Current Pro Tools 10 & win 7 x64 (stability)

[stgaudio]

Hi all,

Whats the score with the current v10 and win x64. I've heard lots of stability horror stories, which is to be expected on forums. Is v10 running well on windows?

I know a lot depends on your build and I have I fairly choppy i7, gigabyte MB, plenty o RAM PC. Quite keen to learn my way round the industry standard platform but don't want to buy into a nightmare.

Anything I should watch out for?

Taaa

[stgaudio]

no one?

[troggg]

Originally Posted by stgaudio

no one?

After working out a few issues, I now have a rock solid installation. I also spent a lot of time pre-planning the PC configuration which involved cruising forums as you are doing now.

Does Avid/PT10 raise the bar on making sure your PC configuration is rock solid, more so than most DAWs? Yes. But now we get to the psychological part. Whenever people have difficulty with the install, they start whining that Avid/PT is making their lives miserable. In actuality, Avid is trying to insure a smooth user experience, one in which problems down the road are minimized. So PT is pickier about your components.

Is training a Windows PC to be a PT10 box impossible? Hardly, cause I've done it. And while I have a lot of Windows experience over the years, I was not intimately familiar with, say, the Sandy Bridge chipset.

But if you can confine any problems you may encounter to obstacles that have to be troubleshooted and may take some time to do so, rather than Avid is messing with my mind, you can do it, too.

The number one thing I would say is you can completely ignore the Avid-recommended video cards, all of which are expensive nVidia cards circa 2009. Modern ATI cards not only work, they may work better.

Then make sure you do all the Avid recommended optimizations listed here:

Windows Guide - Windows 7 Optimizations and Troubleshooting.

And of course, use the PT recommended TI firewire if you go that route.

Hope that helps some.

[stgaudio]

Ok. may need ti upgrade the video card but my gigabyte MB is TI chipset anyways.

[UnderTow]

I have been running PT10 on Win 7 x64 since the end of October. I have no major issues, only a couple of minor ones. (The biggest of which is that I have to restart PT if I want to change the sample rate on my audio interface. Not exactly a big issue and not exactly sure if my interface or PT is to blame).

I have not knowingly done any of the Avid optimizations. (I might have done them unknowingly. This PC was built a year and a half before buying PT and has been used since for all manner of audio, graphics and other tasks). I have a non-TI chipset for my Firewire interface. I have an ATI video card. (Eyefinity rocks. Forget nVidia). So although the system was carefully designed, the components well researched and put together, I haven't done anything specific to Pro Tools... yet the systems is rock solid. I haven't even installed the 10.1 upgrade due to lack of issues! (Although I should I guess once I have time...)

Alistair

[stgaudio]

Thanks Alistair. Sounding positive so far. Can you make any comparisons against a previous DAW or have you always been on PT?

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by stgaudio

Thanks Alistair. Sounding positive so far. Can you make any comparisons against a previous DAW or have you always been on PT?

I also own and run Cubase and Sonar and have tested various other DAWs but I use these DAWs differently. I use Cubase for music production, Sonar for mastering (used to be for music production but switched to Cubase). I use Pro Tools for post-production. I could probably use PT for music production too but it is much less efficient with Virtual Instruments compared to Cubase and I have been using Cubase for so long (and collaborate with many other Cubase users) so I see no point in switching.

For me the strengths of PT are post-production and multi-tracking/mixing bands. My music production is mainly electronic with large VSTi count and only the occasional band mixing. IMO Cubase, with it's MIDI sequencer heritage and efficient VST(i) engine, is better at this than PT.

I also use various wave editors and iZotope RX but those are completely different and don't ever strain the capabilities of the system.

Alistair

[stgaudio]

Ok, my usage will primarily be tracking & mixing musicians. I always put down the midi data when I track keyboards. What are the drawbacks of VSTi's & midi programming in PT?

