pulling the trigger on protools hd 2

[joeymusicguy]

need some help!

i dont know what all i need to buy
just assume all i have is a mac computer

so far i know i need

1. hd 2 (2 pci express cards, comes with protools software + license)
2. 192 interface (protools doesnt work without this?)

thats all i know

requirements:
i need at least 16 channels
i dont want to use the digidesign a/d or preamps (so what do i need?)
also, do i need a wordclock? recommendations?

thanks so much for all the recent help, guys.

 

[jval]

if you don't want to use the a/d on the 192 then you need to buy some more converters..
why not try out the 192 first before spending another $3-5k?? tons of records being made every day on these... don't believe the internet BS about them not being good enough.
get the extra A/D card for the 192 and you'll be ready to go with 16in / 8out.
oh maybe some DSUB snakes if you don't have em already..

 

[joeymusicguy]

if you don't want to use the a/d on the 192 then you need to buy some more converters..
why not try out the 192 first before spending another $3-5k?? tons of records being made every day on these... don't believe the internet BS about them not being good enough.
get the extra A/D card for the 192 and you'll be ready to go with 16in / 8out.
oh maybe some DSUB snakes if you don't have em already..

i wish i didnt have to call my dealer to order this
i just wanna pull the trigger

the fact that i have to call is slowing this whole thing down haha

anyone have a digi rack purchased before october for sale?

 

[Metaltastic]

The 192 doesn't have any built-in preamps, so you'll need to get some

 

[joeymusicguy]

update: just won my 003 rack purchased before oct. for trading in to the digidesign offer

game on!

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

Joey, I've been sort of following your protools threads for the past couple of days and I'm super interested in how you will take the transition - I know Cubase so well it's ridiculous and every time I have used protools I have felt crippled. I can actually edit drums manually in Cubase faster than I can use beat detective in PT.

Hopefully we will hear all about it when you get it up and running?

 

[joeymusicguy]

Joey, I've been sort of following your protools threads for the past couple of days and I'm super interested in how you will take the transition - I know Cubase so well it's ridiculous and every time I have used protools I have felt crippled. I can actually edit drums manually in Cubase faster than I can use beat detective in PT.

Hopefully we will hear all about it when you get it up and running?

well im planning to just not have a life for a few months.

my schedule is going to look like this...

8 am - 12 pm : mix / edit past projects on cubase
12 pm - 8 pm : recording who ever is in the studio at the time on cubase
8 pm - 12 am : learn protools on the mac system in my bedroom

repeat that, for.....ever

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

well im planning to just not have a life for a few months.

my schedule is going to look like this...

8 am - 12 pm : mix / edit past projects on cubase
12 pm - 8 pm : recording who ever is in the studio at the time on cubase
8 pm - 12 am : learn protools on the mac system in my bedroom

repeat that, for.....ever

word. that's kind of what I did, except after a few days I decided I am way more efficient (and thus able to be way more creative) with Cubase, so I stopped bothering.

It's weird because obviously the vast, vast majority of popular music was probably done on protools, so you would think that it's extensively more powerful... but I kind of think it's just because that's what all those guys "grew up" on, and not because it's actually superior.

that said, I'll probably change my tune in a year(or hopefully less) when I start dealing with labels and getting "do you use protools?" pressure.

 

[joeymusicguy]

word. that's kind of what I did, except after a few days I decided I am way more efficient (and thus able to be way more creative) with Cubase, so I stopped bothering.

