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
Avid Pro Tools Tech Preview (version 10?) IBC 2011...
Old 11th September 2011
  #61
Gain control for each clip ...
been expecting that for a while ...


peace

MORDICUS
Old 11th September 2011
  #62
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dankin View Post
Here's the thing for me at least. There's so many things PT does well and IMO better than any other DAW when it comes to recording, editing and mixing audio that the lack of offline bounce is worth dealing with. I say that as someone who owns the latest versions of Logic, Cubase and PT and use all 3 every week. I would love to have offline bouncing in PT and I'm sure we'll see it eventually maybe even in 10 but I'm personally way more excited about clip based gain control than offline bouncing.
That feature has been in Cubase since version 4 (or 3, can´t even remember anymore). Ridiculous!

Glad to see though they are finally coming to modern age with 64-bit!
Old 11th September 2011
  #63
Gear Nut
 
roostert's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Don't make comments that aren't true. Logic and Cubase and Nuendo do PERFECT bounces. For you to assume that the audio is somewhat not the same is really drinking the Avid Cool Aid. I also use Pro-Tools as well trust me, but the fact that I started working on 2 hour longs radio shows and TV documentaries that were an hour and a half Pro-Tools just wasn't an option anymore. Time is money and so many times we are going back making little changes that the producer wanted that the talent wanted, add an extra commercial...there is no way in hell that I would bounce in real time for every little change.
Hey if I'm mixing a record or a song I do it in Pro-Tools. That's what I started with. But for me not having an offline option makes me use Cubase for certain projects because time is important....and you know what the bounces are just perfect.
Well, until bouncing can be done in Pro Tools just like Cubendo....Just a tip (in case you're not already doing this). On your original bounce (which can be taking as much as 2 hours), print to another set of tracks as your "mixdown" tracks. Then when producer "X" wants to make changes, you simply move to that section, fix those "issues" punch in those spots...duplicate the playlist, crossfade to taste, then go into the regions bin (with that whole 2 hour section highlighted) and export as new file. Boom! You don't have to sit through 2 hours of bouncing anymore. Just once.

Frankly, whether it's 2 hours or 3 minutes, on my initial "bounce", I prefer real-time as Quality Control. I've never been big on the quick "rendering"....I've had too many errors happen due to a "malfunction" during the bounce. If there's a glitch, you catch it going down....and if you use the method described above, when you hear a glitch, you stop, back up 10 seconds, punch in a keep bouncing. Charge for that QC time.....pay an assistant, whatever. Hopefully it'll save you some serious time in the future. :-)
Old 11th September 2011
  #64
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsilbers View Post
didnt get that whole deal with RAM timeline.

whats all that about? just fade rendering?

what could be the advantages of loading the timeline to ram?
VERY fast response on huge mixes. Know how long it waits when you have 100 tracks loaded in 5 reels of film!!
Old 11th September 2011
  #65
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearNerd View Post
That feature has been in Cubase since version 4 (or 3, can´t even remember anymore). Ridiculous!
That's kind of irrelevant. Cubase isn't used in the film or post mixing world. It's not a pissing contest - it's about having what we need!!
Old 11th September 2011
  #66
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Wake me up when you can do non realtime bounce!!!!!!

Seriously....it's 2011 how can people work without this feature is mind boggling~
I'd fire you !! heh
Old 11th September 2011
  #67
Lives for gear
 
jimmyboy7's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Dude, why you being ignorant? Of course with NO platform can you offline bounce when you are hybrid mixing. It is for the people who working completely IN THE BOX.

If you are using hardware this is not needed.

X 10!!!! I have 24 tracks of analog summing for a reason heh
Old 11th September 2011
  #68
Gear Addict
 
dasindevin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
That's kind of irrelevant. Cubase isn't used in the film or post mixing world. It's not a pissing contest - it's about having what we need!!
yeah but nuendo is quite often used in the post world and has had the clip gain feature for a very long time

AND it can pee much much further, high and with more volume
Old 11th September 2011
  #69
Gear Addict
 
dasindevin's Avatar
 

also hoping PT 64 will twist waves, lexicons and UA's respective arms into pumping out 64 bit versions of their plugs
Old 11th September 2011
  #70
Gear Maniac
 

Clip gain base control is just a icon easy to do gain envelope. If you can't wait just use Reaper.

