The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
64 bit Pro Tools 10 is coming. This is HUGE!
Old 19th September 2011
  #151
Lives for gear
 
ggegan's Avatar
I mix sound effects on relatively large scale feature film projects. They aren't necessarily large budget or high grossing projects, they are generally in the mid-range budget area, but often the scale of the sound requirements can be quite large.

Latency is probably the least of my concerns. As long as I keep the Pro Tools hardware buffer down to 256-512 samples, it isn't an issue. I usually don't even use delay compensation. I am primarily interested in having the highest possible processing power and having the highest possible number of voices available.

Latency is not generally an issue unless you are dealing with multiple microphones that have leakage between them, as when recording orchestral scores or on-set dialog recorded with multiple mics. Then the phase relationships between the various sources is critical because of the leakage between tracks. Applying different kinds of processing with different degrees of latency to tracks that have microphone leakage can degrade sound quality due to the resulting time domain offsets. But for sound effects, there are almost never situations where using multiple mics causes latency related phase issues, so even though processing requirements may be extreme, latency is not an issue unless it causes noticable delays.
Old 19th September 2011
  #152
Gear Maniac
 
bizzle's Avatar
 

Latency can be a big concern on the dialog side, where you might have several dialog chains, many different plugs (some TDM some RTAS), and need to maintain lip-sync.

As far as TDM vs. Native, don't forget that if you use up all your TDM resources you still have all that native RTAS processing power too. "Out of date" or not, TDM is still very reliable and powerful for the users that need it. And for them, TDM systems pay for themselves. But, buy Native if thats all you need.

10 sure sounds and looks good to me..

&e
Old 21st September 2011
  #153
Lives for gear
 
DaVogi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzle View Post
Latency can be a big concern on the dialog side, where you might have several dialog chains, many different plugs (some TDM some RTAS), and need to maintain lip-sync.
don't confuse latency while mixing (which can be easily compensated by the any modern DAW) with latency in live-monitoring-applications.

only in the latter situation a tdm-system has advantages in large/fully blown sessions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzle View Post
As far as TDM vs. Native, don't forget that if you use up all your TDM resources you still have all that native RTAS processing power too. "Out of date" or not, TDM is still very reliable and powerful for the users that need it. And for them, TDM systems pay for themselves. But, buy Native if thats all you need.

10 sure sounds and looks good to me..
thats not entirely true and the point most tdm-users don't get. in certain circumstances tdm is LESS powerfull than native, because all of the routing will be handeld via DSP, therefore you can easily max out a HD2 with large surround-sessions without touching any tdm-plugins.
Old 21st September 2011
  #154
Gear Maniac
 
bizzle's Avatar
 

I wasn't confusing the two. There are situations where delay compensation cannot correct enough for plugin delay.

Regarding the TDM mixer, you do have a point. But with an HD3 I have not run out except for very rare cases. Talking very large and complex surround mixes.

For both of these topics it is worth mentioning that some care must be taken when building up a session. If you stack a bunch of alternating RTAS and TDM plugs, you are gonna eat up a resources and cause more delay. Same with different routing situations. TDM requires more attention to these points as well as gain staging than RTAS.


Posted via the Gearslutz iPhone app
Old 21st September 2011
  #155
Lives for gear
Avid should just embrace VST and have done with it!
Old 21st September 2011
  #156
Lives for gear
 
DR Music's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom_lowe View Post
Avid should just embrace VST and have done with it!
What's so awesome about VST's?
Old 21st September 2011
  #157
Lives for gear
 
DR Music's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DR Music View Post
What's so awesome about VST's?
Or VST technology?
Old 21st September 2011
  #158
Lives for gear
 
Jesse Peterson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom_lowe View Post
Avid should just embrace VST and have done with it!
+1

RTAS needs a serious overhaul.

With vst3, the plug only uses power when it is processing audio.
Old 21st September 2011
  #159
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DR Music View Post
What's so awesome about VST's?
Just the gigantic number of available VST plugins is enough to warrant adding VST to Pro Tools. Besides that, it seems to be more efficient than RTAS. Then there is the VST3 specific stuff: VST3

Actually a better question might be, what is so good about RTAS that Avid need to keep it? (Besides for backwards compatibility of course). Having multiple plugin formats makes it more costly for developers and thus more costly for the end users. (Having multiple platforms to develop for is already enough extra work and cost methinks).

