The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why is pro tools midi work flow so bad?
Old 31st December 2010
  #31
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby snowby View Post
I never said about features..

I said about the poor implementation of them. If your recording bands all day, im sure pro tools wipes the floor with all the other daws.. (except reason record obviously..thumbsup

I was saying that pro tools LE on pc is no good.

This aproved hardware thing as well? Thats crazy. Reason and Presonus one dont require you to buy a new mother board to run their programs.


I do like pro tools mixer screen and routing and editing. And its a shame to see it go.

but unstable opperation and blulky,clumbsy,buggy work flow when trying to run 5-6 instrument plugins means its getting uninstalled.
Yeah - the PC thing is a bit of a bummer on PT. But it's about "jumping thru hoops".... I like the way PT says "look, this is what we'll support - fek the rest".... It's the same philosophy as a MAc in general. I wish Microsoft would have done the same thing - look at the sprawling mess because they support every single combo of hardware. I'd do the same in my company (in fact to a degree I DO - these are my parameters and if you don't agree with them then don't hire me). I agree LE is a bit of a lumpus, on Mac too. But now with PT9 - heck..... away ya run!
Old 31st December 2010
  #32
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Energie View Post
I don't understand this. What takes long in pro tools? I pull up an instrument, bam, its there. I have no issues waiting, except for Large VI's that them in themselves take just a tad to load. no waiting here.

yes, you can pull one up, but there is more to it than just that when one wants to do some advance programing. When it comes to midi editing,workflow, midi tools, the way things are organized it just seems more logical, fluid and becomes quit fast in abelton live and logic especially when you have 30 or so midi tracks in a dance song. Why do some people favor protools over some other daws that do the same thing? because of the way it feels, works and looks for what they are using it for but avanced midi workflow is not the focus of PT even though it has improved. i don't want to turn this into a thread about which one is better, it's up to the individual. I guess on the outside yes, if you are going to pull up a instrument, play some notes on a midi synth, mix that into a song and call it a day then it's fine. If you want to use advanced midi features,get into the grit of things,have a split screen workflow with more options and faster work flow then another daw might be for you.

It's really not until you dig into things until you find the down falls of anything. With any peice of gear I"ve owned, it's awesome at first then you try to find out how you can do something new and realize that might be one limitation so this other model might just do that for me. Logic has some equal downfalls with audio when compared to protools that makes a Logic user like me run back to PT. If you're a midi guy try writing a song in ableton live or Logic for a month and let me know what you think...seriously.
Old 31st December 2010
  #33
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattg082 View Post
yes, you can pull one up, but there is more to it than just that when one wants to do some advance programing. When it comes to midi editing,workflow, midi tools, the way things are organized it just seems more logical, fluid and becomes quit fast in abelton live and logic especially when you have 30 or so midi tracks in a dance song. Why do some people favor protools over some other daws that do the same thing? because of the way it feels, works and looks for what they are using it for but avanced midi workflow is not the focus of PT even though it has improved. i don't want to turn this into a thread about which one is better, it's up to the individual. I guess on the outside yes, if you are going to pull up a instrument, play some notes on a midi synth, mix that into a song and call it a day then it's fine. If you want to use advanced midi features,get into the grit of things,have a split screen workflow with more options and faster work flow then another daw might be for you.

It's really not until you dig into things until you find the down falls of anything. With any peice of gear I"ve owned, it's awesome at first then you try to find out how you can do something new and realize that might be one limitation so this other model might just do that for me. Logic has some equal downfalls with audio when compared to protools that makes a Logic user like me run back to PT. If you're a midi guy try writing a song in ableton live or Logic for a month and let me know what you think...seriously.

Please define advanced midi workflow...

Seriously. PT has come a long way. It has a true midi editor, multiple controller lanes. The ability to edit multiple regions in one window. Midi event editor, Score editor. Realtime properties for 95% of your average global stuff. A very elegant multitimbrallity system (unlike Logic for instance)

Logic goes deeper. Without a doubt. Going into sysex and nrpn type of editing isn't exactly easy in PT (or ableton for that matter), but they're PITA protocols that aren't easy editable in any DAW. It's a bit less of a PITA in Cubase and Logic. I'll give you that. And something like the transformer stuff in Logic doesn't exist in PT (or Ableton). But does that make PT unusable for midi? It's more a + for Logic than a - for PT

I fall into the category you describe, My music uses far more midi tracks then Audio tracks, and I'm completely comfortable in PT. Version 8 made it from "usable" to "fully capable". I have a copy of Logic on my MAC. had "switched" from PT because of the obvious shortcomings of PTLE/MP, but my experience was very "meh". With PT9 I didn't hesitate a second to switch back... To each his own. For me it's PT9. But don't tell me I'm a "throw a plugin on a track and play some notes cause that's all PT can do" user. That's just uninformed BS... Especially when you talk about Ableton. It's a GREAT program, but to say it has advanced MIDI editing is laughable. Yes, with "MAX for Live" it does, but that's a whole different ballgame...
Old 31st December 2010
  #34
Lives for gear
 
Energie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattg082 View Post
yes, you can pull one up, but there is more to it than just that when one wants to do some advance programing. When it comes to midi editing,workflow, midi tools, the way things are organized it just seems more logical, fluid and becomes quit fast in abelton live and logic especially when you have 30 or so midi tracks in a dance song. Why do some people favor protools over some other daws that do the same thing? because of the way it feels, works and looks for what they are using it for but avanced midi workflow is not the focus of PT even though it has improved. i don't want to turn this into a thread about which one is better, it's up to the individual. I guess on the outside yes, if you are going to pull up a instrument, play some notes on a midi synth, mix that into a song and call it a day then it's fine. If you want to use advanced midi features,get into the grit of things,have a split screen workflow with more options and faster work flow then another daw might be for you.