[troggg]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

I have been running PT10 on Win 7 x64 since the end of October. I have no major issues, only a couple of minor ones. (The biggest of which is that I have to restart PT if I want to change the sample rate on my audio interface. Not exactly a big issue and not exactly sure if my interface or PT is to blame).
Alistair

That's just the way it is, it likes to restart after changing sample rate. I think the manual does mention this [somewhere in its 1200 pages!]. Or at least I thought I saw it in there somewhere.

Regarding Cubase for composing, I agree that Cubase or Studio One [former Cubase programmers] are a little more ideal for that. PT10 has a definite engineering, industrial vibe. I wouldn't be on PT if my musician and mixer buddies weren't on it. That said, once it's happy, it seems to go about its business fairly impressively -- you just have to embrace memorizing 1352 keystrokes to get around!

[norbury brook]

Originally Posted by stgaudio

Ok, my usage will primarily be tracking & mixing musicians. I always put down the midi data when I track keyboards. What are the drawbacks of VSTi's & midi programming in PT?

The problem is RTAS. Compared to VST or AU RTAS is shockingly poor performance wise, just have a look at the DAW bench VI benchmark.

As I do mainly production projects with solo artists and use a lot of VI's pro tools sits on my OSX machine unused most of the time.

The other main issue is 64 bit,using VI's like BFD/Omnishpere/EW play/Kontakt etc x64 is essential. I also use Nebula a lot as I find the EQ's/console and tape emu's amazing but Nebula likes a lot of ram.

Once the RTAS is replaced with AAX and everything goes 64 bit things will change.


MC

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by stgaudio

What are the drawbacks of VSTi's & midi programming in PT?

As norbury brook pointed out, the main difference is the efficiency and memory addressing of the Cubase VST engine compared to the current RTAS format/engine in Pro Tools. Only having one AAX plugin that I use (AAX is the new plugin format for Pro Tools) I can't compare the efficiency gains if any.

If you are recording MIDI tracks as played live from a keyboard, the MIDI editing facilities will have little effect on your workflow. If you need to do a lot of MIDI composition/editing through the GUI you might want to research both workflows a little to see which fits you best.

Another thing worth considering is the control surface integration. For the right amount of money, there are some amazing controllers for PT. (D-Command, ICON and the whole Euphonix range amongst others). On the Cubase side you can also use the Euphonix range (amongst others) but as Avid bought Euphonix, only time can tell how well they support the EuCon protocol for 3rd party DAWs in the future.

Alistair

[troggg]

All true. But the program is so deep, and while you can mouse around, things are really intended for keyboard shortcuts, that if you're gonna commit to PT for reasons like I have [my favorite mixers use it and don't really want to spend hours importing and inserting 50 raw tracks created in another program with various effects into PT], you may as well get a head start on things before the conversion from RTAS to AAX. This transition is one of the top priorities at Avid, and they know they have to cater more to creators, so they'll get it together.

Now if most of your buddies are on Cubase/Nuendo, and you're not planning to use PT as the backbone for a commercial studio, I wouldn't go PT.

Also search on "VEP" which appears to be a reasonably elegant workaround allowing you to take advantage of all your RAM and use VST within PT.

[stgaudio]

Yes, I am aware of the shift to AAX. I wasn't aware that RTAS was a poor format but things seem to moving quite fast with AAX and the plugin alliance thing. I'll almost definitely wait for PT to go 64bit as I know waves have confirmed AAX native.

The main reason is compatibility with peers and the want to learn the industry standard. My studio is undergoing some big upgrades at the moment and it feels like a good time to jump due to the feedback from 10. I'm just not a Mac guy and I don't want to have stability nightmares.

[mykhal c]

PT10 and W7 x64 are super stable on my dated oc'd Q6600. add VEPro to the mix and now you ARE ready for music composition with PT10

[troggg]

Originally Posted by mykhal c

PT10 and W7 x64 are super stable on my dated oc'd Q6600. add VEPro to the mix and now you ARE ready for music composition with PT10

Good to hear. As a new PT10/Win7 64 guy who also is running stable, as I read all the PT threads to learn about the program, I can't help but notice that many of the guys who are having problems take the position that the problem they are having is universal. Yet if you read all these threads, plenty of guys are working fine, and they're happy with PT. You also have to wonder how it is that reviewers, who generally have tuned, optimized systems, are even able to review the program if it's so prone to fail.