Of course VST is Steinberg's technology. The direct competition...

Now if all these companies could have just put their heads together and worked on an independent plugin format to rule them all... A bit like they did with MIDI. There have been at least two attempts that I am aware of but both failed. (The last was right after Steinberg announced VST3).

Alistair
Old 21st September 2011
  #160
Lives for gear
Every plug-in I have in RTAS and VST, the VST version always seems more responsive and less taxing on the system, apart from DMM 2 (no surprises there then).

I keep hearing about RTAS v2? Any word?

As for Avid embracing VST, aren't they an "open" company these days?
Old 21st September 2011
  #161
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Besides that, it seems to be more efficient than RTAS.
Not according to these benchmark tests.

RTAS VIs are well below VST performance and in serious need of a revamp, but fx plugins aren't necessarily worse than VST. Perhaps specific plugins run better in VST vs. RTAS, but that may be due to the port, rather than RTAS.

I personally prefer RTAS for its' automation and present management to VST/Steinberg's approach. Not sure I really want VST in ProTools after dealing with it's own set of issues in Nuendo/Cubase/etc for years.
Old 21st September 2011
  #162
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

They've been working on some kind of RTAS revamp for years now. I just hope it's more stable with better performance now. For features I'm not actually hurting all that much.

Sure the plugin frame is a little overloaded, but in general I like the preset system and automation capablities of Protools a lot more than that of VST hosts, so far at least.

"Yeah, show me eq gain of band 3 on all dialoge tracks". There is no host that can do this aside from Protools with a one modifier + click. WHen you need it, automation is handled much more elegantly in PT, at least the access to it and recording thereof.

I do wonder what kind of performance penalty there is for using clip gain/envelopes in the new PT10. Probably almost zilch, but we dialogue editors and premixers would be amongst the ones shovling massive amounts of clip gain around.
Old 22nd September 2011
  #163
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
Not according to these benchmark tests.

RTAS VIs are well below VST performance and in serious need of a revamp, but fx plugins aren't necessarily worse than VST. Perhaps specific plugins run better in VST vs. RTAS, but that may be due to the port, rather than RTAS.

I personally prefer RTAS for its' automation and present management to VST/Steinberg's approach. Not sure I really want VST in ProTools after dealing with it's own set of issues in Nuendo/Cubase/etc for years.
Ha - that's funny. I've just moved to Nuendo 5.5 and love the way it deals with presets. May be "new toy" syndrome though.
Old 22nd September 2011
  #164
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
Not according to these benchmark tests.

RTAS VIs are well below VST performance and in serious need of a revamp, but fx plugins aren't necessarily worse than VST.
I was thinking more of the instruments but good point about the FX.

Quote:
I personally prefer RTAS for its' automation and present management to VST/Steinberg's approach.
I don't see why that would be any different for VSTs. It would still be Pro Tools automation and preset management.

Alistair
Old 22nd September 2011
  #165
Lives for gear
 

In my experience the only issue is with RTAS VI's . FX plugins run fine. This is one thing I would love to see fixed! It's the only reason I have Logic and Cubase.
Old 22nd September 2011
  #166
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
I don't see why that would be any different for VSTs. It would still be Pro Tools automation and preset management.

Alistair
Good point - it might be. I assumed VST's preset management and automation parameter layouts/menus were part of the plugin spec itself, and not subject to alternate DAW implementations, but parameters might just show up the same way RTAS' do. Idle conjecture on my part at this point though since there's not even a rumor of VST support, lol.
Old 22nd September 2011
  #167
Lives for gear
 
DaVogi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzle View Post
I wasn't confusing the two. There are situations where delay compensation cannot correct enough for plugin delay.
you're right.. but this is a TDM-specific issue. I never run into such a problem on any native DAW...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzle View Post
Regarding the TDM mixer, you do have a point. But with an HD3 I have not run out except for very rare cases. Talking very large and complex surround mixes.