For offline rendering for Protools could get a lot switcher. Many of you there have studio and expensive outboard. But there are many road warrior like me. You need to record,mix and burn a song into CD in 30 mins. Online Rendering eat you 5 min or so, how much time you left. I got Logic at home and Reaper on the road. I will touch Protools if I do have outboard gears to access.
Old 11th September 2011
  #71
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasindevin View Post
yeah but nuendo is quite often used in the post world and has had the clip gain feature for a very long time

AND it can pee much much further, high and with more volume
Nuendo, despite being designed for the task, is rare in post. All dubbing theatres I've worked in, and nearly all post rooms and score mix rooms, are still PT. I did like Nuendo up until N5. Again - how long it has had it doesn't really matter when nearly all mixes outside of pop are PT based.
Old 11th September 2011
  #72
Gear Addict
 
John_Seward's Avatar
 

Most post are switching to Logic.
Old 11th September 2011
  #73
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Seward View Post
Most post are switching to Logic.
That's a joke, right?
Old 11th September 2011
  #74
RiF
Lives for gear
 
RiF's Avatar
And I read through this whole page full of ****
Old 11th September 2011
  #75
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Don't make comments that aren't true. Logic and Cubase and Nuendo do PERFECT bounces. For you to assume that the audio is somewhat not the same is really drinking the Avid Cool Aid.
It's not a lie, he was describing his personal preference. I also prefer to listen to EVERY bounce because glitches do appear on rare occasions and I can't afford to submit a flawed product.

Your post about Logic and Cubase was not an opinion, and is, ironically, untrue. I've heard from Logic users about flawed bounces. **** happens. It's rare, but you have to be thorough. Or maybe you don't, but I do. I even listen to the bounce afterward and have found glitches in them, on very rare occasions.

So I agree: RT bouncing would be nice but I'd never use it.
Old 11th September 2011
  #76
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitecat View Post
That's a joke, right?
I can't think of any post house that uses Logic as their primary DAW of choice.
Old 11th September 2011
  #77
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

It can be mix mistakes as opposed to technical problems with the bounce.

Bouncing means having to go back and listen again as opposed to printing as you mix and being able to stop and immediately fix any problems you find. It actually makes the work take longer.
Old 11th September 2011
  #78
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post
I can't think of any post house that uses Logic as their primary DAW of choice.
Exactly, which is why I'm wondering if it's a poor attempt at humour. I've never seen Logic in action in post ever. I tried it once (for a lark) and failed miserably.

It's a different story for composers obviously but when it comes to editing and mixing for film/TV/otherwise, it's Pro Tools, with some Nuendo, and the odd Pyramix and Sequoia install (probably in that order of popularity if you take the BBC out of the equation - they still use Sequoia a fair bit according to a guy I know at BBC radio).
Old 11th September 2011
  #79
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearNerd View Post
That feature has been in Cubase since version 4 (or 3, can´t even remember anymore). Ridiculous!

Glad to see though they are finally coming to modern age with 64-bit!
What's more ridiculous to me is all the things PT got right in the beginning that no body has done as well yet Like playlist for instance. No other DAW handles multiple takes as well. It's about the fact that I know at any moment what PT is doing with the current take I'm recording. The best grouping of any DAW I've used. Beat detective. How long has it taking the industry to catch up with that one? And BD still gives you more control than any of the other copy's. Then there's session import which is a huge timesaver in a tracking session or when mixing. The best routing also. The ability to timestretch across mutiple tracks such as a drumkit and maintain phase accuracy. Being able to do all editing in the main window instead of a seperate window that can only see one track at a time. There's more I could mention. My point is that there's a lot of reasons why I so many engineers still prefer PT. Every current DAW has some cool features unique to it. I use Cubase and Logic also mostly for programming VI work. But when I'm tracking a band or mixing PT wins for me.
Old 11th September 2011
  #80
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveE View Post
Yay! Avid please add it to a PT9 rev and hook up your loyal customers! (Reaper style)
So you want a company to spend a couple of million on software development only to give it away for free so you charge clients and make money?


Old 11th September 2011
  #81
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
Now we are talking!!! Awesome!!
Don't mind waiting a bit longer for it. Just glad to know it's coming.
Old 11th September 2011
  #82
Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
So you want a company to spend a couple of million on software development only to give it away for free so you charge clients and make money?


Good point, but I can already make money with the current version. Also, I wonder how many people would buy Pro Tools 9 (that haven't already) if these things were added? It comes down to whether Avid is more committed to gaining new customers or milking its current ones. The current software already does everything I need anyway, so charging for it certainly doesn't guarantee them my upgrade dollars, if you catch my drift?
Old 11th September 2011
  #83
Lives for gear
 
JSt0rm's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveE View Post
Good point, but I can already make money with the current version. Also, I wonder how many people would buy Pro Tools 9 (that haven't already) if these things were added? It comes down to whether Avid is more committed to gaining new customers or milking its current ones. The current software already does everything I need anyway, so charging for it certainly doesn't guarantee them my upgrade dollars, if you catch my drift?
It guarantees them my upgrade dollars though. heh
Old 12th September 2011
  #84
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
It can be mix mistakes as opposed to technical problems with the bounce.

