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
Why do you NOT use/need Pro Tools HD? Digital Converters
View Poll Results: Why do you NOT use/need Pro Tools HD?
I don't need PTHD for stability.
57 Votes - 38.51%
My preferred DAW is easy enough to use for me.
78 Votes - 52.70%
With direct monitoring I'll get with lower latencies than I would with TDM.
36 Votes - 24.32%
I use buffer sizes which allow effect inserts during record. Latency = no problem.
30 Votes - 20.27%
I don't need TDM plug-ins / I need plugs in other formats.
48 Votes - 32.43%
PTHD/TDM plug-ins are too expensive. I'll rather buy some other gear instead.
72 Votes - 48.65%
A system not needing a large computer or expansion chassis is more portable.
30 Votes - 20.27%
Compatibility with others using my preferred DAW.
20 Votes - 13.51%
I don't need PT HD for sound quality.
86 Votes - 58.11%
My DAW may or may not have a steeper learning curve, but it's 'deeper' than PT HD.
50 Votes - 33.78%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 148. You may not vote on this poll

Old 19th August 2007
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Jazzpunk's Avatar
 

I do not need Pro Tools...on my days off.
Old 19th August 2007
  #32
Lives for gear
 
crypticglobe's Avatar
To the post above... Nuendo can/will do MORE 96 channels of i/o at 192K. With direct monitoring features... it can do it with lower latency than Pro Tools as well. As long as you have the hardware... nuendo can do it. I don't know if HD can do that... but I know Nuendo can.

I personally use Nuendo and Cubase because on the fast Quad Core computers I have, it will do everything that Pro Tools HD will do for me. I like the user interface MUCH better. Editing is much more elegant. And... I can export/import OMF, or just use stems to go back and forth between Pro Tools users.

So.... there is really no reason for me to use Pro Tools. Just sold my HD-1 rig I had for compatiblity with others actually.... just didn't need it.



JMTC...
Old 24th August 2007
  #33
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crypticglobe View Post
I don't know if HD can do that... but I know Nuendo can
I don't know much about Nuendo, but I know that PTHD always is in software monitoring mode, and also that the latency is higher in this mode than in my native rig. Lots of people don't know this, which probably is the main reason why only 28% chose the With direct monitoring I'll get with lower latencies than I would with TDM-option.
Old 24th August 2007
  #34
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 

direct monitoring tho.
Old 24th August 2007
  #35
Lives for gear
 

Cost, Cost, and Cost (DOH . . why wasn't that a survey choice?). Compatibility is a non issue with file transfers to other DAW competitors if you need to use Pro Tool tracks. Soundwise OTB is best by the vast amount of posts on this board stating so but I've also seen enough posts here that state Pro Tools does not win the sonic war among DAW's. It's just an expensive tool and if you feel you need it for your operation then have it. I don't hate Pro Tooler's, I just don't need to spend that kind of money for that tool when there are much better tools/options that make better economic sense.
Old 25th August 2007
  #36
Lives for gear
 
slaves666's Avatar
I must agree, cost is the reason I'm on Nuendo.....but If I had 20k lying around, I'd have an HD system and a Control 24. That is the only thing we are missing, is a killer surface.
Old 25th August 2007
  #37
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaves666 View Post
I must agree, cost is the reason I'm on Nuendo.....but If I had 20k lying around, I'd have an HD system and a Control 24. That is the only thing we are missing, is a killer surface.

Dont know about that....Nuendo with high end converters and an analog console is a beutiful thing!



Ron Florentine
Soundswest Studio
Old 25th August 2007
  #38
Quote:
Originally Posted by dillweed View Post
I love Nuendo. Pro-tools looks and feels so stone age comparitively.
can't wait till Nuendo 4.

This man knows the truth! Nuendo all the way. Good converters and you're set. I get exceptional quality with Lynx Aurora A/D. Every time i track drums, i am reminded how sweet it is to have 1.2ms latency, direct monitoring drums "Live" after getting a good mix already ITB.

-Way better creative environment
-More intuitive routing (far more, infact)
-The Part Editor/Lane Mode (Can't even picture comp'ing drum takes or even vocals in PT anymore)
-Perfect VST Integration
-Hardware Compatibility
-Faster processing
-The List Goes On.....
Old 26th August 2007
  #39
Lives for gear
 
cjogo's Avatar
Mainly because my clientele/ market does not require the editing offered by PT... Our DAW setup works fine for the product our artist request.... And our proprietary DAW is not really compatibale. > nor my brain's capacity < to tackle another system. Needed a stable "all-in-one " system~~ automated board --no latency --easy to operate out of the box. Just keeping the customers happyheh
Old 26th August 2007
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 

I finally got the budget and decided to go HD2 Accel after many years using PT24/MIX/Mix Plus/MIX4.
Sound is better, clients love it. Pretty stabçe.

