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 12th September 2011
  #91
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Don't make comments that aren't true. Logic and Cubase and Nuendo do PERFECT bounces.
No they don't. As a longtime Nuendo user (formerly Logic, Paris, etc), I can attest to the unreliability of non-realtime.

Nuendo was inconsistent - sometimes mixes/bounces were clean, sometimes not, and it had nothing to do with buffer setting, and it only had to happen once or twice to remove any sense of reliability for critical use.

Realtime/re-records ran much more reliably. Nuendo's bounce dialog also had a nasty habit of locking up with no way to cancel, and if you did cancel it, there was a good chance it would corrupt the project.... hardly a pro "feature", and far from an advantage imho, even if just for rendering VI tracks.

Since moving to PT, I haven't had to re-run any mix or bounced track/clip because of glitches. Offline would certainly be nice for short sections or tracks where the risk is minimal, but I wouldn't choose a DAW for that feature alone.
Old 12th September 2011
  #92
Gear Maniac
 

As I'm software instrument composer, I touch some Cubase, Sonar...etc. Logic is my main. Offline rendering is flawless most of the time. One big advantage of offline rendering you can get ZERO dropout. ZERO bit lose. You can process longer than online rendering, but you are sure that you product is bit accurate.
Old 12th September 2011
  #93
Gear Addict
 
eskay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
No they don't. As a longtime Nuendo user (formerly Logic, Paris, etc), I can attest to the unreliability of non-realtime.

Nuendo was inconsistent - sometimes mixes/bounces were clean, sometimes not, and it had nothing to do with buffer setting, and it only had to happen once or twice to remove any sense of reliability for critical use.

Realtime/re-records ran much more reliably. Nuendo's bounce dialog also had a nasty habit of locking up with no way to cancel, and if you did cancel it, there was a good chance it would corrupt the project.... hardly a pro "feature", and far from an advantage imho, even if just for rendering VI tracks.

Since moving to PT, I haven't had to re-run any mix or bounced track/clip because of glitches. Offline would certainly be nice for short sections or tracks where the risk is minimal, but I wouldn't choose a DAW for that feature alone.
Don't know if you are using a really old version of Nuendo....but I can tell you I've recorded over 300 radio shows this year alone. Over 50 documentaries and I don't have one glitch ever!!!!!!When I used Logic 2 years again I had no problems but no I can't vouch for Logic as I can for Nuendo/Cubase because I don't use Logic anymore. Maybe it would have to do with your sound card and audio driver. But I"m not making any assumptions, I use the software EVERYDAY and I bounce every day! with ZERO glitches. So unless people have facts unless they use the software EVERYDAY like I do, please don't spread any mis information. If I've ever had a problem and it's been once or twice, the bounce will not happen...it will give me an error. So as much as people don't want to believe it just to make them feel good that Pro-Tools doesn't offer it is not the case.

Over and out!
Old 12th September 2011
  #94
Lives for gear
 

It seems good (in PT 10 I suppose) that you can actually see the waveform when moving a clip. Another editing improvement that people who dismissed it previously will enjoy. So it seems that AVID is actually paying attention to what's out there.

The next thing on their list should be real time clip based inserts if they're in "catch up" mode.

PT's looking better. The RAM thing looks pretty cool.
Old 12th September 2011
  #95
Gear Nut
 

Can someone go into detail about this load session into Ram thing? im like so lost!
Old 12th September 2011
  #96
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGlown View Post
Can someone go into detail about this load session into Ram thing? im like so lost!
Think of people using really fast hard drives for audio work for read / access / seek times and all that, and the importance of that for large projects... and how in some cases (in Win anyway), fragmentation can slow some of that down. Now put all of your audio tracks in RAM and you don't have any of those issues. Vegas does this with video. It will allow you to set aside xx RAM for streaming video directly.

Cubase does this with "Preload" allowing you to preload X seconds of audio into RAM.

Example: In 64-bit PT with tons of RAM a laptop with a really slow external USB1 drive for the source audio should be able to play and quickly edit hundreds of 96k tracks (if PT could actually play hundreds of voices at once) because it's not depending on the slow drive to keep the data stream up, it's all coming from RAM. So you'd read the files directly into RAM making the slow USB drive a non-factor.

