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
Digidesign Pro Tools Next Move Audio Interfaces
Old 21st November 2009
  #271
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
I've done "professional" mixes on LE at 96, so I'm sure I could do a "professional" mix on an HD3 too I don't normally work at 96 because I see no value in the final result except the playback in the control room. No one else will ever hear it.
You might want to look into "aliasing"...

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4786669-post2079.html

Old 21st November 2009
  #272
Lives for gear
 
Tonio Ruiz's Avatar
I can't imagine what the next step would be, but I pray everyday to the Studio/Recording Gods for a PT version that accepts third party audio interfaces, so I can use PT instead of DP or whatever DAW that I have to use cause simply I can't afford a large PTHD rig,

cause I mix OTB with at least 32ch out to the analog mixer, I freaking love PT but I'm using another DAW due to a short budget and that is so frustrating to me

or make PTLE expandable to more cards to get more analog outputs... if Avid goes that way, I'll get it in a heartbeat, and I'm sure thousands of consumers will also
Old 21st November 2009
  #273
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
But it's all hypothetical based on something that doesn't exist yet.
That's not even going to slow us down here on GS.

How about this?

Digi pulls the plug on HD cards, says all native from now on.

People who like HD start hoarding cards, buying them up on eBay. HD cards become collector's items like NS-10s, KM 84s and Neves.

Everyone starts to gripe about how the prices are out of control.

Digi 'relents' and starts making HD cards once again. (think New Coke here)

Everyone says the new cards are somehow not as good as the old ones. But at least you can find one...
Old 21st November 2009
  #274
Gear Maniac
 

Oops. When I said "...I think Digi got screwed partially because no one adopted high def en masse. That's definitley in part because even an HD3 Accel system out of the gate couldn't provide enough juice to make pro mixes ITB though" I meant to say "mixes at 96k and higher sample rate". Back in 2004 when I got my HD3/G5 dual 2.0 rig there was no way for me to do many ITB mixes at 96 much less 192. I haven't even checked lately but I know when I first got the system the maximum amount of tracks you could even play at 192k was 24.

I definitely don't wanna start an off-topic debate as to the merits (or lack thereof) of recording at higher sample rates. But from when I first learned about how digital audio worked, it seemed natural for me at least to wonder how even a sine wave at a frequency approaching 20kHz could be remotely captured and reproduced accurately if it was only being sampled twice per cycle. Anyway, logically, if you're someone who thinks 24 bit depth is significantly better than 16 then you should be all for higher sample rates as they're inseparable in terms of their importance in digital audio resolution.

As for the dude who thinks I know something--I wish I did!!! I was being honest though when I said I've given it a lot of thought recently. I do know a few things:

- I only ever wanted to mix records and make art. Pro Tools was/is only a means to that end. Even as I was literally thrilled with the power to mix music on my own terms the HD rig gave me (and still am!), when I first got it I knew it was overpriced for what it was. I had worked for years on large-format boards that cost upwards of $200,000 and still, I knew I was being gouged. I would bet just about anyone who has actually paid for a new TDM card with their own money then plugged it into an equally new computer that cost significantly less than the card has felt the same way. Do I regret buying PTHD? Not even for a second. It's served me well for years, and to do what I what I needed to do in 2004 I needed the cards--it's as simple as that. Plus, for someone trying to make their living in audio--especially before hard disks had completely replaced tape in the early 2000s--dealing with latency was a non-starter.

- I bought a Digi 001 right after they came out. I had previously worked with the "pro" (or, back then, "only") version of Pro Tools. I swear I had to sit in a now-defunct Mars Music and talk myself into PT because I knew Digi had purposefully withheld features and MOTU had a competing product that was much more ambitious. (Plus, I wasn't that far out of college and we had used Performer for MIDI so I had some love for MOTU). Anyway, I guess what I'm saying is that from jump I knew as soon as Digi tried to have a "pro" product and a "consumer" product that it was a weird situation...