So, while I am not dismissing anyone's problems, or calling the software perfect, or defending Avid, I'm just asking: if the problems are so terrible, how is it that so many people are pleased with the program? How do you account for that?

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by troggg

Good to hear. As a new PT10/Win7 64 guy who also is running stable, as I read all the PT threads to learn about the program, I can't help but notice that many of the guys who are having problems take the position that the problem they are having is universal. Yet if you read all these threads, plenty of guys are working fine, and they're happy with PT. You also have to wonder how it is that reviewers, who generally have tuned, optimized systems, are even able to review the program if it's so prone to fail.

So, while I am not dismissing anyone's problems, or calling the software perfect, or defending Avid, I'm just asking: if the problems are so terrible, how is it that so many people are pleased with the program? How do you account for that?

Well, it seems to me, that you simply cannot trust what you read on the internet, as any sort of universal truth, and you need to do your own homework, in order for things to go according to plans. I have been helping a client with a custom PEECEE, I7 quad core with PT10, and it took us two-three weeks to get it blazing. It's wonderful now, but we had a lotta gotchas, and weird turns along the way. I am sure it will be different for everyone.

[troggg]

Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell

Well, it seems to me, that you simply cannot trust what you read on the internet, as any sort of universal truth, and you need to do your own homework, in order for things to go according to plans. I have been helping a client with a custom PEECEE, I7 quad core with PT10, and it took us two-three weeks to get it blazing. It's wonderful now, but we had a lotta gotchas, and weird turns along the way. I am sure it will be different for everyone.

I don't know everything, but I think what it comes down to is everyone has two choices of how they view PT10 on Win7/64:

1) Avid is out to get me and persecute me and couldn't care less about me.
2) It is common knowledge that PT is finicky about Windows components, but I accept that I may to work through an issue or two [I did, too] and I'm willingly to methodically do that until PT is happy in exchange for a huge savings over what I would have paid for a Mac. I also accept the fact PT raises the bar on component selection in an attempt to insure that the user will have a stable experience over the long haul -- not to mess with my mind.

That's what I see as a new PT guy who's reading a lot of PT threads to learn as much about it as I can.

I would also observe that people are way more hesitant to cut their losses than I would be if I were having the heavy duty problems they report. I would be trying a lot of different components or switching to different DAW software, as opposed to endlessly standing on my head trying to get the gear that I already have to work in PT. Swapping stuff around is part of the process. That said, the more research you do, the less swapping you'll have to do.

And there is never any shame in copying a working system exactly.

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by troggg

I don't know everything, but I think what it comes down to is everyone has two choices of how they view PT10 on Win7/64:

1) Avid is out to get me and persecute me and couldn't care less about me.
2) It is common knowledge that PT is finicky about Windows components, but I accept that I may to work through an issue or two [I did, too] and I'm willingly to methodically do that until PT is happy in exchange for a huge savings over what I would have paid for a Mac. I also accept the fact PT raises the bar on component selection in an attempt to insure that the user will have a stable experience over the long haul -- not to mess with my mind.

That's what I see as a new PT guy who's reading a lot of PT threads to learn as much about it as I can.

I would also observe that people are way more hesitant to cut their losses than I would be if I were having the heavy duty problems people report. I would be trying a lot of different components or switching to different DAW software, as opposed to endlessly standing on my head to get the gear I already have to work in PT. Swapping stuff around is part of the process. That said, the more research you do, the less swapping you'll have to do.

And there is never any shame in copying a working system exactly.