How it will work in practice? We'll have to wait and see. Sounds good though. The only thing that needs to be saved to disk are the changes to the project file(s) when you hit "Save". The source files on disk (should) never change anyway.

For dedicated systems it will probably also increase hard drive life span... reading much less. Sounds like a perfect use for a SSD drive, to throw gigabytes of tracks into RAM in no time at all.
Old 12th September 2011
  #97
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Think of people using really fast hard drives for audio work for read / access / seek times and all that, and the importance of that for large projects... and how in some cases (in Win anyway), fragmentation can slow some of that down. Now put all of your audio tracks in RAM and you don't have any of those issues. Vegas does this with video. I will allow you to set aside xx RAM for streaming video directly.

Example: In 64-bit PT with tons of RAM a laptop with a really slow external USB1 drive for the source audio should be able to play and quickly edit hundreds of 96k tracks (if PT could actually play hundreds of voices at once) because it's not depending on the slow drive to keep the data stream up, it's all coming from RAM. So you'd read the files directly into RAM making the slow USB drive a non-factor.

How it will work in practice? We'll have to wait and see. Sounds good though. The only thing that needs to be saved to disk are the changes to the project file(s) when you hit "Save". The source files on disk (should) never change anyway.

For dedicated systems it will probably also increase hard drive life span... reading much less.
I just want to know basically will my 8GB of ram be able to hold a session my sessions never go over 30 tracks with maybe 4 plugs per channel and ill be at maybe 28%
Old 12th September 2011
  #98
Lives for gear
 

Dunno. It depends on how large the files are I guess, sample rate and all that. I suspect people doing that will have probably have more than 8gb of ram... but if your files only add up to 2gb... I don't see why not.

The implications (ironically) for this in native elsewhere are really good. Imagine - yeah, you guessed it - offline render to RAM. Bouncing 32 tracks of Addictive Drums offline in a few seconds while the actual disk files get written to disk in the background from RAM... but your DAW tracks are rendered and up and running on the screen in a couple of seconds.

You can kinda do this now most anywhere with a 3rd party RAM disk application by copying your source files to the RAM disk in post.

http://www.superspeed.com/desktop/ramdisk.php

I may try that later in Win 7 to see how well it works.
Old 12th September 2011
  #99
Lives for gear
 
clivek's Avatar
And iv'e just got use to drawing in volume changes !!

Ah ha gain change just like cubase wicked !!
Old 12th September 2011
  #100
Gear Nut
 

I understand there will be those who don't need offline bounce but this has been my #1 issue with Pro Tools for years. I mostly work in Logic now and constantly render regions, tracks and layers of tracks with offline bounce. It saves so much time that not having it seems ridiculous. I may want to listen through a final mix as a real time bounce but then I just select it in the bounce dialog.

I haven't had a single issue with offline bounce for years. The only issues I ever had were some plugs way back that didn't support it properly but those days have long gone. I know they can't technically do it easily through the TDM buss (although they could make a double speed off line bounce by temporarily doubling the session's entire sample rate - DSP levels permitting and unless it's 192!) but for RTAS only tracks and non-TDM systems, it's a well overdue feature.
Old 12th September 2011
  #101
Gear Nut
 
makinghits's Avatar
 

Another reason why offline bouncing is a MUST: plugins like Slate VCC and 2c Aether. Since they're very cpu hungry in oversampling mode, they give you the option of high oversampling for offline bouncing ONLY, meaning you can mix with no oversampling and OFFLINE bounce with 8x oversampling.
Old 12th September 2011
  #102
Lives for gear
 

It's something that every software workstation should have as at least an option. People who don't want to use it can ignore it and print real time.

If you (like me) produce an entire R&B track with something like Kontakt 4 - say with 24 stereo tracks and 16 + instrument modules - committing those instrument tracks to audio as you decide to commit is a very simple task that doesn't require setting anything up or waiting very long. Just hit a key command.

In those cases PT makes you work as if you're actually recording live musicians in real time.