...because while most companies are trying to figure out what features they can afford to cram into the next release of their product and still get it out in a reasonable amount of time and be stable, with Pro Tools LE Digi is literally trying to figure out what features they can rip out and not piss off their users too much. I ALWAYS thought that was a wack approach--before AND after I owned a TDM rig. For people trying to go from "home-to-office" with their work it's especially irritating

I can't lie tho I get a little frustrated with people who wanna draw a hard line between a "pro" user and a non "pro" user. At the same time, I get equally frustrated with cats whose comments seem like they're always just meant to serve as bait for Digi bashing no...matter...what. Believe me, I know the feeling. But until relatively recently Digi had a product (HD hardware) that every PT user wanted and some needed. Did they charge the very highest price the market would bear for it? Yep. Was that lame? I would argue yes, especially since they took so long to start discounting it. But it is what it is, so assuming we're all Pro Tool users and fans of some sort lets try and help them figure it out and thus help ourselves

Damn, that must be at least a nickel now. Whew
Old 21st November 2009
  #275
Lives for gear
 
PMoshay's Avatar
 

Something with Gigabit ethernet interfacing or AES 50.
Gigabit is is mainstream and can handle alot, AES50 is a AES adopted protocol that has some amazing specs & possibilities and is cheap to license.
Make a system that you can upgrade by plugging in a small box via gigabit ethernet and get more processing (like the unit Waves tried to do years ago) so upgrading your computer is not necessary.

My #1 & #2 gripes with Protools (or any DAW)

#1. You name a track, AC GTR Hi String 1, you controller reads: ACGTH1???? This is near 2010 now, LCD & LED panels are cheap...... please give us FULL NAME DISPLAY on the next product, not a 4 or 6 letter name truncation. (this has to be written in the software, PT is 6/8 characters)

#2. simple interface routing with auto delay comp. A 192 is great, but 8 in/16 out or 16/in/8out only gives you 8 analog insert points per interface, and its convoluted to deal with.

Also my other suggestion is to give the next interface you make have in/out headroom beyond the +21 prosumer standard. SSL, Neve, API's all sound like they do in part because they have massive headroom and mixes dont colapse when pushed hard.
Something with at least a +26 i/o
Old 21st November 2009
  #276
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
That's not even going to slow us down here on GS.

How about this?

Digi pulls the plug on HD cards, says all native from now on.

People who like HD start hoarding cards, buying them up on eBay. HD cards become collector's items like NS-10s, KM 84s and Neves.

Everyone starts to gripe about how the prices are out of control.

Digi 'relents' and starts making HD cards once again. (think New Coke here)

Everyone says the new cards are somehow not as good as the old ones. But at least you can find one...
heh heh heh
Old 21st November 2009
  #277
Lives for gear
 

It will be called PTU (PT Ultimate).

There will be a helmet like the fighter pilots use with a head's up display screen and all you'll need to do is think about an edit or a plugin and it will get done or loaded or tweaked. PTU will be directly connected to your brain stem like in The Matrix. Digi will install those ports on your neck for a minimal fee (they're training ex Best Buy employees to do that now at Guitar Center) and the purchase of a lifetime license and the right to indoctrinate any children you might spawn.

Here's a beta tester for PTU at a recent trade show...



Oh boy... can't wait.
Old 21st November 2009
  #278
Lives for gear
 

I would guess their next step is DSP cards with at least 4 times the power of the current ones at at least 1/2 the cost.

The model of DSP cards is most definitely not dead. If it were, why would SSL, TC, UAD, etc keep coming out with them? A power user maxes out their DSP cards while using native for virtual instruments, convolution reverbs, and additional plugs. What the consumers want is massive power at a lower cost, but all native is not the way -- yet.
Old 21st November 2009
  #279
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio Addict View Post
The model of DSP cards is most definitely not dead. If it were, why would SSL, TC, UAD, etc keep coming out with them? A power user maxes out their DSP cards while using native for virtual instruments, convolution reverbs, and additional plugs. What the consumers want is massive power at a lower cost, but all native is not the way -- yet.
I think it is entirely possible that we will never have 'enough' power.

