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
Avid circles the drain
Old 17th March 2014
  #271
Lives for gear
 

+ 1,000,000

to 3rd Degree.

You nailed it in every way I would have attempted to.

Good work.
Old 20th March 2014
  #272
Old 20th March 2014
  #273
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post

It is a continuing mistake of them not to do it properly but you are also ignoring the growing pro market that doesn't need DSP based systems.


Alistair
Right, I've been out of this thread, but there was no reason that Avid had to make Pro Tools compete as crippleware in the native market. That's what it was, and it alienated everyone in the marketplace. It was done to placate the HD crowd, but the HD crowd wasn't going to be purchasing it since their needs were met by HD. And people who just wanted native audio software simply did the math and compared features and all they saw was that one software met their needs better than what Avid had to offer.

Presumably, anyway. We won't ever know how many people would have just bought Pro Tools at the native level if it was actually a full DAW that wasn't outcompeted by virtually all the other native DAWs, but I can say that I am one of them, and we've all seen plenty of people asking for the ability to just purchase HD on various forums, which was dismissed by Avid aficionados and Avid themselves.

Basically, if you can't sell the people what they are asking for, what they actually want, then you have a serious problem which will usually end in the business collapsing. Because someone will figure out how to do it if you can't. Which is exactly what we are seeing, Avid ignored the needs of certain demographics (even while trying to sell them an inferior product) and is paying the price for that.

I mean, what did LE offer? 48 "tracks" or "voices" or whatever euphemism Avid was calling the specific crippling of the crippleware? But you could buy more "tracks" or "voices" for, what, a thousand or two thousand dollars? How is that going to compete with anything? It's a joke. It wasn't going to compete well and it didn't. And boom! There goes the whole, and very lucrative, native/hobbyist/prosumer market.

I've said this before... I've been saying it for years here. But Avid just couldn't figure out a way to serve the various markets, and its flipping and flopping sure pissed off a lot of people, most notably at the LE level, but I've seen any number of people unhappy at the HD level also.

And all those people who found an expensive way to get HD to run natively by doing a roundabout and getting those awful Toolkits, only to have that door shut in their faces by some arbitrary decision should really have told the company something. At each step, Avid has seemed out of step with not only their customers but even with themselves.

Awful company. I hope they make it and come out of this a leaner and more responsive company with an actual vision for themselves and their products, in touch with what their customers need and want, be it at the very high end level or wherever they choose to compete. This "Avid Everywhere" corporate doublespeak bull**** isn't giving me a lot of confidence about that, but you never know.
3
Share
Old 20th March 2014
  #274
Gear Addict
 

The Pro Tools name is worth some money on the market. Some entity will buy it up and make it work/survive. I don't think anyone would buy it to kill it - even though it deserves a thousand deaths. Interesting times indeed.
Old 20th March 2014
  #275
Lives for gear
 

Not sure if it deserves any deaths... it's frankly very good software. Like I say, I was happy to think that I could just purchase it finally and run it on my computer and with my interface, but that was just illusion. It was still crippled.... there were like two really great features that I thought were exciting, and some other little things, but none of that was available to me, so I put my wallet back in my pocket.

Pro Tools isn't going anywhere. Avid the company might be going somewhere. Avid the software isn't going anywhere.

Sibelius I'm worried about. That's a shame... Avid actually did a great job with Sibelius' last version.
Old 20th March 2014
  #276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Mal View Post
Right, I've been out of this thread, but there was no reason that Avid had to make Pro Tools compete as crippleware in the native market. That's what it was, and it alienated everyone in the marketplace. It was done to placate the HD crowd, but the HD crowd wasn't going to be purchasing it since their needs were met by HD. And people who just wanted native audio software simply did the math and compared features and all they saw was that one software met their needs better than what Avid had to offer.

Presumably, anyway. We won't ever know how many people would have just bought Pro Tools at the native level if it was actually a full DAW that wasn't outcompeted by virtually all the other native DAWs, but I can say that I am one of them, and we've all seen plenty of people asking for the ability to just purchase HD on various forums, which was dismissed by Avid aficionados and Avid themselves.

Basically, if you can't sell the people what they are asking for, what they actually want, then you have a serious problem which will usually end in the business collapsing. Because someone will figure out how to do it if you can't. Which is exactly what we are seeing, Avid ignored the needs of certain demographics (even while trying to sell them an inferior product) and is paying the price for that.