I like PT well enough. I hate real time bounce... as being the only option. It's easily the worst thing about PT.
Old 12th September 2011
  #103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
It's something that every software workstation should have as at least an option. People who don't want to use it can ignore it and print real time.

If you (like me) produce an entire R&B track with something like Kontakt 4 - say with 24 stereo tracks and 16 + instrument modules - committing those instrument tracks to audio as you decide to commit is a very simple task that doesn't require setting anything up or waiting very long. Just hit a key command.

In those cases PT makes you work as if you're actually recording live musicians in real time.

Like PT. Hate real time bounce... as being the only option. Easily the worst thing about PT.
Are we talking about faster-than-realtime bounce or track freezing? Seems to me to be two different features. The latter I would love, the former I wouldn't use.
Old 12th September 2011
  #104
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by whitecat View Post
Are we talking about faster-than-realtime bounce or track freezing? Seems to me to be two different features. The latter I would love, the former I wouldn't use.
Both. So you're saying that you'd rather take the time to setup and name and route to 16 new tracks and then print drum stems from BFD in real time rather than just render them all at once with one command? Or wait 5 minutes for one track to record / commit (stereo piano?) when you could have it as an audio file in 10-15 seconds?

Seems like a waste of time to me (mmv) but (the only real point) every other workstation allows both options and I don't personally know anyone with both options - offline and real time - who regularly prints their full software instrument stems in real time unless there is a bug in the instrument plug that fails with offline render... or there is a hardware effect inserted that makes it necessary.

Again... what you get back is a full resolution 32-bit float file and you'll have hours, if not days, to hear it (the track) play over and over again to make sure it's ok while you continue to work on the production. Here, it's always ok.

Look guys, if people choose to record those kinds of things in real time that's fine. The fact of the matter is PT doesn't even do that as well as other native DAW's. In (for example) Cubendo and similar it's a real time (if you want real time) stem print. You don't have to do anything. No tracks to create (it does it for you on auto-import), no tracks to name (it names the stems after the tracks), no routing to do, nothing else to do but hit a couple of buttons and wait for the song to play through one time.

So even real time printing is a relative hassle in PT.
Old 12th September 2011
  #105
Lives for gear
 
dubrichie's Avatar
if PT goes 64-Bit, what will it mean for existing HD systems?

in particular, older PCI HD systems, not PCI-Express ones.

i wonder, because i'm running one!
Old 12th September 2011
  #106
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Don't know if you are using a really old version of Nuendo....but I can tell you I've recorded over 300 radio shows this year alone. Over 50 documentaries and I don't have one glitch ever!!!!!!
Ah, radio. Well that explains it. We never had problems with radio projects simply because they are quite simplistic compared to the other work we do. I'm glad it works for you - that's great. I know other radio/VO houses using Nuendo with no problems. I don't know of any post facilities in the US using it though.

Film, TV/DVD shows, and even advertising/promos put much more diverse stress on the system, so it's a different ball game, even at lower cpu usage - i.e. 20-40%.

The difference is running down a handful of audio tracks with minimal EQ/comp and probably not a ton of automation vs. a larger project sync'd to video with more tracks, more automation, more edits, more extensive and diverse plugins, routing/bussing, and perhaps VIs for sound design, etc. Imho, the problem with offline bouncing lies in the complexity, not cpu load, and that's what my experience showed me too consistently to risk a business on.

Even with just a few VI's, audio tracks, plugins and low cpu usage, I've seen glitch issues in Nuendo 3 and 4. I received a timed demo of N5 from a rep, but it had serious video issues we simply couldn't take time to work around on every project, so ProTools got the call and has been faithful ever since. So, yes, I've used the latest.

Nothing wrong with your experience, but you are actually the one spreading misinformation by claiming "PERFECT" renders everytime. Maybe you've never heard, or had a problem reported back to you, but that doesn't mean the apps are perfect. No doubt there will be enough young/new engineers reading threads like this that will walk away and assume any native DAW with offline rendering will save them time, and hence get them more work, and never fail them...until it does and a major client takes their business elsewhere.

And, yes, I do this everyday for a living, and have for many years.

Btw, this is a ProTools/Avid thread - probably not the right place to proclaim the virtues of Nuendo.