I am not saying Nuendo would not do it for me.
Old 26th August 2007
  #41
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
For me it's a really personal issue: The thought of working on a computer all day to make records makes my skin crawl. I'm sue it's not the smartest way to be and not the most modern view of the world, but thats how it is. I still drive a stick shif car, I prefer a camera with film and a real zoom, and don't use a DAW...
Old 3rd September 2007
  #42
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

It's interesting to see how this poll turned out, especially when comparing it with the results in it's 'sister poll'..

A few comments based on the current results:

Stability
57% mentioned stability as a reason to use PTHD in that other survey, while 'only' 43% said that they don't need PTHD for stability. I guess that reason some people find a native system stable while others don't is the size of their sessions combined with computer speed (and choice of buffer size, of course).

Ease of use
52% answered that their non-PTHD rig was easy enough to use, while 48% mentioned simplicity as a reason to use PTHD. Close race.


Latency
Only 17% said that latency was no problem due to using low buffer sizes combined with using inserts during record, while 55% of the PTHD users mentioned low latency as a reason to use PTHD. This probably shows that most people (100% minus 17% = 83%) aren't happy with the latency they achieve when using inserts during record - in other words, when software monitoring is enabled.

Also, only 23% answered that 'With direct monitoring I'll get with lower latencies than I would with TDM'. Does this confirm that the remaining 77% actually aren't aware that native systems have lower latencies than PTHD rigs (for people who don't need to use inserts on recording tracks)?

Plug-ins
29% of the non-PTHD users mentioned that they don't need plug-ins that only exist in the TDM-format (or needed plug-ins in other formats), while 21% of the PTHD users mentioned that they need plugins only available in the TDM-format. Availability of certain plug-ins in one format or the other doesn't seem like a very common reason to use PTHD, and since more and more plugins are ported to other formats, I guess this will be a less important reason to use a specific format in the future.

Compatibility
Only 15% said that they used their non-PTHD rig for compatibility reasons, while 54% of the PTHD users mentioned compatibility as a reason to use Pro Tools. Compatibility is an important reason to use PTHD, which is kind of interesting, because when I started to use Pro Tools, compatibility with other studios was often mentioned as one of the main reasons not to use Pro Tools (another one was that PT was very buggy in the early days).

Sound quality
The option that got most response among non-PTHD users was 'I don't need PT HD for sound quality' (59%). PTHD's sound ('Digidesign's converters (or compatible), 48-bit mix engine') was the only option that got only 6% of the votes from the PT-users, so neither of the groups obviously think that non-PTHD systems sound less good than Digidesign's HD setup.

There are obviously still some myths that are floating around: 30% answered that they use PTHD because they needed a lot of tracks or I/O's - even if a native Logic setup allows for more tracks and I/Os that a PTHD rig. However, the only outcome of the poll that kind of surprised me was that 'only' 32% of the PTHD users answered that PTHD's better monitoring during solution record than native solutions (no need to use 3rd part mixers) was one of their reasons to use PTHD. 32% isn't really a low number, it's almost one out of three users, but I guess the reason the number wasn't even higher is that most PTHD users probably don't know how different the monitoring situation is in a native system (if software monitoring is disabled, which is the essential for a lot of people who want as low latency as possible).

Being an ex-PTHD user myself, I think the monitoring situation is the area where PTHD really outperforms native solutions (at least Logic) - not because of hardware limitations, but due to how the control over the monitoring situation during record it is implemented.
Old 3rd September 2007
  #43
Deleted 86c3d96
Guest
Oy Vey!

These anti Pro Tools threads are nearly as tedious as the anti Playstation 3 threads on Digg.com, except most of you are purported adults.

Old 3rd September 2007
  #44
Gear Addict
 

I do not use PTHD because at present it is to much $$$ to spend on a computer based system. I currently use PTLE and Samplitude9. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. I track,comp, and manage files with PTLE and Mix with samplitude 9. I use a PC with 2 gigs of ram and 2.4 GHZ core 2 duo.

I used to be more of a digi hater, but not so much anymore-It's a waste of energy and noone at digi is listening. I am finally about to drop a lot of money on gear- all of it will be on analog stuff. So I'm not about to upgrade any time soon.

Why do I use Protools? Simple, we live in a PT world, I need to use that currency to be on the same playinging field as others. Why do I not use PT in some cases? Samplitude sounds much more natural, and is easier to mix in.

I guess you could say PTLE is my tape machine, and Samplitude is my console.

