The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
SHOULD I GET PRO TOOLS HD
Old 7th August 2005
  #31
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S
Get a Mbox or a 002 and tell them you have Protools. Probably about 40% of my clients don't know the differece between HD and 002.
I am not serious but I have seen lots of studios adveitse "We have Protools"
... they just forget to say the LE part.
with that said if you can cost jusify it (charging at least $500.00/day) it will pay for it self. Just remember this most people in production hire for skill not for gear.

very right
Old 7th August 2005
  #32
no ssl yet
Guest
GET MIX

I'd say get a mix system and buy the upgrade. I used my apogee converters from my mix system and payed $4Gs to upgrade to HD2 from mix plus.

If you can find the mix system cheap and get digi's latest plugin bundle. you can get into HD without spending an arm annd a leg
Old 7th August 2005
  #33
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theom
The one thing that sets tdm or pt hd apart is:

very low latency,

If you are multitracking full bands, this can be an important issue.
I agree with most of the rest of the posts here.
I've heard this argument a million times and I just don't get it.

The only time latency is an issue for a properly designed native system is if you're tracking with plugins on the INPUTS and need to monitor the effected signal. I use Cubase SX (full delay compensation) with MOTU HD192 hardware (near-zero latency monitoring) and it is simply a NON-ISUUE. I track full bands live on a regular basis. No problem. Even if I had the ability to track with live plugins, I don't think I would. Just not the way I work. If I need processing for monitoring, I do it with hardware at the console.

Now PTLE....that's another story. I had a 002Rack for about a month. Took it back, no thanks. fuuck The lack of auto-PDC is a MAJOR limitation. EVERY other serious native system has full PDC except PTLE. The idea of manually delaying every track individually is just out of the question. Talk about a workflow killer.
Old 8th August 2005
  #34
Gear Addict
 
Prickstein's Avatar
 

I recently had to upgrade from my 001 when I was aproached by one of my favourite bands to do a radio remix of a forthcoming single.
The 32 track count of LE was barely enough to open the drum and bass tracks let alone the multitude of guitar tracks and vox.
There was no way in hell I could afford an HD rig at this point in time so as luck would have it, I found a Mix Plus system that ended up being CHEAPER than a 002 with my 001 as a trade in!
The album version was mixed on a HD system through an analogue console and sounds like crap. My mix is the said Mix Plus system with 20 bit ADAT Bridge for monitoring and mixed in the box. There is no comparison.
MY suggestion is getting a mix plus and using your current conversion. Save a bucket of money and have the compatibility.
Oh BTW, the initial email from the band said "I assume you use 'tools on a mac, yes?"
If that helps at all.
Old 8th August 2005
  #35
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zakco
I've heard this argument a million times and I just don't get it.

The only time latency is an issue for a properly designed native system is if you're tracking with plugins on the INPUTS and need to monitor the effected signal. I use Cubase SX (full delay compensation) with MOTU HD192 hardware (near-zero latency monitoring) and it is simply a NON-ISUUE. I track full bands live on a regular basis. No problem. Even if I had the ability to track with live plugins, I don't think I would. Just not the way I work. If I need processing for monitoring, I do it with hardware at the console.

Now PTLE....that's another story. I had a 002Rack for about a month. Took it back, no thanks. fuuck The lack of auto-PDC is a MAJOR limitation. EVERY other serious native system has full PDC except PTLE. The idea of manually delaying every track individually is just out of the question. Talk about a workflow killer.
Dead -on!
here is the deal,
Someone brings in a session that needs a couple tweeks, and a new lead vox:
You load it into your LE native pt rig and hope you have the proccessing power to get all 25 waves plugs (on the 30 track session)that are on the session to run. but to overdub you need to spend the time to dump enough plugs so you can overdub the vocal with a small buffer. Then of course the vocalist says the mix is all off now and he cant feel the track to sing.

Drag.

In many ways a older tdm rig may be a great option, but will it run the new plugs?
Old 8th August 2005
  #36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prickstein
MY suggestion is getting a mix plus
.

What if the song is tracked at 96K?
Old 8th August 2005
  #37
Gear Addict
 
Prickstein's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
What if the song is tracked at 96K?
Good point Thrill, I deal mostly with rock'n'roll bands so 48k will do for me. Project I'm talkin' bout was tracked by a pretty big name rock producer with a st-st-stu tter and it was 48k. You might need higher.
Old 8th August 2005
  #38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prickstein
Good point Thrill, I deal mostly with rock'n'roll bands so 48k will do for me. Project I'm talkin' bout was tracked by a pretty big name rock producer with a st-st-stu tter and it was 48k. You might need higher.
I totally hear that.