Ram caching looks very interesting to me. Are there other videos of the IBC presentation? I thought someone mentioned there was, but haven't found any.
Old 12th September 2011
  #107
Lives for gear
 
KFMG's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
Ram caching looks very interesting to me. Are there other videos of the IBC presentation? I thought someone mentioned there was, but haven't found any.
I've personally viewed at least one other video on Avid's YouTube page. There appeared to be a few others there as well.
Old 12th September 2011
  #108
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.
The point being made is that you SHOULD be reviewing your offline bounces..in which case it doesn't save you any time.

I agree it should be an option, but not for the reason some seem to be suggesting. For roughs, or bouncing submixes, maybe. I'd also never do an offline final mix!

Quote:
Originally Posted by an.unna.kid View Post
VST and VSTi support?

and yeah, offline bouncing... cmon avid, get in modern times
VST/VSTi? Please God no. Lots of unstable half-supported random plugins? RTAS (and TDM of course) are the PT formats, and since the vast majority of plugins are now available in those formats, why would you want to incorporate another format? make RTAS more efficient, yes.

VST/VSTi is a tech support nightmare.
Old 12th September 2011
  #109
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sardi View Post
Translation:

Avid has made a somewhat unusual move, will demonstrate the next version of Pro Tools at IBC 2011. Although not yet know which features outlined will be included in the official version, but the picture looks very interesting. This version has presented a special function to load the session in RAM, allowing better performance when dealing with files that are on the timeline. This is achieved in a new version of Pro Tools 64-Bit. The video mentioned other important developments, including the ability to open multiple AudioSuite plugins at the same time, plus you can save those who have open at the time. At issue are also improvements, such as a dedicated gain control for each clip, and new crossfades and fades in real time (no longer need be rendered). It is unclear when it could get this new version of Pro Tools, but it's clear that Avid is working hard on it. What you see in the video is only a development version, is therefore subject to any changes.

Sounding good.
I think you may have missed one of your callings, I doubt AVID could have come up with anything better than that... :-)

The disclaimer at the start was hilarious , i.e - psssst.., we are going to show you some ( possible/probable) new stuff but don't hold us to it... LOL
Old 12th September 2011
  #110
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
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.
Reapers routing is largely the same as PT. The only difference being any object can be any kind of track..... no real bonus in that for me as they're all groups or channels!! I don't write
Old 12th September 2011
  #111
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Reapers routing is largely the same as PT. The only difference being any object can be any kind of track..... no real bonus in that.
Could be. Not to go too far afield but if PT can route like Reaper then that's great. I've not personally seen any conventional DAW (maybe I missed it in PT, granted) that can (for one example) route a mult from the middle of a FX chain.

Like with chain EQ, Comp, EQ but send a mult directly from the Comp's output to another track. Reaper's internal track channels (64 channels per track internally) make some things like that possible that I haven't personally seen before. If PT can pull that kinda thing off, very cool, and I was wrong.

Whether most people actually need that kind of flexibility, dunno. Another discussion. But it seems to be configured to make anything possible routing wise.

It's a PT thread so ... kinda off topic. I just kinda disagreed with "best routing" as a practical matter. PT's routing is much more like Cubase (well the other way around actually) when you use it's (Cubase's) dummy busses as transports back to other audio track inputs like PT's busses.
Old 12th September 2011
  #112
Gear Nut
 
makinghits's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
VST/VSTi? Please God no. Lots of unstable half-supported random plugins?
What an ignorant and judgmental statement
Old 13th September 2011
  #113
Gear Addict
 
eskay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
Ah, radio. Well that explains it. We never had problems with radio projects simply because they are quite simplistic compared to the other work we do. I'm glad it works for you - that's great. I know other radio/VO houses using Nuendo with no problems. I don't know of any post facilities in the US using it though.

Film, TV/DVD shows, and even advertising/promos put much more diverse stress on the system, so it's a different ball game, even at lower cpu usage - i.e. 20-40%.