So why PTLE instead of HD? At present I have no need for more than 18 ch of i/o, mind you 18 @ 96KHz would be nice. If I was constantly turning down paying work because I could n't meet the tech requirements of tracking a gig I would consider HD before I would consider adding I/O on the Samplitude side of things. It's sad, but a lot of the non-gearslut world does not know the difference between Samplitude 9, garageband, cubase etc. But when you say "pro tools' they say 'OK'. So long as these people sign our checks that's all that matters.

I use Samplitude 9 when I know the project is completely in my hands from start to finish.

Cheers
Old 3rd September 2007
  #45
Lives for gear
Prices will come right down after Christmas.

Shortly after that, all manner of 'ProTools Killers' will be launched (ye, right!)

BUT

IMO the killer app will be from one of the VERY big boys (i.e. many times bigger than Avid) and will feature easy-to-use HDTV editing, 5.1 amd 7.1 encoding and decoding and DVD authoring (on top of all the usual multitracking audio tools and plugins).

There are only two or three manufacturers who can do that. Apple, Sony & Adobe.
Old 3rd September 2007
  #46
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry_seldon View Post
These anti Pro Tools threads are nearly as tedious as the anti Playstation 3 threads on Digg.com, except most of you are purported adults.

...and except that this isn't an anti-Pro Tools thread.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Byre View Post
IMO the killer app will be from one of the VERY big boys (i.e. many times bigger than Avid)

I don't think Apple wants to kill Apple - however, looking at this chart, it looks like Avid is struggling a bit already.

Yahoo! Finance Charts
Old 3rd September 2007
  #47
Gear Nut
 

Hmmmm ... another pro/con protools thread. Don't know why I feel compelled to comment but ...

I use both Nuendo and protools and/or whatever else happens to be in the studio I am working at. I own both Steinberg and Digi products in my own post studio and even though these comments will seem redundant, (perhaps even naive) but my experience has been:

Musicians, hobbyist, and a lot of professionals seem to prefer Digi because it's simple and it works. And it IS the industry standard. Probably because: if for no other reason, it has proliferated the market to such an extreme extent that my 66 year old mother owns an m-box.

Engineers, editors, and tweakers prefer Steinberg because it's a little more customizable with greater 3rd party support, more extensive editing (drag-able crossfades come easily to mind), and various I/O choices.

If given the choice, I personally go to Nuendo every time because I like the interface, the plugs, and mostly the editing. For my work flow, it's a better platform. However, often by the time I get a project, it's already in PT and the client may want to be there as I mix .... Thankfully that doesn't happen too much. I don't track, I mix and thats it ... I don't like to be there with the musos.

If the opportunity arises, I will import the project and mix in Nuendo. I do a lot of mix and fix and Nuendo is better suited for that in my opinion.

But lets be honest here shall we? either platform is fine for what they do. Besides if your over 30, you already know that digital still sounds small and 2 dimensional regardless of how the app is marketed. We use it because it's convenient, cost effective and the unfortunate truth of our industry is: a large segment of working musicians can barely play these days. We work in an industry where perception is reality.

oops ... sorry got off topic.

yeah ... yay team Nuendo/ PT

panda
Old 4th September 2007
  #48
Lives for gear
 
Andrew Kinsey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
What 3rd party Plug-ins do those support?
Latency? Can you record and Live mix at the same time with all of those?
Can you record through all of those as you track?
Do they have the same abount of PDSP power of an accel?
Can I run a system with 7 cards?


Do you have to buy and use 3rd party interfaces?
Do you have to use 3rd part Drivers?
Lantency? Stablilty? Industry Standards?
Im not sure if you can run effects plug-ins on what is being recorded in live from Nuendo i have not been able to do this the way things are currently setup but even if i could i woudn't as i prefer to hear what im actually tracking. With Pyramix and Sequoia you can do this though. All of these programs have Plug-in delay compensation as standard.

The Digi Accel cards are very old now and DSP technology has moved on so i wouldn't accept that the Accel cards are more powerfull than anything else.

Also with regards to 3rd party interfaces, i think that choice is a good thing. People often complain about the Digi convterters especially the DA performance of the 96IO. Why go Digi when you can go better?

As far as industry standard.. if it wasn't for that fact there would be no other advantage of going HD IMO. I dont see any other advantage of HD in terms of sound quality, value for money, and functionality.

Also the Midi Editing sucks in Pro-Tools which is a big factor for me.

Old 8th November 2010
  #49
Nuendo does it all...
Old 8th November 2010
  #50
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

You forgot "Because I don't do this for a living".

-R
Old 8th November 2010
  #51
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman View Post
You forgot "Because I don't do this for a living".