It's really not until you dig into things until you find the down falls of anything. With any peice of gear I"ve owned, it's awesome at first then you try to find out how you can do something new and realize that might be one limitation so this other model might just do that for me. Logic has some equal downfalls with audio when compared to protools that makes a Logic user like me run back to PT. If you're a midi guy try writing a song in ableton live or Logic for a month and let me know what you think...seriously.
I actually make most of my living composing and sequencing in pro tools, so yeah, I would say I know a bit about working inside PT with midi as I do it everyday, sometimes complicated orchestral midi mockups to track heavy electronic stuff. I have had to learn logic, DP etc. I can work with midi on any of these programs, I prefer audio editing in PT, so I just stay within. But there is nothing midi wise in PT I am wanting at the time really. It gets the job done for me.
Old 31st December 2010
  #35
Lives for gear
 
Igotsoul4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby snowby View Post
I like pro tools for the editing..

but the midi/intruement part is horrible. Im talking serious midi.. not engineer who needs to play a few midi notes every 2 years..

but some one who composes with it every day... Its a breathtaking un-creative experince..

I still dont get why cant all daws be as realiable and well made as reason?
I totally agree but nothing beats the audio editing of Protools. It's weird they can't get the second half right. Logic on the other hand has the opposite problem. I cannot get a workflo going with audio. I guess there is no one trick pony.
Old 31st December 2010
  #36
Old 31st December 2010
  #37
Gear Head
 

Maybe i make this thread about the wrong thing.. only i didnt know how to make it sound snappy other wise.

I think actually maybe the midi in pro tools.. Is prehaps ok..


But the problem is, when you are trying to write in the box using the plugins like xpand, structure, hybrid etc.

The way it handles plug in instruments is not very pleasant.

Now i have made many compositons with just pro tools, ableton live and reason.


I hate using 3 daws.. and i dont. I use reason but i was looking for a daw that combined audio with midi and maybe vst.

Ableton live has an amazing workflow and is a very nice program. The sequencing is just like hardware and very creative.

but the audio part of it sucks, no mono tracks, drop outs when you play back 20 audio tracks + and editing is not really very good, and some crashes.

Reason is perfect but no VST support or audio... I have never had one crash with reason in 5 years of using it. My hardware i used before reason crashed more often. On pc or mac.


And today i try pro tools For the last time. I installed it because i wanted to record some audio.

Disconected from internet so it loads up (why the hell is a DAW connected by being connected to internet? this is abysmal) used for 15 min with reason rewired recording thru a mic. Big system crash. Shut down my system and i had to reboot twice to get it going again.

So i bouce the reason track to audio and then load t as audio into pro tools.

Everything worked ok. Until i wanted to bounce what i had done down. I had the hardware buffer set at 64 samples. After the bounce my cans were full of this white noize hissing that almost made me deaf.

I mean.. what the hell. How can they release a DAW that is physically dangerous like that?


And as for that guy who said about all the midi features and how pro tools has them .. from the nertherlands..


Its not important what features a DAW has, its how easy it is to use to write music with.

The most imortant thing is how enjoyable and easy it is to use, how fluid.

Its like reason has no features.. but I can make a whole track with it in about 2 hours or less.

Where as pro tools it tends to take me about a day to make a track..
Old 31st December 2010
  #38
Lives for gear
 
Energie's Avatar
 

it appears you just don't know how to operate pro tools.
Old 31st December 2010
  #39
Gear Addict
 
MX582's Avatar
 

ehh i like that reason track way better both sonically and musically. maybe stick to using reason?

anyway... dunno if someones already mentioned it but vienna ensemble pro would fix this right? i agree protools cant handle virtual instruments at all but i love working with midi in protools, editing and recording it. Combined with vienna ensemble i feel thats pretty powerful. I like editing midi in protools
better than ableton and logic.. i'll admit im more comfortable in protools in general but as far as just plain midi goes i don't feel like its lacking anything. am i missing something? is there anything different about cubase that makes midi more efficient? from an editing point of view..

anyway dont wanna hijack the thread but i believe vienna ensemble pro would solve your problem
Old 31st December 2010
  #40
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby snowby View Post
Disconected from internet so it loads up (why the hell is a DAW connected by being connected to internet? this is abysmal)
It's not. The reason we don't connect DAW's to the internet is to prevent our computer from conducting processes in the background while we're trying to record.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby snowby View Post
Everything worked ok. Until i wanted to bounce what i had done down. I had the hardware buffer set at 64 samples. After the bounce my cans were full of this white noize hissing that almost made me deaf.