The difference is running down a handful of audio tracks with minimal EQ/comp and probably not a ton of automation vs. a larger project sync'd to video with more tracks, more automation, more edits, more extensive and diverse plugins, routing/bussing, and perhaps VIs for sound design, etc. Imho, the problem with offline bouncing lies in the complexity, not cpu load, and that's what my experience showed me too consistently to risk a business on.

Even with just a few VI's, audio tracks, plugins and low cpu usage, I've seen glitch issues in Nuendo 3 and 4. I received a timed demo of N5 from a rep, but it had serious video issues we simply couldn't take time to work around on every project, so ProTools got the call and has been faithful ever since. So, yes, I've used the latest.

Nothing wrong with your experience, but you are actually the one spreading misinformation by claiming "PERFECT" renders everytime. Maybe you've never heard, or had a problem reported back to you, but that doesn't mean the apps are perfect. No doubt there will be enough young/new engineers reading threads like this that will walk away and assume any native DAW with offline rendering will save them time, and hence get them more work, and never fail them...until it does and a major client takes their business elsewhere.

And, yes, I do this everyday for a living, and have for many years.

Btw, this is a ProTools/Avid thread - probably not the right place to proclaim the virtues of Nuendo.

Ram caching looks very interesting to me. Are there other videos of the IBC presentation? I thought someone mentioned there was, but haven't found any.

Sorry my man, but maybe in your part of the world radio and tv documentaries are 4 tracks with minimal eq and compression. I often have 20-40 tracks because we record live music for the radio show and many times for the local church where a band comes to play. We also do children's books and stories which have music narration sound effects and we easily reach 50 tracks. So YOU are the one who is spreading miss information about NATIVE systems. Oh, did I tell you that I also have a PowerCore 6000
as well and an old Motu 896 firewire card. All running on a 5 year old PC with Windows XP. Rock solid everyday, with offline bouncing.
So again I would love to see this in Pro-Tools, once they get Delay Compensation correct and offline bounces I will be there. Now if you backed up a little bit you would have read that I also use PRO-TOOLS and that is why I am in this thread. I would love to use Pro-Tools at work but its is not possible in it's current state.

Now I got some offline bouncing to do......
Old 13th September 2011
  #114
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Sorry my man, but maybe in your part of the world radio and tv documentaries are 4 tracks with minimal eq and compression. I often have 20-40 tracks because we record live music for the radio show and many times fr the local church where a band comes to play. We also do children's books and stories which have music narration sound effects and we easily reach 50 tracks. So YOU are the one who is spreading miss information about NATIVE systems. Oh, did I tell you that I also have a PowerCore 6000
as well and an old Motu 896 firewire card. All running on a 5 year old PC with Windows XP. Rock solid everyday, with offline bouncing.
So again I would love to see this in Pro-Tools, once they get Delay Compensation correct and offline bounces I will be there. Now if you backed up a little bit you would have read that I also use PRO-TOOLS and that is why I am in this thread. I would love to use Pro-Tools at work but its is not possible in it's current state.

Now I got some offline bouncing to do......
Umm....my definition of "small"/low risk for glitching *is* up to 50 tracks with almost all audio (i.e. no/few VIs and midi, bussing, etc) - that works fine typically. Bump it up a bit and complicate the mix a bit more and you might run into this, regardless of buffer level/cpu loading.

The guys I know producing radio shows like you describe are all on ProTools and turn around mixes very quickly. And if there's a revision/change/error to correct, that's what destructive punch is for.

Like others have said here, real-time is about quality control, not saving time so a client will applaud you for being faster and cheaper than the PT studio down the street.

The only misinformation here is you claiming it works PERFECTLY (your word), every time, and implying that will be the case for everyone. I simply said that is not the case, from experience (on multiple systems, all expertly custom built, tweaked and optimized, running usually RME interfaces which are remarkably stable).

I really don't care what you prefer - work however you see fit - it's your risk to take. Every feature works "perfectly" ....until it doesn't.

