amarshism
Member
What would be the need of a rme with the lynx aurora? If you're running a hardware independent pt, wouldn't the aurora act as the interface itself? You could use the rme money on pres/clock.
PRO TOOLS WITHOUT digidesign/m-audio interface?
- Thread starter Leon--
- Start date
Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
Speed (FW800 vs. FW400), stability (RME are well known to put out rock solid drivers, whereas I haven't heard pretty much anything about the Lynx's separately bought FW option), expandability (FF800 can handle 28 I/O without daisy chaining) and four pretty decent mic pres as a bonus. Or in case you meant the HDSP solution, well, it's just a whole different beast from the FireWire stuff.
Trevoire520
Member
To be honest, the top end market for Avid is mainly the post production market, guys who are working with hundreds and hundreds of tracks and lots of effects. These guys are not going to be downgrading their HD setups for a native rig anytime soon. They can also justify the cost of a HD setup as they're making serious money.
Whereas the power of HD has been unnecessary in music production for quite a while, meaning alot of these guys are unlikely to ever pay out $10k+ for a HD rig when the industry they're in is making significantly smaller amounts of money compared to the post guys. These guys are using Logic, Cubase and even Reaper instead because it does what they need them to and is at a significantly lower price point than HD.
While I don't think we're going to get all the HD features for under £1000, I expect that the worst limitations will be gone and more functionality can be added by buying add ons. For example I (and probably most others here) have no need for surround mixing or video playback, but I could really do with being able to use more than 18 inputs and having ADC.
If Digi get the features and price point right and go for volume of sales then they could seriously clean up in the mid level market.
Obviously they can't abandon the high-end HD stuff or do anything to decrease its value in any way. But they are really missing out on us mid-level guys and gals.
My suggestion would be to keep the HD like it is. Of course they should update and supply new interfaces and options. But for LE, inclusion of delay compensation, VST support, and native interfacing is a must. They could still sell the MBOX crap to people just starting out, but could also sell cool new firewire and usb 2.0/3.0 interfaces with all kinds of routing options to the mid-level guys.
Win us over with your product! Make nice, affordable, reliable interfaces and keep up with the software.
My suggestion would be to keep the HD like it is. Of course they should update and supply new interfaces and options. But for LE, inclusion of delay compensation, VST support, and native interfacing is a must. They could still sell the MBOX crap to people just starting out, but could also sell cool new firewire and usb 2.0/3.0 interfaces with all kinds of routing options to the mid-level guys.
Win us over with your product! Make nice, affordable, reliable interfaces and keep up with the software.
ADC would imply that you could use outboard gear as plugins right? Or is ADC strictly the software plugin issue?
If they start talking at least 128 tracks, 64 busses with the ability to use outboard gear as plugins I will spend a pretty penny on this program.
I figure I'm looking at a minimum of 6 g's for an HD1 system via a reputable eBay seller. At 6 grand I could get an SSL Alphalink with MADI PCIe card, Big Ben and fill out my SCA rack. That would be a much more fun upgrade, as long as it can perform like it's HD brethren and let me run some outboard.
If they start talking at least 128 tracks, 64 busses with the ability to use outboard gear as plugins I will spend a pretty penny on this program.
I figure I'm looking at a minimum of 6 g's for an HD1 system via a reputable eBay seller. At 6 grand I could get an SSL Alphalink with MADI PCIe card, Big Ben and fill out my SCA rack. That would be a much more fun upgrade, as long as it can perform like it's HD brethren and let me run some outboard.
greyskull
Member
- Mar 22, 2006
- 6,072
- 7
- 38
adc would include Hardware inserts too.
You can of course manually shift the regions (it's 4 times the playback engine buffer I worked out after pinging A LOT)
As a MASSIVE pro tools fan, I am beside my self with excitement about what may come at AES... Just hope I don't get disappointed ... again.
You can of course manually shift the regions (it's 4 times the playback engine buffer I worked out after pinging A LOT)
As a MASSIVE pro tools fan, I am beside my self with excitement about what may come at AES... Just hope I don't get disappointed ... again.
mva801
Member
- Nov 18, 2009
- 1,870
- 13
- 38
That's why I'm trying not to get my hopes up. I'm hoping I'll be pleasantly surprised after mentally preparing for yet another let-down from Digi/ Avid.
darthjujuu
Member
obviously someone needs to chime in with "reaper is only $60."
reaper4.0 is looking like it will be timed perfectly to contend with PT9, and i hear whispers that they're introducing a marker based elastic audio clone ... which, for me atleast, completely and totally negates any/all lingering protools interest, after being a digi002 (and now profire2626) owner.
greyskull
Member
- Mar 22, 2006
- 6,072
- 7
- 38
Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
Reaper and Pro Tools are intended for a completely different target audience. You can disagree all you want, but quite honestly, how many professional, commercial recording studios have you seen running Reaper? This debate is going on at HCAF, GS and such every single day in different forms, so maybe we should keep it out of here 
darthjujuu
Member
who's debating?! we were discussing prices, it was relevant. and industry standards does nothing for me... far as i'm concerned you're paying just to be able to say you're using the industry standard. and it depends on your definition of "professional and commercial", i make a pretty decent supplimental income running my reaper studio, as does harvey and countless others on here, but i digress, don't wanna start that whole song&dance again.