As evolution runs in the opposite direction from entropy, software bloat is the flip side to Moore's Law. As computers get faster, programs enlarge to take advantage of the greater speed.

I remember my second computer, it was nominally SO much faster than my first computer. But what happened was I spent the same amount of time waiting for the same programs to load, in color!


And 'bloat' is maybe too negatively charged a word. Much software is more demanding because it produces a better result. Aren't today's plugs often compromised by the perceived need to have many many Instances available?

When people say native machines now have 'enough' power, they only mean 'enough power to run today's version of plug-ins', which almost everyone agrees do not sound good enough yet.

Furthermore there certainly seems to be a correlation between CPU usage and quality. Isn't that at least part of the reason why your Bricasti or Lexicon box running ONE reverb on it's dedicated-to-reverb chips - sounds better than one of the 24 D-Verbs you can open in your Pro Tools session?

the entire history of computers is this leapfrogging between more powerful machines and more demanding software. To expect the software to stand still and let the machines catch up seems unlikely.
Old 21st November 2009
  #280
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
Aren't today's plugs often compromised by the perceived need to have many many Instances available?
I think it's true that as we get more and more DSP available, the industry will find new and challenging ways to use it, but we're already in a situation where we can get a lot more plug-ins than we need - and more tracks than most of us need. Just as a test, I recorded 24 24-bit tracks into an already finished song today, with EQ and Comp on every single of the recorded tracks, and the song already had 60-70 audio+instrument tracks - I was using the 32 buffer and the project still used only maybe circa 20% of my available power.

Things are being doubled according to Moore's Law, that's true, but a doubling from being able to use 8 instead of 4 tracks is much less significant than a doubling from 100 to 200, because if you can work with 200 tracks without problems, you have a lot of headroom.


Quote:
Furthermore there certainly seems to be a correlation between CPU usage and quality. Isn't that at least part of the reason why your Bricasti or Lexicon box running ONE reverb on it's dedicated-to-reverb chips - sounds better than one of the 24 D-Verbs you can open in your Pro Tools session?
Talking of Lexicon, check the thread about the new Lexicon reverb bundle. Apparently, these reverbs sound as good as the real Lexicons, and you can run 'dozens and dozens and dozens' of them (according to the developer) on a computer which isn't even the best computer that's available. In other words, I can get enough power to run, say, 80 Lexicon reverbs for less than I paid for my hardware Lexicon, and Avid knows this, and of course this will influence their next move.

Number of tracks, reverbs etc. is much less important than headroom.
Old 21st November 2009
  #281
Lives for gear
 
Skip Burrows's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I think it is entirely possible that we will never have 'enough' power.

As evolution runs in the opposite direction from entropy, software bloat is the flip side to Moore's Law. As computers get faster, programs enlarge to take advantage of the greater speed.

I remember my second computer, it was nominally SO much faster than my first computer. But what happened was I spent the same amount of time waiting for the same programs to load, in color!


And 'bloat' is maybe too negatively charged a word. Much software is more demanding because it produces a better result. Aren't today's plugs often compromised by the perceived need to have many many Instances available?

When people say native machines now have 'enough' power, they only mean 'enough power to run today's version of plug-ins', which almost everyone agrees do not sound good enough yet.

Furthermore there certainly seems to be a correlation between CPU usage and quality. Isn't that at least part of the reason why your Bricasti or Lexicon box running ONE reverb on it's dedicated-to-reverb chips - sounds better than one of the 24 D-Verbs you can open in your Pro Tools session?

the entire history of computers is this leapfrogging between more powerful machines and more demanding software. To expect the software to stand still and let the machines catch up seems unlikely.
This is a fantastic point. Just think how fast todays MAC PROS would run OS 9 from APPLE. That would be a screamer with the ability to run fantastic plugins. Computer speed + Software Needs(Bloat) = Not much gain if any at all.
Old 21st November 2009
  #282
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
but we're already in a situation where we can get a lot more plug-ins than we need
Ahhh, but more GOOD plug-ins? How many engineers still feel that "good plug-in" is an oxymoron?

Two threads over, they are asking if plug-ins will ever replace hardware. What if they could someday, but if only they use a LOT more DSP?



Quote:
Talking of Lexicon, check the thread about the new Lexicon reverb bundle. Apparently, these reverbs sound as good as the real Lexicons, and you can run 'dozens and dozens and dozens' of them (according to the developer) on a computer
Does that seem reasonable to you? There are chips and software inside those boxes. Are the hardware units deliberately crippled to run only one verb at a time? Are their newest boxes stuffed with 10 year old chips?

I haven't heard the new Lexicon plugs, but I HAVE heard that exact same claim 1000 times before!


You are right that people are no longer weeping for lack of tracks, but I think it is entirely possible that we have been grossly underestimating the amount of data handling necessary to properly emulate the sound our former recording technologies.

A smart move for any company that sold hardware would be to commission or create software that actually did sound better, but required upgraded hardware to do so. Maybe it's not possible, but I bet if it is possible, it will demand more and more processing power.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #283
Lives for gear
 
jamwerks's Avatar
 

The processing power needed for Eq and dynamics is nothing compared to that needed for the lastest VI's and samplers. And that's not the kind of power that Avid sells.

Massive speculation about the future product lines, but their CEO's have probably known for many years what they could and couldn't do. The guys making those decisions are free from the biases and emotions that us end users have.

I forsee a rack mounted dsp module like the Eleven guitar rig. I don't see Avid getting out of the Hardware market. There are so many cool things that they can come up with (other than dsp) that so many will want.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #284
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
TDM+native >native ...at least for another decade.

That said, the TDM+host advantage will diminish every year.

How must Avid stay ahead? With Pro Tools obviously, "Pro Tools the SOFTWARE." Pro Tools will more and more have to compete with the other leading DAWs on a level playing field, as the importance of dedicated DSP becomes less of an advantage.

That's why PT8 was such a huge leap forward and a brilliant use of resources. They laid down the gauntlet and said we're best, and they succeeded at making the best well-rounded and professional "DAW package," with untouchable editing and mixing ease, reliability, and efficiency and has a great line of pro quality controllers like the ICON behind it. (Yes, of course the other DAWs beat PT in many ways, but as the best professional ""DAW package" or "DAW system", the PT system is unbeatable.)

They also succeeded in bringing on tens (hundreds?) of thousands of new users buy finally inviting in the composers and beat-makers with PT8 and the great sounding AIR plugs. I know so many people using PT now that wouldn't (read: couldn't) use it until it became a sequencer in PT8.

It needs to be more and more about "Pro Tools the SOFTWARE" from here on out. They should put most resources into the PT app and just pull way ahead.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #285
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
Never say never,
I had band I recorded 11 years ago - they got signed. Now the record company is paying 5 times the original project budget just to do a remix.
You just never know what's down the road.
And the band won't sell ONE more record because it's recorded at a higher sampling rate

TH
Old 22nd November 2009
  #286
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

A 'hardware reverb' is a small computer with a native "reverb plug"-in inside

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
Ahhh, but more GOOD plug-ins? How many engineers still feel that "good plug-in" is an oxymoron?
Create a poll, so I don't have to make a guess. :-)

Quote:
Two threads over, they are asking if plug-ins will ever replace hardware.
For loads of people, that has happened already...

Quote:
There are chips and software inside those boxes. Are the hardware units deliberately crippled to run only one verb at a time?
Yes, there's no such a thing as 'software' and 'hardware' digital reverbs, they're all soft-and hardware reverbs, and they're all already replacing analog reverbs and real rooms. A Lexicon 'hardware reverb' is a box with some processing power and a built-in, native software 'plug-in'/app that emulates actual hardware: real rooms and halls. [/end of mystery]

Quote:
Are their newest boxes stuffed with 10 year old chips?
Ask the Lexi developers, or just jump to the last part of this message. :-)

Quote:
I haven't heard the new Lexicon plugs, but I HAVE heard that exact same claim 1000 times before!
I think it's the first time someone claims that one can get the same/as good algorithms in plugins as you can get in the 'real' Lexicon hardware reverb emulations (read: in Lexicon's dedicated reverb hardware, digitally emulating analogue walls and rooms).

The biq question is IMO: what kind of secret, mysterious hardware do you think is used in digital effect units that's supposed to be so much more powerful or code efficient than the processors found in modern computers? And: if these chips were so much more powerful, why don't/didn't Apple, Dell, Acer and all the others use these chips when they make/made computers?

Instead of being such things as 'hardware reverbs' and 'software reverbs' in the digital domain, it's just a question about whether the digital processor is placed on the inside or outside of the box you use for recording. If the processor (and it's software) is placed inside the computer, we call it 'software based', it the chip is placed on the outside of the computer chassis, we call it 'hardware'. It's a semantic thing only.

There's no such things as 'native' or 'DSP based' DAWs either: All computer chips process digital signals, and all the code (unless some emulating is going on) is native.

Wake up to the modern world, joeq! Color TVs, automobiles, telephones and computers that can handle what we used to consider large amounts of data and complex algorithms in real time actually do exist!

The processors inside the old 224, 300 and 480 may not be more powerful than what you find in today's cell phones or our kids' gameboxes.

The Lexicon developer on this board (who also is behind Lexicon's 'hardware reverb' flagship, the 960) have explained, in several posts, how the 'DSP chips' have some catching up to do, and how he himself was surprised when he saw how well these reverb algorithms were running on regular computers.

Here are some of his posts:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4662914-post15.html
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4662202-post186.html
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4661663-post147.html
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4662026-post166.html
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4661644-post145.html

And some excerpts from what he writes; all relevant to the topic of this thread and the misconceptions about 'DSP hardware' vs 'native':
Quote:
I did the reverbs for the 960L. In the worst case, an algorithm required 8 processors (4 Lexichips, 2 Z80s. a 56361 and a Celeron). It was an absolute nightmare partitioning stuff up among all those hungry mouths. You're not going to convince me that you won't do a better job if you have a single processor capable of doing all the work without all the bother.
Quote:
The focus of the DSP manufacturers is not on high-end audio (at least as we mean it on this forum). They're interested in smart phones, car audio systems and the like. The requirements in those system is typically low power consumption and high integration (with built-in S/PDIF and such). While these DSP chips are inarguably powerful, there's been very little real change in their crunching ability in years.

Compare that to computers. There's a hungry market for computers, whether towers or laptops. Those computers have got to be able to encode home videos, play music and manage your email--all while you're browsing the web looking at YouTube videos of plugins. That market focuses companies like Intel. Their chips now have multiple cores with very smart cache management and a heaping pile of memory.
Quote:
I originally coded these on a G5 and could run several copies without sweating (half-dozen 'verbs and about 16 disk tracks with plenty of CPU left). Last few months I've been on an 8-core Intel Mac. Dozens and dozens and dozens. I can't think of anything to do with that much reverb. Our guy doing the demos at AES is using an old Macbook Pro, running Tiger. He had a couple of dozen disk tracks and a half-dozen copies of the plug.

There of course is skepticism about ITB verbs, but it's really about the code.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #287
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamwerks View Post
The processing power needed for Eq and dynamics is nothing compared to that needed for the lastest VI's and samplers. And that's not the kind of power that Avid sells.

Massive speculation about the future product lines, but their CEO's have probably known for many years what they could and couldn't do. The guys making those decisions are free from the biases and emotions that us end users have.

I forsee a rack mounted dsp module like the Eleven guitar rig. I don't see Avid getting out of the Hardware market. There are so many cool things that they can come up with (other than dsp) that so many will want.

Yep, the Eleven Rack was a dead giveaway, and the missing mid line product in their line is so obvious it hurts. Right now you either spend under a grand or 10 grand. That will change, and my bet is that it changes at NAMM.

TH
Old 22nd November 2009
  #288
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spicemix View Post
You might want to look into "aliasing"...

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/4786669-post2079.html

Yeah I read it before. When I can hear that I'll begin worrying

TH
Old 22nd November 2009
  #289
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 

I'm still plugging along happily with a G5 and PTHD3. I have been tempted to upgrade to the latest and greatest Mac but am going to sit tight to see what Digi does. I can't help but wonder if digi is going to do away with TDM. It blows my mind that there is an iMac 27 inch screen that has incredible power for about 2K. Of course it has no PCIe slots but has firewire, USB, and ethernet.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #290
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
And the band won't sell ONE more record because it's recorded at a higher sampling rate

TH
So your only motivator is how it translates to sales? Each to his own.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #291
Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
TDM+native >native ...at least for another decade.

That said, the TDM+host advantage will diminish every year.

How must Avid stay ahead? With Pro Tools obviously, "Pro Tools the SOFTWARE." Pro Tools will more and more have to compete with the other leading DAWs on a level playing field, as the importance of dedicated DSP becomes less of an advantage.

That's why PT8 was such a huge leap forward and a brilliant use of resources. They laid down the gauntlet and said we're best, and they succeeded at making the best well-rounded and professional "DAW package," with untouchable editing and mixing ease, reliability, and efficiency and has a great line of pro quality controllers like the ICON behind it. (Yes, of course the other DAWs beat PT in many ways, but as the best professional ""DAW package" or "DAW system", the PT system is unbeatable.)
I more think they were doing a nessasary game of catch up, but to say "untouchable editing and mixing ease" ya know I read an awful lot of this statement on here and this time I just have to say:

I use pretty much every major DAW platform because I freelance all over the place, and PT just doesnt have those advantages IMHO. In PT making a cut is a two step process, and who the hell wants to remember all those damn buss numbers! Its not that I don't know it like the back of my hand, i do. Cubase for examble you just make a group channel track and assign your track output to the group channels name. Your telling me buss numbers In and out are easier than that? Sure you could label them in the IO screen but who needs to think about all that?

I do think PT8 is a major step into this decade however and finally makes the program not feel so primitive anymore, but untouchable editing? cmon I'll take a scissor tool and snip snip snip, over a mouse click - command E mouse click - command E mouse click - command E anyday! Elastic audio is nice though. ICON? I'd never pay that much for a mouse gimme a break. lol.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #292
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
"DAW package," with untouchable editing and mixing ease, reliability, and efficiency and has a great line of pro quality controllers like the ICON behind it.
Sorry, not worded very well. Editing and mixing ease is widely regarded as "the best," but that in isolation its not untouchable...PT as a "package DAW solution" is untouchable.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #293
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
So your only motivator is how it translates to sales? Each to his own.
Reality is a motivator.

When you can sit next to me and pick out which songs are at 96 and which aren't....on the radio...on TV....on iTunes...even on a the average stereo in a person's living room....it will be worth the added expense to record. Unless you can do that you are doing it for no one but yourself.

TH
Old 22nd November 2009
  #294
Gear Guru
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I think it is entirely possible that we will never have 'enough' power.

As evolution runs in the opposite direction from entropy, software bloat is the flip side to Moore's Law. As computers get faster, programs enlarge to take advantage of the greater speed.

I remember my second computer, it was nominally SO much faster than my first computer. But what happened was I spent the same amount of time waiting for the same programs to load, in color!
You raise a good point but the graph isn't linear. Each type of program gets to a point where upgrading to a faster processor becomes less and less important.

A word processor for example. Who among us would ever upgrade so that their word processor would run faster? Those days are gone.

I think we're pretty close with Pro audio.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #295
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
A word processor for example. Who among us would ever upgrade so that their word processor would run faster? Those days are gone.

I think we're pretty close with Pro audio.
Not if you're composing using VIs in AU, VST or RTAS. We're miles still from "pretty close."

I see so many post that say Logic is in a league of it's own, or or PT is in a league of it's own or PT or Logic blows, etc. Very few seem to have the overall picture in front of them at all times...that the editor/mixer's needs on a TDM DAW is radically different than a songwriter's needs on a MacBook, both being "pro audio" professionals. As a composer, I couldn't give a toss about ADC, but as you know, I'm freaking for Freeze Track which would save me at at least a half day work per week in printing and writing all these posts. I bet you can live without Freeze. Of course this is related to the light vs dark GUI battle. All of these different tasks must be done with the same software. (and should be for workflow's sake.)

As far as storage space, that is one are where we're solidly "there." Videos aren't going beyond HD specs for years to come and audio is not going beyond 96k for years to come, but hard drives breath easier and easier every year. Seagate 1.5GB 7200 go for $80 sometimes. With Time Machine everyone can duplicate or triplicate everything with ease and little cost. In the storage arena, we're golden.

And Kenny, yes, for editing, CPU wise, we're pretty much there and have been for a while. For mixing, we're pretty much there too if you have a multicore intel chip, TDM system or loads of I/O with outboard. In songwriting we're stressing over Freeze Track, VI efficiency, Receptors, running Logic in parallel, the VSL concept, Bidule, etc etc..it's still a serious nightmare.
Old 22nd November 2009
  #296
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I haven't heard the new Lexicon plugs, but I HAVE heard that exact same claim 1000 times before!
samples in a mix by ken lewis
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-p...ml#post4786092
Old 22nd November 2009
  #297
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Not if you're composing using VIs in AU, VST or RTAS. We're miles still from "pretty close."

I see so many post that say Logic is in a league of it's own, or or PT is in a league of it's own or PT or Logic blows, etc. Very few seem to have the overall picture in front of them at all times...that the editor/mixer's needs on a TDM DAW is radically different than a songwriter's needs on a MacBook, both being "pro audio" professionals. As a composer, I couldn't give a toss about ADC, but as you know, I'm freaking for Freeze Track which would save me at at least a half day work per week in printing and writing all these posts. I bet you can live without Freeze. Of course this is related to the light vs dark GUI battle. All of these different tasks must be done with the same software. (and should be for workflow's sake.)
Absolutely. And VIs/sample developers are just getting more and more adventurous.

The whole thing is like when your house is crowded with too much stuff and you say "Man, we need a bigger place." You know what happens. You get a bigger place, and now you have more room for more stuff. And on it goes.

TH
Old 23rd November 2009
  #298
Lives for gear
 
Mikey MTC's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarfishMusic View Post
and who the hell wants to remember all those damn buss numbers! Its not that I don't know it like the back of my hand, i do. Cubase for examble you just make a group channel track and assign your track output to the group channels name. Your telling me buss numbers In and out are easier than that? Sure you could label them in the IO screen but who needs to think about all that?
Ummm .... right click on the bus number at a bus output or input point, select rename, type new informative name. I can't imagine it being much easier than that.

Quote:
ICON? I'd never pay that much for a mouse gimme a break. lol.
You've obviously never used one or seen a demo.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio Addict View Post
The model of DSP cards is most definitely not dead. If it were, why would SSL, TC, UAD, etc keep coming out with them?
Copy protection...
Old 23rd November 2009
  #300
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceantracks View Post
Reality is a motivator.

When you can sit next to me and pick out which songs are at 96 and which aren't....on the radio...on TV....on iTunes...even on a the average stereo in a person's living room....it will be worth the added expense to record. Unless you can do that you are doing it for no one but yourself.

TH
Obviously, you've got a point. My point is that if I can tell a clear difference ABing hi rez and redbook versions of my own track in my own space, that's enough for me. Though, I've rarely demoed the difference for someone where they didn't appreciate it given the chance, I don't care if anyone can pick my track out from the pack as better. I know that I've contributed to more depth of beauty in the world. That's the reality that motivates me. Clearly, you relate to it differently, and I honor that. Like I said, each to his own. My only regret is that quality isn't promoted more, because I believe that if it was, we'd be living in a more beautiful world, with less of the destructive consequences of self perpetuating insensitivity. Maybe not your thing...
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
xirvi / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
cajonezzz / So much gear, so little time
9

Forum Jump
Forum Jump