It's weird because obviously the vast, vast majority of popular music was probably done on protools, so you would think that it's extensively more powerful... but I kind of think it's just because that's what all those guys "grew up" on, and not because it's actually superior.

that said, I'll probably change my tune in a year(or hopefully less) when I start dealing with labels and getting "do you use protools?" pressure.

dont worry, you'll never be asked about that

and when you are asked, it usually doesnt matter

for instance. i had a representitive of fearless sitting in my control room asking me "can we get the protools sessions when you're done?" i bullshitted him an answer that sounded like yes but was pretty much no.

they never asked again, and i never gave them the session (and i wasnt using protools)

some people are also schemers. i later found out that guy loved my drums, and wanted to steal the samples.

the music biz is fucked up

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

dont worry, you'll never be asked about that

and when you are asked, it usually doesnt matter

for instance. i had a representitive of fearless sitting in my control room asking me "can we get the protools sessions when you're done?" i bullshitted him an answer that sounded like yes but was pretty much no.

they never asked again, and i never gave them the session (and i wasnt using protools)

some people are also schemers. i later found out that guy loved my drums, and wanted to steal the samples.

the music biz is fucked up

lol yeah I hear you, a guy from the band A Day To Remember, who's name I won't mention, stole one of my snare samples. I did drums for a band who went to work with him for the rest of the stuff and he cut a few out of the song and saved them. I'm pretty sure I hear it on one of his newer mixes. You'd think he'd have his own. oh well.

how come you are making the switch, if it's not cause of some label bullshit? From reading some of your past posts I pretty much considered you a good reference point for when anyone asked me if I'm crazy for thinking Cubase is superior or when a guy I was going to work with wanted me to only use protools, or etc etc. I was like, well the devil wears prada dude seems to do fine with Cubase... it can't be that bad.

Now I'm gonna be a lone wolf haha.

 

[joeymusicguy]

lol yeah I hear you, a guy from the band A Day To Remember, who's name I won't mention, stole one of my snare samples. I did drums for a band who went to work with him for the rest of the stuff and he cut a few out of the song and saved them. I'm pretty sure I hear it on one of his newer mixes. You'd think he'd have his own. oh well.

how come you are making the switch, if it's not cause of some label bullshit? From reading some of your past posts I pretty much considered you a good reference point for when anyone asked me if I'm crazy for thinking Cubase is superior or when a guy I was going to work with wanted me to only use protools, or etc etc. I was like, well the devil wears prada dude seems to do fine with Cubase... it can't be that bad.

Now I'm gonna be a lone wolf haha.

for me, its just time to get pro with all of this

i can't even open the branches sessions anymore, because all this cubase wankery

i wanted to make a video tutorial on how the inner workings of "louder than thunder" because honestly it was a massive achievement for the band, and for me. that song has over 24 tracks of drums and percussion, not to mention all the other shit... i was really proud of it

and now i can't even open it

fuck that

and thats not the only reason, just a really good one.

a. its more stable
b. its the industry standard, and wide spread
c. latency free, with TDM
d. i'll be working with big name producers in 2010 who run protools
e. its bigger, and faster than cubase
f. dedicated hardware acceleration for software, im 100% in the box, i need this
g. cross compatibility
h. guarantee system (will take projects of any size, run them no problem, including block buster films)

 

[joeymusicguy]

oh and dont get my wrong, cubase is fully capable

im just ready for a final change, a new home.

 

[Ermz]

Cool, well it's about time, and once you get familiar with it, it will be a far more comfortable one than Cubase ever was.

Pretty filthy re: the dude trying to steal your drums. I guess it figures that people would be as insidious here as they are in other industries.

I was going to champion the whole 'wait for Digi's new offering... HD is on its way out' thing, but if the benefits of a DSP based system are quite real for you, then by all means. I hope you'll be happy with the new rig.

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

oh and dont get my wrong, cubase is fully capable

im just ready for a final change, a new home.

word. I feel you on all that stuff - like I said I almost did this myself - though I must say I haven't had any session-debilitating problems like that since SX3 was around. 4 and 5 have been great as far as not corrupting projects. I have never used Nuendo though.

sorry to derail your thread by the way hahaha. I do have a useful tidbit of info though that you may not have heard yet-

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/406809-pro-tools-hd-really-weak.html

This was a main deterrent for me - I average around 100-120 tracks per project most of the time and I feel like I would be limited with anything less than HD3.

 

[joeymusicguy]

Cool, well it's about time, and once you get familiar with it, it will be a far more comfortable one than Cubase ever was.

Pretty filthy re: the dude trying to steal your drums. I guess it figures that people would be as insidious here as they are in other industries.

I was going to champion the whole 'wait for Digi's new offering... HD is on its way out' thing, but if the benefits of a DSP based system are quite real for you, then by all means. I hope you'll be happy with the new rig.

well i figure if they offer something so splendid, they'll HAVE to have some sort of offer for all those HD users out there

it just wouldn't make sense

but even if they dont, i can always re-sell and sail the new boat on the new sea if i have to

 

[joeymusicguy]

word. I feel you on all that stuff - like I said I almost did this myself - though I must say I haven't had any session-debilitating problems like that since SX3 was around. 4 and 5 have been great as far as not corrupting projects. I have never used Nuendo though.

sorry to derail your thread by the way hahaha. I do have a useful tidbit of info though that you may not have heard yet-

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/406809-pro-tools-hd-really-weak.html

This was a main deterrent for me - I average around 100-120 tracks per project most of the time and I feel like I would be limited with anything less than HD3.

i've thought about this, and it just comes down to cleanliness

if i streamline my projects a little better, i'll be in good range

hd 2 is what im getting, so i should be fine.

if btbam can do what they did on misdirect with jamie king's hd 2, im sure i can handle this crabcore shit

haha

 

[MetalJonesy]

you can have an HD8 setup if you want

it all stems from the core card and add on accel cards

just so you know, you can run two 96ios from a HD core card (or HD1 as its known) even 192s i believe

basically with an HD1 setup you can run 32 I/O, the nice addition of the core cards is processing power being allocated to the DSP chips, which is pretty handy for only 1 sample latency, so HD1 is ace, HD2 is im sure more than enough for most people, hence why id always go for the HD1 option, id love to trade my 002 in and get the 96I/O and core card! with a standard HD1 setup (Just the core card) you can run 96 simultaneous audio tracks in PT every additional accel card allows an extra 32 tracks upto 192, ill say thats based upon PT 7.4 so like LE, it may have changed regarding track count allocated!

 

[joeymusicguy]

you can have an HD8 setup if you want

it all stems from the core card and add on accel cards

just so you know, you can run two 96ios from a HD core card (or HD1 as its known) even 192s i believe

basically with an HD1 setup you can run 32 I/O, the nice addition of the core cards is processing power being allocated to the DSP chips, which is pretty handy for only 1 sample latency, so HD1 is ace, HD2 is im sure more than enough for most people, hence why id always go for the HD1 option, id love to trade my 002 in and get the 96I/O and core card! with a standard HD1 setup (Just the core card) you can run 96 simultaneous audio tracks in PT every additional accel card allows an extra 32 tracks upto 192

i heard you can't run more than 7 ssl e-channels on hd (perhaps in tdm mode)

is that true O_O

 

[jval]

i've thought about this, and it just comes down to cleanliness

if i streamline my projects a little better, i'll be in good range

hd 2 is what im getting, so i should be fine.

if btbam can do what they did on misdirect with jamie king's hd 2, im sure i can handle this crabcore shit

haha

totally dude... I'm getting by on my HD1. Every now and then I'll hit the voice limit, but all it takes is some quick submixing. either way I'll be adding an accel card soon enough..

 

[Joshua Wickman]

I don't own hd but i believe you will need...

Monitor controller, something like a Presonus Central Station.

Depending on what preamps you use I think you need dsub cable to xlr to connect your preamps to the 192.

I think you can run 8 channels of preamps through lightpipe (not 100% certain on this) so maybe like a rme adi-8 for them Rme converters.

Again I could be wrong on some of this stuff, but I was in this local studio when they were setting there Hd rig up. So i have a little (very little)experience. They used the c24 board for there preamps and monitoring, so it was a little different that what your going to use. The dsub cables threw me off though cause I'm so used to xlr and 1/4in.

Maybe some other protools hd guys could explain what you will need better. I tried...