Most of the stuff i've mixed this year is all 44.1k/48K but a few 96Kers are starting to slip in here and there.

Without an HD system with the amount of track counts i just couldn't open it.
Old 9th August 2005
  #39
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theom
Dead -on!
here is the deal,
Someone brings in a session that needs a couple tweeks, and a new lead vox:
You load it into your LE native pt rig and hop you have the proccessing power to get all 25 waves plugs (on the 30 track session)that are on the session to run. but to overdub you need to spend the time to dump enough plugs so you can overdub the vocal with a small buffer. Then of course the vocalist says the mix is all off now and he cant feel the track to sing.
Quite often, I talk to people running PTLE and I ask them how they cope with the lack of delay compensation. About 3/4 of them say "huh....what's that?"
What's really scary is that they don't even realize that their cracked wave plugins are throwing their entire mix out of sync. 5 plugins on the snare drum, 3 on the kick, none on the overheads and they can't figure out what the hell's wrong with the drum mix..."it sounded good when I tracked it".... The other users understand the problem and have accepted the method of manually delaying each track seperately....

In my opinion, Digi really screwed LE. I could live with the track count limitation but once you've worked with full PDC, there's no going back.

-Z-
Old 9th August 2005
  #40
Gear Nut
 
T-fonk's Avatar
 

Hi!

You're welcome to buy my HD2 Accel-rig with a 96 I/O. (8I/O) Also with a command 8 digicontroller and the UAD TDM bundle.

Best Regards, T-fonk.

Mail me at: [email protected]
Old 9th August 2005
  #41
Gear Head
 
soundeslutz's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by beechstudio
The gear is just icing on the cake. IMHO heh
oh but what sweet icing it is.
Old 9th August 2005
  #42
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zakco
I've heard this argument a million times and I just don't get it.

The only time latency is an issue for a properly designed native system is if you're tracking with plugins on the INPUTS and need to monitor the effected signal.
I wouldn't call that a small problem. I have tracked about 25 albums with actual real playing musicians in Cubase SX/SXII. When working mostly ITB, the above is an serious obstacle, and the only way I found to deal with it was to say "hey, look... this isn't a real recording system, but we can make it work." Because time and again, and more often than not, people will want a reverb, or an comp, or some kind of fx which might be the whole point of that particular track.
Sometimes, the latencey can be to much even without plugs for some drummers.

The thing is that latency IS an issue with the native apps, and that is a bad workflow killer.
PT LE has in addition the major drawbacks of no ADC, and reduced track count. I still use it all the time for location recording, but it is not useable for tracking a real band.

Cubase is, it's really possible to track bands with cubase.

It's just that, latency IS an issue.

I long ago moved back to TDM,

The irony is that, in a studio with a very good console, very good outboard.
this big difference between TDM and Native is unimportant and Cubase works fine in most cases, but you still have the odd drummer which can hear even the no fx latency.
So latency IS an issue, it's being talked about in a native studio.

In TDM, since ADC, latency issues are simply a thing of the past.
If one can justify the expense, TDM is simply a more musicians friendly format.
Old 9th August 2005
  #43
Lives for gear
 
pigpen's Avatar
 

Well, I have recently been "noticed" as well. A well known entertainment attorney picked me up (just like I was a band) to help get me work, namely with labels. My first offer came in from RCA and I was unable to get the job due to the fact that I did not have HD. I have a Mix 4 system, but in the all knowing A+R guys' heads, it is not enough.
So in my first instance, not only did the platform matter, but the system did as well.

Hopefully this will not be the norm.

Just my experience.
Old 9th August 2005
  #44
Gear Maniac
 

I got an HD3 rig ages ago, because I had to be in sync with the studios I was working at, and that is what they had. I always felt like with the other platforms, you could build yourself a beautiful, lovely ISLAND, that everything suits your needs perfectly, but you are more than a simple trip away when you want to work with other people, or at other places.

I could probably get ATR services to make you a 2 1/2" headstack for your tape machine as well, and talk about the advantages of the extra track width, and not be able to play you 2 1/2" tapes anywhere else. Of course you can transfer, but....

I actually like PTHD, and my Studer A827 (I got my own), and they get along well with the outside wolrld...
Old 9th August 2005
  #45
Lives for gear
 
DirkB's Avatar
Common wisdom: investments come before the earnings...