...i just don't see the limitations. if anyone ever didn't take me seriously cause i wasn't running protools i'd tell them to kiss my peepee and go take some more photobooth pictures. </immature stab at apple>
...i just don't see the limitations. if anyone ever didn't take me seriously cause i wasn't running protools i'd tell them to kiss my peepee and go take some more photobooth pictures. </immature stab at apple>
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Reaper and Pro Tools are intended for a completely different target audience. You can disagree all you want, but quite honestly, how many professional, commercial recording studios have you seen running Reaper? This debate is going on at HCAF, GS and such every single day in different forms, so maybe we should keep it out of here
Agreed. I know upper end studios that have it, but for the sole purpose of the freelance guys that come in and prefer it. You never see it as the main daw in a professional situation (I'm talking about studios that are more than $30 an hour and feature systems that are worth at least $15k).
darthjujuu
Member
the FXpansion wrapper worked just fine for me for most things during my year-ish in LE 7.4, particularly the sneap-favored free guitar VST's and such
Reaper and Pro Tools are intended for a completely different target audience. You can disagree all you want, but quite honestly, how many professional, commercial recording studios have you seen running Reaper? This debate is going on at HCAF, GS and such every single day in different forms, so maybe we should keep it out of here
These are my thoughts exactly. Reaper looks fantastic (especially with the stuff Adam Wathan has done to improve user intuitiveness) but PT9 will definitely, IMO, quell other DAW's attempts to compete at this level.
To any macbook pro users; the laptop RME interface looks like a great option, especially if connected to an SSL Alphalink via MADI - very low latency, good conversion, more than enough I/O options. Any thoughts on that?
(Obviously assuming PT9 will be hardware independent)
if PT 9 will be around 1k i'd probably jump ship. but for 2,5k i'd rather get a used HD1 system to be honest....there are still a few things about HD that are worth the price, tracking latency being a big part imho, and i don't see me shelling out that amount of money for just a piece of SOFTWARE. at least with HD there are a few hardware related advantages that justify the money....sort of, at least.
i really hope they will be aiming this at the mid level market. i also agree that a mid priced pro tools software only wouldn't damage their hd sales....let's face it, audio stuff isn't the main market for hd systems anyways, like someone already pointed out.
on the contrary, a mid-priced PT 9 software might even get them more future HD sales, if people like the software and would have the hardware advantages too. you don't really lust for something you've never tasted, do you?
i really hope they will be aiming this at the mid level market. i also agree that a mid priced pro tools software only wouldn't damage their hd sales....let's face it, audio stuff isn't the main market for hd systems anyways, like someone already pointed out.
on the contrary, a mid-priced PT 9 software might even get them more future HD sales, if people like the software and would have the hardware advantages too. you don't really lust for something you've never tasted, do you?
AdamWathan
Member
I'm pretty pumped to see what happens at AES and I'm the most die-hard Reaper dude ever, heh... PT and Reaper are the only DAWs I don't hate. I love Pro Tools, it's the shit. I've just had much better luck getting what I want implemented in Reaper than trying to convince the guys at Avid to change
Bring on visible waveforms when moving stuff! The code is already fucking there, you can already do it with elastic audio enabled when using the hand tool and dragging warp markers:
http://www.adamwathan.com/misc/PTvisiblewaveform.swf
Bring on visible waveforms when moving stuff! The code is already fucking there, you can already do it with elastic audio enabled when using the hand tool and dragging warp markers:
http://www.adamwathan.com/misc/PTvisiblewaveform.swf
greyskull
Member
- Mar 22, 2006
- 6,072
- 7
- 38
I'm pretty pumped to see what happens at AES and I'm the most die-hard Reaper dude ever, heh... PT and Reaper are the only DAWs I don't hate. I love Pro Tools, it's the shit. I've just had much better luck getting what I want implemented in Reaper than trying to convince the guys at Avid to change
Bring on visible waveforms when moving stuff! The code is already fucking there, you can already do it with elastic audio enabled when using the hand tool and dragging warp markers:
http://www.adamwathan.com/misc/PTvisiblewaveform.swf
And you're pretty much the only one who doesn't shout it from the rooftops constantly
(love you)I'm stoked to see what happens. so hard to not get TOO excited.
jipchen
ForesterStudio
Now you got me wondering: Why would you not want VSTs?
(I personally don't want them because I want AU support
)But even if you don't like VSTs.. you wouldn't have to use them, would you?
Are you worrying about stability?