Excellent post

[stgaudio]

troggg & Roc Mixwell

Would you care to fill me in on some of the things to look out for. I'm running an i7 920 (socket 1366), 16gb ram, Win 7 x64, Gigabyte EX58-UD4 MB (texas instrument chipset), ATI Radeon HD 3450.

I'm pretty sure my system is DAW friendly apart from my graphics card which is.....shit. What would you recommended as a reasonably priced video card for PT 10? Are there any other issues you can see with the rest of my components?

Cheers

[troggg]

Originally Posted by stgaudio

troggg & Roc Mixwell

Would you care to fill me in on some of the things to look out for. I'm running an i7 920 (socket 1366), 16gb ram, Win 7 x64, Gigabyte EX58-UD4 MB (texas instrument chipset), ATI Radeon HD 3450.

I'm pretty sure my system is DAW friendly apart from my graphics card which is.....shit. What would you recommended as a reasonably priced video card for PT 10? Are there any other issues you can see with the rest of my components?

Cheers

Hey. The stuff in paragraph one above all looks familiar from the PT working Windows configurations thread on DUC which is good.

Me and PT are loving this monstrosity: Amazon.com: GIGABYTE ATI Radeon HD6770 1 GB DDR5 DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort PCI-Express Video Card GV-R677SL-1GD: Electronics You can't tell how big it really is from the picture! When you unbox, you will gasp and your jaw will drop. You need a big case, but then you're running the fastest silent passive ATI card there is and you probably need one less case fan.

[mykhal c]

Originally Posted by troggg

Good to hear. As a new PT10/Win7 64 guy who also is running stable, as I read all the PT threads to learn about the program, I can't help but notice that many of the guys who are having problems take the position that the problem they are having is universal. Yet if you read all these threads, plenty of guys are working fine, and they're happy with PT. You also have to wonder how it is that reviewers, who generally have tuned, optimized systems, are even able to review the program if it's so prone to fail.

So, while I am not dismissing anyone's problems, or calling the software perfect, or defending Avid, I'm just asking: if the problems are so terrible, how is it that so many people are pleased with the program? How do you account for that?

FWIW, myself and a LOT of DUCers have put in a ton of work on the Windows side regardin' PT8/PT9/PT10. the link in my sig dates back 3 yrs!!! i've maintained that thread for that long!!! you will find a HUGE amount of info regardin' components and results. it's definitely a 1-stop shoppin' thread for W7 and PT. newer builds are posted on page one (1366, 1155, and 2011 sockets) and of course more detailed discussions are in the later pages. definitely worth a look!!!

[troggg]

Originally Posted by mykhal c

FWIW, myself and a LOT of DUCers have put in a ton of work on the Windows side regardin' PT8/PT9/PT10. the link in my sig dates back 3 yrs!!! i've maintained that thread for that long!!! you will find a HUGE amount of info regardin' components and results. it's definitely a 1-stop shoppin' thread for W7 and PT. newer builds are posted on page one (1366, 1155, and 2011 sockets) and of course more detailed discussions are in the later pages. definitely worth a look!!!

Hi, I added my rig to your long-running thread a few weeks ago!

[mykhal c]

Originally Posted by troggg

Hi, I added my rig to your long-running thread a few weeks ago!

excellent!!! i'll have to find it and post on page 1. i'm slowly movin' the older builds to my 2nd post and puttin' the more recent ones in the 1st post...kinda movin' slower..especially after 3yrs

[troggg]

Originally Posted by mykhal c

excellent!!! i'll have to find it and post on page 1. i'm slowly movin' the older builds to my 2nd post and puttin' the more recent ones in the 1st post...kinda movin' slower..especially after 3yrs

I'm "Blissful World" on DUC. Mykhal, do you happen to know about what percentage of PT Native sales are on PC?

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by troggg

...do you happen to know about what percentage of PT Native sales are on PC?

My understanding is that the majority of LE users at least until a few years ago were actually PC. The biggest selling DAW is supposed to be CueBase on PC.

People who are having problems tend to make up the majority of folks posting to the Internet.