Just try to be a bit more objective and realistic about the industry beyond your local market and refrain from posting absolutes.
Old 13th September 2011
  #115
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
The only misinformation here is you claiming it works PERFECTLY (your word), every time, and implying that will be the case for everyone.
There's a first for everyone, right? I had perfect bounces for quite a long time. And then one day that changed when there was a serious glitch, and I've discovered quite a few errors since then. It's a personal choice whether or not we look for these problems, but there's really nothing noble (certainly nothing wise) about ignoring the potential for errors. Given enough time it WILL happen. Are you the type who wants to catch it, or will you let it fly past in order to save time?
Old 13th September 2011
  #116
Lives for gear
 
barryjohns's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post
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.
I agree with this!
Old 13th September 2011
  #117
Lives for gear
 
sardi's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I think you may have missed one of your callings, I doubt AVID could have come up with anything better than that... :-)

The disclaimer at the start was hilarious , i.e - psssst.., we are going to show you some ( possible/probable) new stuff but don't hold us to it... LOL
Google translate.... heh

Yeah the disclaimer was funny. Especially the posh English accent used for it. The Queen's English means it's serious business innit.
Old 13th September 2011
  #118
Gear Addict
 
eskay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdm View Post
Umm....my definition of "small"/low risk for glitching *is* up to 50 tracks with almost all audio (i.e. no/few VIs and midi, bussing, etc) - that works fine typically. Bump it up a bit and complicate the mix a bit more and you might run into this, regardless of buffer level/cpu loading.

The guys I know producing radio shows like you describe are all on ProTools and turn around mixes very quickly. And if there's a revision/change/error to correct, that's what destructive punch is for.

Like others have said here, real-time is about quality control, not saving time so a client will applaud you for being faster and cheaper than the PT studio down the street.

The only misinformation here is you claiming it works PERFECTLY (your word), every time, and implying that will be the case for everyone. I simply said that is not the case, from experience (on multiple systems, all expertly custom built, tweaked and optimized, running usually RME interfaces which are remarkably stable).

I really don't care what you prefer - work however you see fit - it's your risk to take. Every feature works "perfectly" ....until it doesn't.

Just try to be a bit more objective and realistic about the industry beyond your local market and refrain from posting absolutes.

Again you are the one who is making assumptions...you just don't get it. Offline bounce is not important because it saves time for the client, it's because it saves us time to be MORE CREATIVE!!!!! So when we are MORE CREATIVE every minute that passes by the client is very very happy. This way we actually have more QUALITY time because we commit and BOUNCE on the spot. Then we spent time on looking forward and thinking of new ideas...instead of sitting there and waiting for a realtime bounce. So yeah for what I do IT IS FLAWLESS!!!!! You just don't want to believe the an offline bounce is PERFECT....Because then how can you justify that your 12,000.00$ TDM system is not capable of that....I really do doubt that you have worked with Native systems in their entirety. Bottom line is that it is not about Native versus TDM it is about having all the tools available to us as engineers. And for ME having an offline bounce is a very important tool to my arsenal and for my clients.
Old 13th September 2011
  #119
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskay View Post
Again you are the one who is making assumptions...you just don't get it. Offline bounce is not important because it saves time for the client, it's because it saves us time to be MORE CREATIVE!!!!!


You obviously aren't reading my posts, and don't understand what anyone else in this thread is referring to in terms of quality control and listening to final mixes. That's all I, and others here have been referring to. We covered the offline fx/submix scenario already if you read back a bit more carefully.
Old 13th September 2011
  #120
I have used Sonar for several years and just ordered my first PT this week (PT9). I work with alot of midi with full orchestral mock ups so I was never insterested in PT due to its 32 bit limitation. My question with PT 10 and loading the project into RAM, this seems like people like me will need to have even more RAM, as our samples already use lots of RAM.

As far as offline bouncing, with lots of samples many times I have to freeze and bounce tracks to lesson CPU load and I have never had a glitch with the fast bounce process, (using Sonar).

Having never used PT's -yet- I am a little surprised people are excited about clip based gain envelopes, I figured all DAW's had this. This is not meant in anyway to be a DAW vs DAW post, my only experience is with Sonar so I am a little surprised that PT did not have some of the basic features I have been using for years in Sonar. It makes me wonder what all the hype is about PT.

I look foward to diving in and working on a mix with PT, but honestly, with the lack of features that I took for granted in other DAW's I fear I may be disappointed. (PT 9 is the first version with ADC??)
-Mike
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