Bouncing means having to go back and listen again as opposed to printing as you mix and being able to stop and immediately fix any problems you find. It actually makes the work take longer.
But that's only true for turning in final masters.

Bouncing saves a TON of time during the compositional stages. I don't leave my VI's as midi...everything gets burned to audio. I don't want to come back two years from now and find a VI in a session that I no longer use or have, or isn't compatible. So I do VI's of strings, say, and bounce them offline to audio. This goes on all through the project, and in PT would mean ...over the course of a long project....a LOT of time spent waiting to bounce things to disk if it were real time.

It's been one of the most requested PT features, and Avid announced that they "knew, and were working on it" last Christmas. I just do not think the composer audience is very important to AVID, and with good reason, it's an audio/post product first, a compositional tool second.

TH
Old 12th September 2011
  #85
Lives for gear
 

Bouncing final mixes is probably less than 5% of the total use for faster than real time (offline) rendering so the idea that it slows anything down is not even close to the reality. The majority context is - everything else - you have to use real time bouncing for which in PT causes a real time wait (after you setup the tracks you will bounce to) - the length of the track or clip or song - and which everywhere else happens much faster.

"Quality Control" has nothing to do with that since in production you will hear the result of those bounces multiple more times anyway, because you're still working on the production? Not only that, it bounces in full resolution, 32-bit float, so you lose no quality at all when you bounce your DSP... to get out from under hungry plugs (commit), to clean up tracks, to bounce instruments, whatever.

So lets assume some prefer to hear their final mix in real time while printing it ... that's perfectly fine, do that. That has absolutely nothing to do with the tons of wasted time bouncing everything else in real time over the course of the production.

It makes no sense at all (to me) in 2011... except for the obvious, that HD being hardware can't do that so PT9 won't either.

PT is a really great workstation but making "least use case" excuses for real time rendering is nothing but defensiveness.

Anyway, the new features look cool. Good for AVID.
Old 12th September 2011
  #86
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
It can be mix mistakes as opposed to technical problems with the bounce.
I rarely listen more objectively than I do when bouncing. I'm never less of an engineer, more of an average listener, than at that point. A real-time bounce allows me to listen (and, as you said, fix mistakes) one last time. Someone might (and probably will) argue that we should be able to listen with such an outsider's perspective without having to bounce. I agree, yet there's something about having the faders go motionless, and the screen show nothing but a countdown - knowing that "that's it!" - that properly calibrates my senses.
Old 12th September 2011
  #87
Gear Addict
 
John_Seward's Avatar
 

It was a joke. No serious post facility would even consider Logic.
Old 12th September 2011
  #88
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveE View Post
.\ The current software already does everything I need anyway, so charging for it certainly doesn't guarantee them my upgrade dollars, if you catch my drift?
Maybe so but if they add a few features that can save you time - the price of an upgrade may be well worth it. There are always cool new features that make one life easier in upgrades They have to do it otherwise nobody would buy the upgrades...
Old 12th September 2011
  #89
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dankin View Post
The best routing also.
Bests are often subjective and hard to quantify but I do feel PT has the best automation system.

But routing? I think Reaper is easily the best ... by far. No conventional DAW comes close from what I can see. And no, not my software of choice so no bias.
Old 12th September 2011
  #90
Lives for gear
 
mykhal c's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
But that's only true for turning in final masters.

Bouncing saves a TON of time during the compositional stages. I don't leave my VI's as midi...everything gets burned to audio. I don't want to come back two years from now and find a VI in a session that I no longer use or have, or isn't compatible. So I do VI's of strings, say, and bounce them offline to audio. This goes on all through the project, and in PT would mean ...over the course of a long project....a LOT of time spent waiting to bounce things to disk if it were real time.

It's been one of the most requested PT features, and Avid announced that they "knew, and were working on it" last Christmas. I just do not think the composer audience is very important to AVID, and with good reason, it's an audio/post product first, a compositional tool second.

TH
i understand the inconvenience some feel with the lack of offline bounce. what i would think those that need it durin' compositional stages would do is just bus those VIs out to an audio track even as one composes. that way you've always got an audio track mirroring that VI at all times durin' your process. and if disk space becomes an issue just delete the regions/playlists that become obsolete along the way. /2cents
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