I mean.. what the hell. How can they release a DAW that is physically dangerous like that?
Maybe you should RTFM. You clearly don't understand what the hardware buffer is for or why you're using those settings.
Old 31st December 2010
  #41
Lives for gear
 

you must be doing something wrong, as i have a pretty crappy older PC, not on avids list, with a dodgy at best interface that has always struggled with drivers, only 4gb ram, and i just composed something with 12 INstruments and about the same in plug-ins, with no pops, clicks, or crashes...

i think if you tailor your comp for music only, streamline for max performance, don't connect to the net and use different settings, you will probably get much better results.
Old 31st December 2010
  #42
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Igotsoul4u View Post
I totally agree but nothing beats the audio editing of Protools. It's weird they can't get the second half right.
Tried it recently? As far as I'm concerned, they got it right. All of it. I agree about the audio, and after 15+ years on performer and DP alongside PT, I'm happily on PT only at this point, and in some respects, the midi is soooo much better than DP that I'm just loving it. DP can do SOME stuff better, but it's not that PT can't do it, and the other advantages of PT smoke DP for my purposes, so I'm happy as a clam. I'm working on everything from live orchestra sessions, to HUGE HUGE midi orchestral mockups to heavy electronic stuff to ??? I'm working midi on PT everyday, and rarely miss any midi stuff from DP.
Old 31st December 2010
  #43
Gear Nut
 

Why is pro tools midi work flow so bad?

I don't find much wrong with the midi except sometimes when copying a piece of midi at the start of the bar it disappears when duplicated.

Also I wish there was freeze or bounce all effects in place. I HATE having to buss everything over. It takes forever.
Old 31st December 2010
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Energie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asian Steve View Post
I don't find much wrong with the midi except sometimes when copying a piece of midi at the start of the bar it disappears when duplicated.

Also I wish there was freeze or bounce all effects in place. I HATE having to buss everything over. It takes forever.
Yeah that happens ocassionaly. A glitch I get annoyed with. But I usually find if I delete the region, then repaste, it fixes it.
Old 31st December 2010
  #45
Gear Nut
 

Why is pro tools midi work flow so bad?

I just always nudge the first midi note of any region forward a few ticks.
Old 31st December 2010
  #46
Lives for gear
midi in PT was an afterthought
Old 31st December 2010
  #47
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
midi in PT was an afterthought
Not anymore....
Old 31st December 2010
  #48
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Not anymore....
PT midi is weak and poorly implemented. Unlike Cubase where they mastered midi
in the 80s and basically pioneered the virtual instrument later in the 90s.
Cubase midi workflow is what all other applications wish they were.

no other app can handle midi and audio as well as Cubase from a native CPU perspective.

PT even with accel cards and all their 'DSP' still only performs as well as native Cubase.
it's mind boggling.

In addition the PT GUI is archaic and amateurish from a contemporary HCI design perspective
but then again I like DOS and oldstyle unix apps myself? so............YMMV
Old 31st December 2010
  #49
Gear Head
 

Maybe i did speak to soon...

I watched a video and saw the mighty JR Rotem using pro tools as his midi sequencer..

I must admit i was shaken up by this! he wasn't even using 8. It looked like he was using 6 or 5 lol.

So anyway I reformatted my pc. and reinstalled pro tools le 8.

And i now test it and so far so good. I put as little as possible on my pc as possible and i no longer get the system crash every 10 min.

I still dont know what was causing it. Maybe it was flash player? Well I have no idea.

As for the work flow im having another go at it.

Im open minded and can admit when i am wrong or could be wrong about something..


I admit its not as bad as i thought it was...
Old 1st January 2011
  #50
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
PT midi is weak and poorly implemented. Unlike Cubase where they mastered midi
in the 80s and basically pioneered the virtual instrument later in the 90s.
Cubase midi workflow is what all other applications wish they were.

no other app can handle midi and audio as well as Cubase from a native CPU perspective.

PT even with accel cards and all their 'DSP' still only performs as well as native Cubase.
it's mind boggling.

In addition the PT GUI is archaic and amateurish from a contemporary HCI design perspective
but then again I like DOS and oldstyle unix apps myself? so............YMMV
Did you ever open PT after version 4.0?

BTW, I won't deny Steinbergs pioneering role with plugin tech, but explain to me why every program had VI tracks while in Cubase you still had to work with separate Midi/Audio tracks to get a VI running. One of the MAIN reasons I left Cubase in '05. So much for VI workflow...
Old 1st January 2011
  #51
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
PT midi is weak and poorly implemented. Unlike Cubase where they mastered midi
in the 80s
Absolutely ridiculous. Not even worth a rebuttal. It shows that you really have no clue. Give it a try sometime. You'll be surprised.
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
FBE / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
3
lfranz5451 / Low End Theory
16
lfranz5451 / Low End Theory
6

Forum Jump
Forum Jump