-R

hehhehhehheh
Old 8th November 2010
  #52
Lives for gear
 
sound_music's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman View Post
You forgot "Because I don't do this for a living".

-R
lol!
Old 8th November 2010
  #53
Lives for gear
 
JSt0rm's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman View Post
You forgot "Because I don't do this for a living".

-R
buhahaahahah heh
Old 8th November 2010
  #54
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
It's not an attempt of staring another DAW war!
said the person whose very username is an attempt to start a DAW war



this is what politicians refer to as a "Push Poll":

they aren't really "seeking information" -

"Why are you going to vote against Abercrombie For Senate?"

___1. Abercrombie's two mistresses and love child show he is a hypocrite on "family values"

___2. Abercrombie's aide Del Svensen is under investigation for bribery.

___3. Abercrombie has voted to raise taxes SIX TIMES

___4. Abercrombie voted to cut heat subsidies leaving old people to freeze to death.

___5. Abercrombie's inappropriate emails show he is a racist and a pervert.
Old 9th November 2010
  #55
Lives for gear
 

How about because you don't have many legit clients, can turn away work and can avoid paying for the most commonly used recording progam ever made?

Its not about sound or function- its about universal acceptance... Unless you are at home or self contained.
Old 9th November 2010
  #56
Lives for gear
 
DarkSky Media's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
said the person whose very username is an attempt to start a DAW war



this is what politicians refer to as a "Push Poll":

they aren't really "seeking information" -

"Why are you going to vote against Abercrombie For Senate?"

___1. Abercrombie's two mistresses and love child show he is a hypocrite on "family values"

___2. Abercrombie's aide Del Svensen is under investigation for bribery.

___3. Abercrombie has voted to raise taxes SIX TIMES

___4. Abercrombie voted to cut heat subsidies leaving old people to freeze to death.

___5. Abercrombie's inappropriate emails show he is a racist and a pervert.
Nice.

But actually, if you look for it, most polls are push polls. It's just that some are better disguised than others. heh
Old 9th November 2010
  #57
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Hi, these two polls "Why do you need / not need PTHD?" were started in 2007 as a result of various discussions in a few threads with all kinds of arguments pro/against using PT (usually, vs. using Logic). Many valid and invalid arguments were posted pro/con both Logic and PT in these threads, so the idea was to get an overview of what *most* people's reasons to use their DAW was.

And as a long time user and owner of many PT/TDM rigs, I'm not even against using PT - I just wondered if those who (back then) argued against PT and Logic actually were sitting on the info they needed about these DAWs, because a large number of uneducated guess and false assumptions were posted (from both sides) along with firm statements a la "PTHD will never go native", "TDM plugins have lower latency than native plugins" and other stuff we now know is wrong. And much more... Anyway - the word 'native' in "nativeaudio" doesn't have any thing to do with 'DAW wars'; it's more about native vs. non-native. I'll again admit that it's a silly name, since all these systems run software that's native to their own chips. And, for the records, I don't think anyone with an IQ above circa 60 would suggest there's something wrong with using dedicated DSP chips in any setting.

WIth the launch of PTHD Native the 'somewhat silly 'native' vs. 'DSP based' discussions seem to over anyway, because there seem to be nobody left suggesting that the native power of a fast, current computer can't be used for professional audio. I don't think anyone ever has been against 'non-native' signal processing, but some of us have claimed that we don't need extra DSP chips. I have been relying on PTHD for my income for many years. I am not against using PTHD or DSP chips. I don't think anyone are. That's all - nothing dramatic at all.

Maybe I should get a new nick name? :-)
Old 9th November 2010
  #58
Lives for gear
 
synthoid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
Maybe I should get a new nick name? :-)
yeah, in another six months or so no one's gonna understand what your gearslutz id refers to. when you explain it they will say that you're getting old.

-synthoid
Old 9th November 2010
  #59
Gear Head
 

One Question

Why is it that Pro Tools HD systems are used on most all-professional works including music recording and postproduction, TV, movies etc. Even at the high price of the hardware. I guess if you’ve used other systems including the HD system you would understand why
Old 9th November 2010
  #60
Lives for gear
 
uncle duncan's Avatar
 

The moral issue: I don't feel good about supporting a company that is intentionally making it more difficult for audio professionals to collaborate. Why is it that PT has been charging $500 for OMF compatibility when all other DAW's include OMF compatibility as a standard feature?

The financial issue: Although I make my living with my studio and music gigs (50/50) I service the low end of the market, where bang-for-buck is more important than name brand recognition. My money is better spent on mics and pres than on an over-priced recording system.

The workflow issue: I use midi extensively. Nuff said.
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
the tortoise / Product Alerts older than 2 months
4

Forum Jump
Forum Jump