So, you need to make a judgement whether your expected earnings as a professional mixer will justify a §15k system.
Since your looking at writing it of in say 5 years, that's 3k per year. So if the HD system brings you 1 serious mixing job per year, that you wouldn't have gotten without the HD system, then take the plunge, simple as that.

I've thought about it too since I'm starting to get some mix work, but since I don't expect it to blossom and the market in the Netherlands is certainly not such that I need a HD system to be competitive, I don't need to.
However, when the time comes that the purchase is justified to get on the HD boat, I'll do it in a minute, because it makes a lot of things a lot easier...

Good luck,
Dirk
Old 10th August 2005
  #46
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
.... time and again, and more often than not, people will want a reverb, or an comp, or some kind of fx which might be the whole point of that particular track.
Hmm...I suppose you're right. IF you're using a system without ANY form of outboard hardware or monitor mixer. I mix ITB, but if someone wants reverb in their cans...no problem, I have a lexicon MPX1 for that. Compression in the cans...a couple of cheapo dbx comps for monitor duties. I guess if you insist on NO outboard whatsover, it's an issue. Personally I wouldn't work that way even if I had an HD system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
Sometimes, the latencey can be to much even without plugs for some drummers.....
I'm not really sure why that could be a problem. Are you using an audio interface without DSP monitoring capability? Even mid quality gear like motu and RME offer "latency free" monitoring using their Cuemix or totalmix software. (at least as low as you can get with AD/DA conversion).
If you're trying to make a monitor mix using Cubase (post buffer) than sure, that's an issue, but again, I would never work that way, nor expect it to work that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
the only way I found to deal with it was to say "hey, look... this isn't a real recording system, but we can make it work."
I can agree that for the person trying to run a ZERO hardware, full blown tracking setup, it is an issue, but to suggest that Cubase is not a "real recording system" as you put it, is kind of insulting to the professional users out there that seem to do just fine with it. How about saying it just doesn't work the way YOU need it to. I get really sick of that kind of bull**** PT elitism.

I DO get your point and I respect your opinion and I don't want to come off like a jerk, but using a native system IS an option, you just need to gear up DIFFERENTLY for it. And yes.....that DOES meaning buying some hardware. (which you will have a budget for after NOT buying an HD system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
you still have the odd drummer which can hear even the no fx latency. .
Could you explain how someone could "hear" 1.5 ms of latency?
What is the latency of TDM hardware? If you are monitoring post AD/DA conversion, It's not ZERO.

From MOTU's site:

Quote:
The PCI-424 card features CuemixDSP™, a powerful processor dedicated to creating a custom tailored monitor mix of up to 96 channels of audio. Because the mixing takes place on the card itself, instead of making the round trip from the PCI bus to the host processor, the system provides the same near-zero latency performance as today's latest digital mixers. CueMix DSP completely eliminates the buffer latency associated with monitoring on host-based systems. Because the DSP is mixing for you, your computer's CPU is free for other tasks
Other than the use of plugins, how is this different (latency wise) from PTHD?

Maybe I'm missing something....

-Z-
Old 10th August 2005
  #47
Somehow I don't remember these kind of problems back in the 2" days....

You call this progress???


Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 10th August 2005
  #48
Lives for gear
 
joaquin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams
Somehow I don't remember these kind of problems back in the 2" days....

You call this progress???


Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
sometime you gain and sometimes you loose, but, we are definitely moving ahead
Old 10th August 2005
  #49
Gear Maniac
 
stuntbutt's Avatar
 

I may be the only one here that understands "Lower Arnold" Rock On!
Old 10th August 2005
  #50
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zakco
Hmm...I suppose you're right. IF you're using a system without ANY form of outboard hardware or monitor mixer. I mix ITB, but if someone wants reverb in their cans...no problem, I have a lexicon MPX1 for that. Compression in the cans...a couple of cheapo dbx comps for monitor duties. I guess if you insist on NO outboard whatsover, it's an issue. Personally I wouldn't work that way even if I had an HD system.



I'm not really sure why that could be a problem. Are you using an audio interface without DSP monitoring capability? Even mid quality gear like motu and RME offer "latency free" monitoring using their Cuemix or totalmix software. (at least as low as you can get with AD/DA conversion).
If you're trying to make a monitor mix using Cubase (post buffer) than sure, that's an issue, but again, I would never work that way, nor expect it to work that way.



I can agree that for the person trying to run a ZERO hardware, full blown tracking setup, it is an issue, but to suggest that Cubase is not a "real recording system" as you put it, is kind of insulting to the professional users out there that seem to do just fine with it. How about saying it just doesn't work the way YOU need it to. I get really sick of that kind of bull**** PT elitism.

I DO get your point and I respect your opinion and I don't want to come off like a jerk, but using a native system IS an option, you just need to gear up DIFFERENTLY for it. And yes.....that DOES meaning buying some hardware. (which you will have a budget for after NOT buying an HD system.



Could you explain how someone could "hear" 1.5 ms of latency?
What is the latency of TDM hardware? If you are monitoring post AD/DA conversion, It's not ZERO.

From MOTU's site:



Other than the use of plugins, how is this different (latency wise) from PTHD?

Maybe I'm missing something....

-Z-
Yeah, well, I don't think youre missing that much.

You have described the workaround.
but in all of the mixture with using outboard double for monitoring,(mults for everything.) involving the internal no-latency soundcard mixer (turn up, turn down, mute unmute for every take.)


Somwhere along all that mess, the workflow suffers.

That said, as I pointed out Cubase SX is just fine for some stuff, for an ITB mix I would rather use SX than PT 6.0 or earlier thanks to the ADC.
And if you are working predominately with yourself or your buddies, those workarounds needed to track seemlessly, might be justified by the reduced investment.

Which btw. isn't that much for a full blown system. A Nuendo/SX rig with 24ch or more of converters of 192 I/O quality, a couple of UAD cards, a really fast computer makes sure that the price difference isn't really that great, but ofcourse you can get a working system at lot less, and certainly one that beats LE, if compabillity is of no concern.

I can understand where you're coming from, but sometimes workflow is just worth that extra $.
Old 10th August 2005
  #51
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
You have described the workaround.
but in all of the mixture with using outboard double for monitoring,(mults for everything.) involving the internal no-latency soundcard mixer (turn up, turn down, mute unmute for every take.)
I don't quite understand....during tracking I'm hearing no latency monitoring through discrete outputs to a hardware mixer where any processing is happening. On playback, these channels are output discretely to the same channels on the monitor desk. THere is NO muting unmuting, turning up down etc...It works just like a tape deck with editing etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
Somwhere along all that mess, the workflow suffers.
Actually, the mess you described doesn't exist.

What soundcard/interface combination are you referring to that requires you to mute/unmute and adjust gain between record and playback?

-Z-
Old 10th August 2005
  #52
Gear Nut
 

a big name producer will mix an independent- production at my little place next week.
he said: "at least they have PTHD, so its a better demo-studio..."

IMO you need PT if you want serious people working in your studio. most of the pros I know prefer it- if you dont have a SSL or another big-name desk you should have a PT rig. otherwise they book another place.

I am not a big name dude at all, but I itry to get into a protools studio as well when I work abroad. I just cannot work quickly enough on another DAW...

as pointed out severel times the demo- clients prefer investing money in somebody who owns a 20.000$ system than in somebody who works with a discount PC and cracked Cubase ... I guess they think it proofs that you are serious. maybe its stupid, maybe not

people make good stuff with everything, so if you exclusively work at your place stick with your system. nobody will dislike a mix because it was done on something he doesnt like.
Old 11th August 2005
  #53
Quote:
Originally Posted by joaquin
sometime you gain and sometimes you loose, but, we are definitely moving ahead

If one were to compare the sound quality of today's releases to those of 20 years ago, you might have an argument with that.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 11th August 2005
  #54
Lives for gear
 
joaquin's Avatar
 

Hi Jim. I believe that you may have a point, though, for me, we have today, absolutely all the tools required to create amazing sounding albums!! Been by the use of Digital, analog, or a combination of both Techniques.
I also believe that we as human beings, tend to get "used" to specific artistic parameters because we grow up with them. By that I mean, for example, the dynamic range in a Vinyl, and all it's "warmness" are in relity the result of technical limitations. The actual noisefloor in Tape may be very "romantic", but non the less is just Noise. (if you like it and believe that enhance you art....Cool!!).
Other aspect that I'm perciving is that we, as artist, tend to relate sound with a specific era, wich in my opinion is more related to the music done at the Time. I mean...60's 70's...ROCK'NROLL. Today's Mainstream, for me, is a lot of Bull S&^%$it.
Also you cant compare the sound of a well reproduced Cassette Tape to the limited MP3, but...we are talking about higher standars and full resolution.
Sure, Tape and Tube Gear can sound Amazing and you must use it if it's what you are looking for....I know that I will.
In the end they are all tools at our disposal, and you know, it's not the wand but the wizard...
Old 11th August 2005
  #55
Gear Addict
 
jerdude's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stuntbutt
I may be the only one here that understands "Lower Arnold" Rock On!

I don't know where you are from stunt but I lived in the St. Louis area for a couple years.

I once had a strange, disheveled, rough looking guy with a thick hillbilly accent tell me he was from L.A.. Then he burst into loud hillbilly laughter for 3 seconds before looking me directly in the eye with a straight face... and with that loud, thick hillbilly accent he suddenly blurted out... "LOWER ARNOLD!!"
Old 11th August 2005
  #56
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ringo.fire
as pointed out severel times the demo- clients prefer investing money in somebody who owns a 20.000$ system than in somebody who works with a discount PC and cracked Cubase ... I guess they think it proofs that you are serious. maybe its stupid, maybe not
Definitely Stupid. Contrary to popular belief, there actually IS a middle ground between the two and believe it or not some of us actually PAID for a legal version of Cubase! I have maybe $8000.00 CDN into my DAW including 2 UAD-1 cards and a boatload of removable HD storage. I chose to invest the bulk of my money into my rooms, my mic locker, great preamps and decent monitors. If spending the whole wad on a TDM rig that sits in a spare bedroom with cheapo mics listenting on B-ringer speakers makes me "Serious", than this industry truly is fukked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ringo.fire
people make good stuff with everything, so if you exclusively work at your place stick with your system. nobody will dislike a mix because it was done on something he doesnt like.
I couldn't agree more. Ease of portability/compatibility is the ONLY argument for PT that makes ANY sense IMO. And I'm willing to admit that it's a big deal for some. If I felt that my business depended on that I would have made that move years ago. Perhaps I will in the future. But it DOESN'T make me more "pro", it just makes me more compatible.....I wish people would begin to seprerate the two.

Having said all this, if the original poster of this thread feels that having an HD rig will make him more money that he should go that route. I certainly would.
Old 27th August 2005
  #57
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by borau
and Cubase works fine in most cases, but you still have the odd drummer which can hear even the no fx latency.
Even with "Direct Monitoring", I'm assuming Cubase has it, Nuendo anyway. Just asking.
Old 28th August 2005
  #58
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
If someone could convince me that I could use all my existing VST plugins and have it work properly, I'd most likely make the switch to an HD2 or HD3 system.
Most of the plugins you've mentioned can also run as RTAS plugins, so you wouldn't need to use the wrapper for them and you wouldn't need to upgrade them all right away to use your system. You'd also get some good TDM plugins with the system.

The one thing (or four things) you'd probably lose are your UAD cards. I know they're supposed to work with the wrapper, but I think there are still latency issues with them.

Quote:
I've heard this argument a million times and I just don't get it.

The only time latency is an issue for a properly designed native system is if you're tracking with plugins on the INPUTS and need to monitor the effected signal. I use Cubase SX (full delay compensation) with MOTU HD192 hardware (near-zero latency monitoring) and it is simply a NON-ISUUE. I track full bands live on a regular basis. No problem. Even if I had the ability to track with live plugins, I don't think I would. Just not the way I work. If I need processing for monitoring, I do it with hardware at the console.
The thing is more and more people don't have consoles any more. It's very nice to be able to track the band with effects (which you're not actually recording, just using for monitoring) which oftentimes wind up being part of the final mix. And it's nice to be able to pull up your session with all of your settings, including monitoring effects, right where you left them.

I'm certainly not saying it's the only way to work...and I do like working on nice consoles...but it is a valid issue for many.

-Duardo
Old 28th August 2005
  #59
Lives for gear
 
Ziggy!!'s Avatar
 

How about a soundscape system?

they have that Cui Bono EDL Convert software now that allows you to open Samplitude/Sequoia, Vegas, Vegas Scripting, Cool Edit Pro, Audition, SAW, SAWStudio, Wavelab, Sadie, Sonic Studio, Discreet, AES31, OpenTL, OMFI, Tascam BU, CMX/GVG and Pro Tools 5 files on your system...
Old 28th August 2005
  #60
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by zakco
I couldn't agree more. Ease of portability/compatibility is the ONLY argument for PT that makes ANY sense IMO..
If I was doing it for a hobby, I probably would not have a 7 card HD rig and I woud be able to hang out here lots too.
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