any 100% bonafide evidence to say that my 192io wont work as a legacy coverter beyond PT10 (just like Mix converters on HD) Yet either so lets wait and see.
I wouldnt expect such a large organisation to provide major updates for free either, yes companies like Reaper can do that because they are tiny with only a few employees, Avid on the other hand have got a lot of staff to pay.
This conversation can go on and on but Avid are a huge company supplying large systems with garunteed performance with approve system configurations to huge facilities like skywalker sound for film productions across massive multi workstation networks that integrate Avid Media composer with PT.
They are covering that end of the industry where other DAW's wouldnt last 5 mins because they dont have the feature sets, integration or performance/reliability and still managing to cater for the small end of the spectrum like the bedroom users and i think they are doing a pretty darn good job of it.
PT8 was pretty terrible, PT9 although it didnt offer masses of new features improved stability bay a large margin (i would say back to where they were at 7.4) and i think 10 is again a progression in the right direction.
I thought the cubase 5 to 6 feature set was pretty whack and wasnt worth the upgrade price so i sold my cubase to someone else.
To me it sounds like you want the features of HD but dont want to pay extra for it,
Well i want a Ferrari but i dont want to pay for that, so i'll have to stick with my crappy 4 door saloon that does the job and gets me from A to B.
DigitalMetal
Building a Mini SSL
Only because of the newer AAX format instead of TDM, AAX will cover native and DSP powered plugins for HDX DSP cards.
it will be interesting to see which TDM developers will embrace AAX though,
They way i see it at the moment, A developer will only have to write one plugin in AAX format and that will work for native And DSP if you have an HDX Card, rather than having to wite an RTAS and TDM version of the same plugin.
For me this is an attractive prospective for developers.
AudioPhile777
Mathew Cohen
pifos_2
des scoubidoubidous wha !
oh my god people are really taking the piss : http://www.facebook.com/AvidProToolsFamily?sk=wall
the new features are not relevant enough for the home studio users...
seems like those features should have just been included in pt9 for free last year.
the new features are not relevant enough for the home studio users...
seems like those features should have just been included in pt9 for free last year.
abt
BT
jipchen
ForesterStudio
@DigitalMetal:
Yes I understand what you're saying about Avid etc. - I still feel like they fucked the customers over with this upgrade. Skipping it isn't really an option because a) I want the features (like being able to turn of software monitoring,haha) and b) it won't be cheaper if I upgrade to PT 11 someday, anyhow. Probably even more expensive.
Not sure why you think I want HD features but don't want to pay up? I want to be able to turn of software monitoring. That's not even a feature, just a function of every DAW ever. I neither need nor want ProTools HD, because my interface already has a DSP chip, zero-latency monitoring, unlimited routing, and DSP-effects for headphone mixes etc. I just want to be able to use it properly (like with Cubase,Sonar,Logic,Reaper,... etc ). They even implemented that "feature" but limited it to two outputs? "You're allowed to turn off software monitoring but only for Output 1 and 2" Perhaps you can explain to me how this makes any sense? I already asked on the forums, we'll see what the support says.
I'm also willing to pay for big software upgrades. Not willing to pay for necessary patches and old features that don't even work right, though. Or is a stable software that is compatible with the latest Mac OS now considered "luxury" or "HD feature"?
And 64bit software has nothing to do with ProTools HD if you ask me either (it shouldn't, anyway). That's just logical considering OS X is 64 bit - and yes, I read the RAM disk cache article but this feature is in fact PT HD only and I accept that.
You're right though, this can go on for another few pages so I'll quit the ranting now
Yes I understand what you're saying about Avid etc. - I still feel like they fucked the customers over with this upgrade. Skipping it isn't really an option because a) I want the features (like being able to turn of software monitoring,haha) and b) it won't be cheaper if I upgrade to PT 11 someday, anyhow. Probably even more expensive.
Not sure why you think I want HD features but don't want to pay up? I want to be able to turn of software monitoring. That's not even a feature, just a function of every DAW ever. I neither need nor want ProTools HD, because my interface already has a DSP chip, zero-latency monitoring, unlimited routing, and DSP-effects for headphone mixes etc. I just want to be able to use it properly (like with Cubase,Sonar,Logic,Reaper,... etc
). They even implemented that "feature" but limited it to two outputs? "You're allowed to turn off software monitoring but only for Output 1 and 2" Perhaps you can explain to me how this makes any sense? I already asked on the forums, we'll see what the support says.I'm also willing to pay for big software upgrades. Not willing to pay for necessary patches and old features that don't even work right, though. Or is a stable software that is compatible with the latest Mac OS now considered "luxury" or "HD feature"?
And 64bit software has nothing to do with ProTools HD if you ask me either (it shouldn't, anyway). That's just logical considering OS X is 64 bit - and yes, I read the RAM disk cache article but this feature is in fact PT HD only and I accept that.
You're right though, this can go on for another few pages so I'll quit the ranting now