For both of these topics it is worth mentioning that some care must be taken when building up a session. If you stack a bunch of alternating RTAS and TDM plugs, you are gonna eat up a resources and cause more delay. Same with different routing situations. TDM requires more attention to these points as well as gain staging than RTAS.
absolutely, gain staging is a very important thing in tdm-land.... and for routing: sometimes you have to think outside the box to make things work in the box (especially on smaller HD-Rigs you really have to trim your setup for efficiency... but still, we can't activate delay compensation on surround-projects with our hd2, so I believe the upgrade path from HD1 for mixing purposes would have been hd native and hd2)
Old 23rd September 2011
  #168
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
Good point - it might be. I assumed VST's preset management and automation parameter layouts/menus were part of the plugin spec itself, and not subject to alternate DAW implementations, but parameters might just show up the same way RTAS' do. Idle conjecture on my part at this point though since there's not even a rumor of VST support, lol.
I think it's partly the host and partly the spec. VST3 parameters are directly exposed in some way but the host still has to (I assume) code to access them.

But in a VST 3 host getting a parameter out is a simple right click of a control in some cases, for any VST3 plug or instrument.

The automation stuff Airon talks about is where PT really stands out.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #169
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
The automation stuff Airon talks about is where PT really stands out.
I really like the way Pro Tools deals with automation but that is a GUI thing. It doesn't say much of the underlying data.

Maybe I'm wrong but I really don't see why Avid couldn't add VST support to Pro Tools. Of course they might not want to because that would probably devalue the RTAS format.

Btw, on an only semi-related note, I have always assumed that RTAS stood for Real Time Audio Suite but then someone told me that was wrong (but couldn't tell me what it really stood for). Can anyone confirm or correct this?

Alistair
Old 23rd September 2011
  #170
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

RTAS does stand for Real Time AudioSuite....
Old 23rd September 2011
  #171
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
RTAS does stand for Real Time AudioSuite....
Thanks for confirming!

Alistair
Old 23rd September 2011
  #172
Lives for gear
 
Kuba_Pietrzak's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post

Maybe I'm wrong but I really don't see why Avid couldn't add VST support to Pro Tools. Of course they might not want to because that would probably devalue the RTAS format.

No, VST is an open format and it is more about losing control who writes those plug-ins and how they work.

I do not think, that you can write and sell any plug-ins for ProTools without Avid's license and permission.



Kuba
Old 23rd September 2011
  #173
Lives for gear
 
cubivore's Avatar
 

any new info on this not relating to plugins? i wanna know if i should save my money thru october or just buy a new bike.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #174
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubivore View Post
any new info on this not relating to plugins? i wanna know if i should save my money thru october or just buy a new bike.
Lots. Look at the start of the thread.
Old 23rd September 2011
  #175
Lives for gear
 
cubivore's Avatar
 

Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom_lowe View Post
Lots. Look at the start of the thread.
yeah, i read all that and was hoping for any new tidbits. i just need more tantalizing. heh
Old 23rd September 2011
  #176
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubivore View Post
yeah, i read all that and was hoping for any new tidbits. i just need more tantalizing. heh
Well since it was a technology preview and not saying anything would definitely be in PT10, I wish you luck looking for "tidbits" because until a product is close to being announced, I doubt there will be any.
Old 24th September 2011
  #177
Gear Addict
 
audiobob's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubivore View Post
i wanna know if i should save my money thru october or just buy a new bike.
Buy a bike. By the time it's released, or by the time all bugs are worked out you'll have saved enough money again and you'll be in better shape. Get the bike and bring it into town, let's ride Memorial park.
Old 24th September 2011
  #178
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
We'll see VST in Pro Tools when we se RTAS in Cubase.
Old 24th September 2011
  #179
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorg View Post
We'll see VST in Pro Tools when we se RTAS in Cubase.
Haha, I'd hate to see Steinberg adopt RTAS
Old 25th September 2011
  #180
Lives for gear
 

There´s NO WAY avid is going to use
a non proprietary format like vst in their systems.

Hopefully they´l encrypt the coming RTAS 2
similar well / better than TDM which has several anti piracy advantages.

I really like the fact that none of the guys next door
work with my pretious mdw eq, heat, anthology tdm plugins.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump