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
Pro Tools | Ultimate
Old 13th April 2018
  #91
kdm
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by sardi View Post
Well, you’ve quoted me out of context.

I was talking about nothing has changed from a week ago when the software was called HD. There’s people ranting about pricing changes and what not and none of that is true.

Now, in regards to adding features etc. I’m right there with you. There’s lots of stuff I’d like added and have wanted for some time that they just don’t seem to be delivering. Even with that in mind, I still choose to use PT, not for compatibility, but because I prefer the software to other DAWs.

At the end of the day, it’s a choice. There’s no need to get all butt hurt about this stuff when there’s so many great options out there. We’ve never had it so good.
My apologizes for quoting you out of context. I was only quoting your comment to setup a contrast for what I said - you were right, so no intent to imply otherwise. I was really responding to the ProTools advocates here that don't seem to have a problem paying again and again for little to nothing new. Same business model, just new names here and there.

Personally, it doesn't bother me in the least - the pricing was already ridiculous for a DAW I can barely justify keeping installed anyway. I had already cancelled my sub to HD last year, but I'm not in a market that requires ProTools. Either way, Nuendo is my preference for a lot of reasons other than cost, after working in both side by side for quite a while.

Speaking of price, ironically, it is cheaper to just buy a copy of every other DAW than 2-3 years of HD, or I should now say, "Ultimate" (if you include Nuendo *and* Cubase).
Old 13th April 2018
  #92
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Mixwell View Post
Yes. Here is the deal. Has been this way for many months now. Actually, since they decided to go "al a cart" with the HD products.

This is not Annual. If you buy any HD core card, HD-Native PCie [no longer available] HDX, [hardly available] or HD TB box, -- or that + HD Software -- sans Avid HD Interface, you need to purchase the $299 Digilink I/O License to connect any 3rd party or even "purchased later" Avid box.

Yes, you read that correctly. With Core Audio Devices, you do not need to pay any fee.
Thanks!

So ProTools "vanilla" (or regular, or whatever we're calling it these days) users don't need to pay that DigiLink fee to use 3rd party interfaces?
Old 13th April 2018
  #93
Lives for gear
 
Squawk's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Secondly, you won't find a DAW with the same feature set as Pro Tools HD for "10-20 times less" in price. Nuendo is about the closest... and it still costs $1900! I take it you also think Steinberg has lost the plot?
Except last time I checked, Steinberg wasn't charging me 1k (or $500) year to maintain my Nuendo license and updates.

And I point this out as a PTHD, Nuendo, and Cubase Pro license holder.
Old 13th April 2018
  #94
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post
Thanks!

So ProTools "vanilla" (or regular, or whatever we're calling it these days) users don't need to pay that DigiLink fee to use 3rd party interfaces?
Correct, because there is No HD porting..No need for Avid to rip a hole in your wallet. You gotta use the devices drivers with your HD Software. Its funny how they will now support a 3rd party reverse engineered HD port for $299
Old 13th April 2018
  #95
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Mixwell View Post
Its funny how they will now support a 3rd party reverse engineered HD port for $299
Yeah. Funny in a not-so-funny kinda way.
Old 13th April 2018
  #96
Lives for gear
 
deuc647's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Mixwell View Post
Correct, because there is No HD porting..No need for Avid to rip a hole in your wallet. You gotta use the devices drivers with your HD Software. Its funny how they will now support a 3rd party reverse engineered HD port for $299
If im not mistaken some folks were grandfathered into the no digilink license think correct? Like if you were on 12.5 and before?
Old 13th April 2018
  #97
Quote:
Originally Posted by deuc647 View Post
If im not mistaken some folks were grandfathered into the no digilink license think correct? Like if you were on 12.5 and before?
If you already had a registered HD system and active support, in 2016 they gave you it. But when they split up the SKU's, they announced the $299 fee.
Old 13th April 2018
  #98
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post
Yeah. Funny in a not-so-funny kinda way.
Think about the subscription move. All this math adds up to the missing revenue they once had. And the fact they were sick of all you guys not buying their hardware.
Old 13th April 2018
  #99
Pro Tools Ho-Down

Pro Tools Ultimate | Cluster_****
Old 13th April 2018
  #100
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
The replaced "HD" with the word "Ultimate".
That is 100% all that has changed , its a re-branding only, but it is entertaining reading the ongoing incessant cyclic debates.
Old 16th April 2018
  #101
Here for the gear
 

Wow, so you admit you have been getting screwed for the past 2 to 4 years! The bottom line is simply this... A great Mix, A great Master, Is exactly what it is, (A great Product) Whether it is done with poortools or Reaper. The person that buys your music will not be buying it because you used Poortools. Get a grip and move on to a daw that is reasonable and will with all due respect provide you with the same if not better product than, Yes, That's Right! POORTOOLS!
Old 16th April 2018
  #102
Lives for gear
 
projektk's Avatar
 

It is absurd that Pro Tools standard addition doesn't include entry level post features like 5.1 surround sound.
Old 17th April 2018
  #103
Here for the gear
 

Awesome work Avid on the new Ultimate splash screen. Forget about new features - folder tracks anyone, squashing bugs, the brand newsplash screen it is! But it's worth it, no doubt
Old 17th April 2018
  #104
Lives for gear
 
deuc647's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumcas View Post
Awesome work Avid on the new Ultimate splash screen. Forget about new features - folder tracks anyone, squashing bugs, the brand newsplash screen it is! But it's worth it, no doubt
I would love folder tracks.
Old 17th April 2018
  #105
Lives for gear
 
sardi's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lumcas View Post
Awesome work Avid on the new Ultimate splash screen. Forget about new features - folder tracks anyone, squashing bugs, the brand newsplash screen it is! But it's worth it, no doubt
There was also a fair few bug fixes.

Last edited by sardi; 17th April 2018 at 08:15 AM..
Old 17th April 2018
  #106
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
In fairness, PT has been making some sound progress on bugs recently.

Regarding Reaper, I've tested it and even though it's clearly a very powerful DAW I find it a bit difficult to wrap my head around.

The main thing I was surprised about to the point of "no, this can't REALLY be how it works in Reaper, can it?" Is side chaining. It was very confusing to me. But it worked. That pretty much speels out Reaper for me.
I'm sure I could get used to it, but the PT mixer and routing has a sort of modular elegance to me that is both simple, streamlined and yet incredibly flexible and powerful.
I have not come across a DAW that can match that, for my workflow.

The way Cubase and Studio One handle sidechains, for instance, (which I've dubbed MyFirstSideChain) is time consuming to the point of unusable to me (although probably convenient to most users).

The inability to separate busses from channels in Cubendo and S1 is another reason why these DAWs are damn near unusable to me. This dumbed down MyFirstRouting business of those DAWs will drive me nuts.

Reaper is more flexible in that regard, no doubt, but I find it a little confusing to wrap my head around.
I will continue to toy around with it though.

For now, PT is still king for me.
If only it would regain stability for me on Mac and fix some annoying major and minor bugs, I'd be fine with the current feature set.

Wishlist:
Folder Tracks
Multi Channel Side Chains

I guess we'll have both before 2019, hopefully said bugs will be fixed by then too.

Find the DAW that works best for YOUR workflow.
That's still PT for me, although I've been "browsing" for sure...
Old 17th April 2018
  #107
Lives for gear
 
allstar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Reaper is more flexible in that regard, no doubt, but I find it a little confusing to wrap my head around.
I will continue to toy around with it though.
Ok, I realise I may have become the stereotyped Reaper evangelist here, but. . .

Sidechaining to TDR Kotelnikov compressor in Reaper ( my got comp ) goes something like this :

• Select external side chain on the plug-in

• Drag and drop a send from any other channel onto the plug-in.

Very simple.

If, like me, you spent a lot of years on Protools, it's very easy to be resistant to new ways of doing things. I didn't look at another DAW for nearly 20 years.
I stuck at Reaper and when the penny finally dropped it was an epiphany, I'd encourage you to keep playing with Reaper.
Old 17th April 2018
  #108
Gear Maniac
 
Aux13's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by allstar View Post
If, like me, you spent a lot of years on Protools, it's very easy to be resistant to new ways of doing things.
Yes, this might be a problem.
Old 17th April 2018
  #109
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by allstar View Post
• Select external side chain on the plug-in

• Drag and drop a send from any other channel onto the plug-in.

Very simple.

If, like me, you spent a lot of years on Protools, it's very easy to be resistant to new ways of doing things. I didn't look at another DAW for nearly 20 years.
I stuck at Reaper and when the penny finally dropped it was an epiphany, I'd encourage you to keep playing with Reaper.
It's definitely not a matter of being resistant to new ways of doing things. (You'll find I'm an avid proponent of ITB and touch screens after being a OTB analogue console guy for years and years, for example).
It's not even only a matter of the time in takes to learn new skills, although that plays a part.
It's mainly an issue of:
what do I need to do?

how many steps does that take in PT?
is it even possible in the other DAW?
If so: how many steps does it take?

I didn't now about this drag and drop send functionality, that might help me along.
I'll definitely try it!
Does it work with multiple sends?

You see, in PT I have multiple sources sending to the same SC bus and multiple plugins keyed to that bus. It can be up to 20 paralel sources and 20 paralel SC plugins.
Setting that up in PT is relatively straight forward and changing plugins is relatively painless.
Even setting that up in any elegant fashion is damn near impossible in Cubendo/S1, let alone changing it if you want to try another plugin (because: *poof* those twenty side chain busses are gone, as soon as you change plugins).
I'll try your method and see if I can set it up well in Reaper (which I can then turn into a template, so the time to setup is not a huge issue).
It is the time it takes to change plugins when you're side chaining like that, that is the issue.
It is not ideal in PT, but it's doable.
I'll have to test it in reaper again with this added knowledge you kindly provided. Thanks!
Old 17th April 2018
  #110
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post

how many steps does that take in PT?
is it even possible in the other DAW?
If so: how many steps does it take?

...

You see, in PT I have multiple sources sending to the same SC bus and multiple plugins keyed to that bus. It can be up to 20 paralel sources and 20 paralel SC plugins.
Setting that up in PT is relatively straight forward and changing plugins is relatively painless.
Even setting that up in any elegant fashion is damn near impossible in Cubendo/S1, let alone changing it if you want to try another plugin (because: *poof* those twenty side chain busses are gone, as soon as you change plugins).
You can do the exact same thing in Cubendo as you would in PT: Route through a bus (A.K.A a group track in Cubendo). Then you just need to reconnect the bus output to the new plugin's side-chain). For normal operation, Cubendo is actually faster than PT as you do not need to create a bus first (and thus, in PT, go to the I/O options page to do this).

Personally, if I would need to replace a compressor that has multiple side-chain feeds in Cubendo, I would select all the source tracks and add a send from all of them to the new destination in one step using the SHIFT+ALT key modifier (Same as PT).


Alistair
Old 17th April 2018
  #111
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
You can do the exact same thing in Cubendo as you would in PT: Route through a bus (A.K.A a group track in Cubendo). Then you just need to reconnect the bus output to the new plugin's side-chain). For normal operation, Cubendo is actually faster than PT as you do not need to create a bus first (and thus, in PT, go to the I/O options page to do this).

Personally, if I would need to replace a compressor that has multiple side-chain feeds in Cubendo, I would select all the source tracks and add a send from all of them to the new destination in one step using the SHIFT+ALT key modifier (Same as PT).


Alistair
Thanks. I'll try that.
Though I very much doubt it'll be the exact same thing.
I agree that Cubendo can help you do "normal" things quicker, but I find that if you want to do more advanced things the way Cubendo routs things will actually hinder me.

In PT I do not need to create sidechain buses. I have them preset. You only need to do that once.
They are always there, ready to use. I can send one thing to them, or more, I can use the same side chain bus to send to one plugin, or a hundred, I can even send that side-chain bus to something other than a side chain. I can do what I want with my signals, without the DAW trying to "help" me.
I find in Cubendo (and S1) I cannot operate so freely. I'm sure there are tricks that will help me do better, but I'm still worried there are some basic architectural traits to both of those DAWs that will fundamentally hinder me.

Fot instance, I understand that with a key command, I can send to one bus from multiple sources.
But how do I send to 20 plugins from 20 buses?
If I do a subgroup and send from that, I cannot have twenty sends on one group channel can I?
So how do I duplicate that group channel to generate more sends? I can't, can I?
I'll need to create another subgroup, which means another bus etc.
I may be missing something, and I'll be glad to find out that I am....

In PT, channels and buses are independent of each-other.
Side chain buses and plugins are also independent of each-other since the former is just a bus.
No matter how I try to route things, the fact that in Cubendo and S1 buses and channels are irreversibly linked to each-other and plugins and their side chain buses are too, limits my freedom.

In PT, this independence of things may require more steps initially, which may confuse users (which I understand), but ultimately I find it gives the operator more freedom.
And doesn't chaperone like some sort of Windows paperclip wizzard thing.

I hope I'm wrong and I'm just missing something.
If you're not sure, try try this test in Cubendo:
Send from 20 buses to the sidechains of 20 plugins on( downstream) buses and then try changing those 20 plugins for another type with SC. Let me know if you find a remotely elegant way of doing this, without it being considerably more time consuming than it would in PT.
I haven't found a way yet.
I was hoping Nuendo would be freer in routing than Cubase Pro, but I found little benefit to it for me. I hope I'm wrong.
Old 17th April 2018
  #112
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Thanks. I'll try that.
Though I very much doubt it'll be the exact same thing.
I agree that Cubendo can help you do "normal" things quicker, but I find that if you want to do more advanced things the way Cubendo routs things will actually hinder me.

In PT I do not need to create sidechain buses. I have them preset. You only need to do that once.
They are always there, ready to use. I can send one thing to them, or more, I can use the same side chain bus for one plugin, or a hundred, I can even send that side-chain bus to something other than a side chain. I can to do what I want with my signals, without the DAW trying to "help" me.
I find in Cubendo (and S1) I cannot operate so freely. I'm sure there are trick what will help me do better, but I'm still worried there are some basic architectural traits to both DAWs that will fundamentally hinder me.

Fot isntance, I can understand that with a key command, I can send to one bus from multiple sources.
But how do I send to 20 plugins from 20 buses?
If I do a subgroup and send from that, I cannot have twenty sends on one group channel can I?
So how do I duplicate that group channel to generate more sends? I can't, can I?
I'll need to create another subgroup, which means another bus etc.
I may be missing something, and I'll be glad to find out that I am....

In PT, channels and buses are independent of each-other.
Side chain buses and plugins are also independent of each-other since the former is just a bus.
No matter how I try to route things, the fact that in Cubendo and S1 buses and channels are irreversibly linked to each-other and plugins and their side chain buses are too, limits my freedom.

In PT, this independence of things may require more steps initially, which may confuse users (which I understand), but ultimately I find it gives the operator more freedom.
And doesn't chaperone like some sort of Windows paperclip wizzard thing.

I hope I'm wrong and I'm just missing something.
If you're not sure, try try this test in Cubendo:
Send from 20 buses to the sidechains of 20 plugins on( downstream) buses and then try changing those 20 plugins for another type with SC. Let me know if you find a remotely elegant way of doing this, without it being considerably more time consuming than it would in PT.
I haven't found a way yet.
I was hoping Nuendo would be freer in routing than Cubase Pro, but I found little benefit to it for me. I hope I'm wrong.
I'll get back to you when I'm on a proper computer. Too much typing needed for a phone reply. (And I need to verify a key modifier).

Alistair
Old 17th April 2018
  #113
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Cool thanks, I haven't even the time time to get into this anyway.
But I would certainly appreciate an experienced user like yourself who gets what I'm trying to do to look at a efficient way of going about that in Cubendo.

Cubendo is powerful (certainly combined with DTouch) and it'll be a shame to discard it just because of my routing problems with it.

Cheers!
Old 17th April 2018
  #114
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by tops3b View Post
Im sorry but I need to pipe in here. Your comparison doesn't work. NOBODY who makes a living from this business would expect a Mackie to perform like an SSL. So that isnt an argument that stands up in this scenario. I dumped Avid and PT HD 2 years ago when they changed their pricing policies. I also sold all my HD hardware too as I didn't want to be part of a company that has lost touch with those that kept it alive. As a songwriter and producer I was making 6 figures a year from music. Since dumping Avid I have continued to make that 6 figure sum. The DAW market isn't like hardware. Some of the new pieces of software are leading the way and Avid has been playing catch up. So please don't jump on an elitist bandwagon here and tell anyone that PT is an SSL and other DAW's are Mackie's. It doesn't float. If you love the software and prefer to work in it. Cool. Thats an argument I will accept. And you can pay whatever you would like for it. PT is an amazing piece of software but its not the only one that gets the job done and to the same high standards. I know cuz I used to use it and somehow have manage to maintained the high standards Ive been known for and have kept the level of rewards and success from using another DAW.
I think you missed the point. The low cost DAW you’re using probably isn’t in the same market as PT Ultimate, Nuendo, Pyramix and Sequoia. That is the Professional post Production Suite market aimed at film and tv. If it was it would have a similar feature set and cost within the ballpark. None of this software costs less than a grand. .

No one is saying you need to use Ultimate to be professional. You can use whatever tools you like even GarageBand and Audacity, but it’s unlikely you will be mixing the next large budget Hans Zimmer scored movie with them. In the Post Production market standard tools are used.

Last edited by miscend; 17th April 2018 at 11:29 AM..
Old 17th April 2018
  #115
Lives for gear
 
allstar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
in PT I have multiple sources sending to the same SC bus and multiple plugins keyed to that bus. It can be up to 20 paralel sources and 20 paralel SC plugins.
You can certainly add more sources sending to the same side chain with the drag and drop manner I described. Changing the receiving plug-in is straightforward too, it just needs to be told to 'listen' to the track's aux 3-4 input.

As far as having multiple plug-ins on different tracks receiving the same side chain signal, I've not done that and so would need to try it out. I suspect an additional bus would have to be involved there. If I get time I'll try it out, for my own education also.
Old 18th April 2018
  #116
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Totally Mattias78! There are plenty of great DAWs out there...



- It would have cost 4 times the price to access Pro Tools HD 5 or 10 years ago, with no option to subscribe by the month or year.
This information is incomplete/wrong since you cannot get PT HD/Ultimate on a month-to-month basis.

It's the year or nothing
Old 20th April 2018
  #117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeronimo View Post
This information is incomplete/wrong since you cannot get PT HD/Ultimate on a month-to-month basis.

It's the year or nothing
It is true, it is only Vanilla that is available on a month to month subscription... but it isn't just a year or nothing. It is a perpetual license with hardware, perpetual license without hardware, or a subscription by the year for HD. That is vastly more options than PT HD users had even 3 years ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by allstar View Post
Ok, I realise I may have become the stereotyped Reaper evangelist here, but. . .

Sidechaining to TDR Kotelnikov compressor in Reaper ( my got comp ) goes something like this :

• Select external side chain on the plug-in

• Drag and drop a send from any other channel onto the plug-in.

Very simple.

If, like me, you spent a lot of years on Protools, it's very easy to be resistant to new ways of doing things. I didn't look at another DAW for nearly 20 years.
I stuck at Reaper and when the penny finally dropped it was an epiphany, I'd encourage you to keep playing with Reaper.
Interesting. That side chain suggestion isn't working for me. At least, not in so fewer steps. I still have to select both the sidechain inputs on the plugin, and also the side chain channels on the send otherwise the audio ends up on the side-chained channel's fader. I was using the Cockos Real comp. Is it plugin dependent perhaps?

I have used Reaper since 2009, but it still doesn't hold a candle to Pro Tools for me and the way I prefer to work. To me, it has the vibe of an application where so many features and functions, and configurability were jammed in that it boiled over and spilled into all the nooks and crannies. In Pro Tools for example, right clicking on the fader section of a channel gives you all the metering ballistics options. Right clicking on the routing assignments gives you routing assignment options. Right clicking on the send views gives you send extended view options. Right clicking on the send assignments gives you send options. Right clicking on the inserts gives you insert options. I found it self-explanatory from the outset.

Reaper on the other hand is drowning in multiple ways of doing the same thing. Even with the really nice themes like White Tie's Imperial, there is an insert button right above the insert view? Right clicking on the fader gives you the same routing window as pressing the routing button. The source button does the same thing as a right click on the meters. Right clicking on the fader faceplate results in 60 odd choices in a menu that folds out to three panels wide. Pro Tools has it condensed down to 15 odd options, including the entire track preset system. Reaper is windows, windows, windows.

Reaper and Pro Tools really exist at the opposite ends of the DAW design ethos in that sense. Even with the configurability, nailing down the windows in Reaper seems next to impossible. I have asked the question a few times about how to automatically close existing floating plugin windows when opening new ones, and nobody seems to give a clear answer if it is actually possible. It seems the best workaround is creating a keyboard shortcut to kill the 50 odd floating plugin windows I find hiding behind the mixer window on a very regular basis... and that is even after adding SWS extensions and creating custom actions.

I have used it for quite a few years but the epiphany I had is that the being-everything-to-everyone approach of Reaper loses the very thing that initially drew me to Pro Tools, which is the elegance and logic of it's layout just work for me. I do wish Pro Tools had a stems bounce feature that was as well implemented as Reaper though (which must be about the best there is), along with the wildcard naming feature. The analogue insert 'ping' feature would be great, but for the longest time it crapped itself in Reaper anyway. Reaper could really learn a thing or two from Pro Tools too. I find HD's clip gain & clip effects pretty damn classy, and much quicker than the way Reaper has implemented it.

To each their own, really. DAWs are a funny thing.
Old 20th April 2018
  #118
Lives for gear
 
allstar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Interesting. That side chain suggestion isn't working for me. At least, not in so fewer steps. I still have to select both the sidechain inputs on the plugin, and also the side chain channels on the send otherwise the audio ends up on the side-chained channel's fader. I was using the Cockos Real comp. Is it plugin dependent perhaps?
It works the same with ReaComp for me. The steps are :

• Set ReaComp's Detector Input to Auxillary Input L+R

• Drag and drop a send on to the plug-ins GUI

Hope that works for you.

Regarding your other Reaper issues, I do get what you mean about Protools being more streamlined, but for me I happily traded that for ultimately more flexibility and customisation. I'm not one of those people who constantly tweaks Reaper, but I have a configuration I've built that is very efficient for me. It's probably true that Reaper out the box is unlikely to satisfy many people, in the long run you do have to get your hands dirty. Like I say though, for me, that's liberating.

Of course, as a business, the latest version of Protools resides on the studio computer and regularly sees use. It's just now I wouldn't choose to use it. I just really prefer Reaper, but then that's just my opinion.
Old 20th April 2018
  #119
Gear Maniac
 
Aux13's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Reaper and Pro Tools really exist at the opposite ends of the DAW design ethos in that sense.
They also exist at the opposite ends of price range.
Old 21st April 2018
  #120
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Thanks. I'll try that.

In PT I do not need to create sidechain buses. I have them preset. You only need to do that once.
They are always there, ready to use. I can send one thing to them, or more, I can use the same side chain bus to send to one plugin, or a hundred, I can even send that side-chain bus to something other than a side chain. I can do what I want with my signals, without the DAW trying to "help" me.
HI ufo,

Can you post your empty template? I want to open it with Shift held down so the plugins are all inactive and check out your setup, it sounds intriguing.

I've been checking out Tony Maserati's MWTMasters videos, and he seems to have some similar things "ready to go, but hidden and inactive" until needed.

I'm trying to "up my template game" so my fav plugins are always "at the inactive ready". I think it will also help me trim out some of my plugin folder.

Thanks in advance either way, kindest regards Walt
Topic:
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