I mean, what did LE offer? 48 "tracks" or "voices" or whatever euphemism Avid was calling the specific crippling of the crippleware? But you could buy more "tracks" or "voices" for, what, a thousand or two thousand dollars? How is that going to compete with anything? It's a joke. It wasn't going to compete well and it didn't. And boom! There goes the whole, and very lucrative, native/hobbyist/prosumer market.

I've said this before... I've been saying it for years here. But Avid just couldn't figure out a way to serve the various markets, and its flipping and flopping sure pissed off a lot of people, most notably at the LE level, but I've seen any number of people unhappy at the HD level also.

And all those people who found an expensive way to get HD to run natively by doing a roundabout and getting those awful Toolkits, only to have that door shut in their faces by some arbitrary decision should really have told the company something. At each step, Avid has seemed out of step with not only their customers but even with themselves.

Awful company. I hope they make it and come out of this a leaner and more responsive company with an actual vision for themselves and their products, in touch with what their customers need and want, be it at the very high end level or wherever they choose to compete. This "Avid Everywhere" corporate doublespeak bull**** isn't giving me a lot of confidence about that, but you never know.
Well said, they had a great opportunity to own the consumer market and they just completely dropped the ball.
Old 20th March 2014
  #277
Lives for gear
 
rotundness's Avatar
Maybe someone already said this, I didn't read every single post...
What about Universal Audio purchasing Avid/Protools?
Are they big enough?
Old 21st March 2014
  #278
Gear Maniac
 

If you read the article from Bloomberg someone linked to a few pages back, it really does seem bleak. The reason is economics, and nothing to do with Avid per se. Basically, unless the stock goes for a firesale, no private equity money will take them private. That's good tho cuz all those companies do is borrow money to acquire the company (leveraged buyout), then strip mine the assets to sell them off to pay themselves bonuses. What's typically left is a shell of the company so mired in debt they can't compete, so they fold. But it doesn't matter at that point because everyone has taken the money and run.

But that leave a quandary for healthy companies. There's a long list of healthy companies that could buy Avid, some of which have been mentioned on this thread. The problem is that to do it legit, they have to assume the LIABILITIES along with the assets. And Avid is already swimming in debt, apparently.

So yeah, PT the software is far to valuable to disappear in the near future. Otoh, who knows what will happen before someone acquires them, and their ultimate future depends on WHO acquires them and what state their financials are in when/if they do go belly up.
Old 21st March 2014
  #279
Lives for gear
 

Really? My understanding has been that Avid isn't particularly in debt, and is sitting on a lot of money, although they are apparently going through that pretty quickly. Am I wrong?
Old 21st March 2014
  #280
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philter View Post
ProTools isn't losing market share where it matters, which is with professional recording facilities. It was a mistake for them to try to market to home users, as these kind of goofy threads clearly show. If you need HDX, you will know you need it. If you don't need it, you should be on cubase or garage band whatever other home user program you want.
Funny, quite a few professional people around me have already switched from ProTools to Cubase and Nuendo sometime ago.

BTW, it would be interesting if Behringer would buy Avid. Hmmm...

UliTools!
Old 21st March 2014
  #281
Gear Head
 
louieshowers's Avatar
 

Does anyone know for certainty how much money they do or do not have? Does the lack of current financial reporting by Avid necessarily indicate a dire problem? Or could it indicate that they have much more money than they would like to make publicly known? Just an honest question......

As far as a buy out is concerned, would it be in the best interest of another company to take on the exterior tasks of owning/rehabilitating the tainted brand name "Pro Tools"? I totally acknowledge the power of the program in which I have invested much time (approx 12 years), troubleshooting and working hours into. I would hate to have to abandon my familiarity and workflow efficiency starting from square one on a different DAW. But I feel as though something drastic needs to happen before Protools becomes a name of the past (well before its due time). I just hope that whatever outcome is reached, we see improvements in customer relations/communication, addressing the needs of its users, and reevaluate their pricing. I would hope that they would take into consideration that the marketplace has changed, and that people are expecting more of a value, along with the ability to plug and play at the hobbyist/bedroom level... The sad thing is that throughout the years, there has been accumulative damage that has been done to this name. People have been offended, and many individuals have already abandoned this potentially excellent Daw. A real vendetta exists between a lot of engineers and this company. The time is right now for someone else to step in and address these areas. But maybe this would be too tall of an order for a third party to undertake? I hope it survives. Well, Protools that is. Just my thoughts. Good Day all.

-Lou
Old 21st March 2014
  #282
Lives for gear
 

Reports are that Avid's US operations are debt free and it's overseas opererations have a very high debt load. How that translates to how much Avid owes is anyone's guess as with no financials for such a long period it's tough to make an educated guess. Of the cash reserves Avid claims it has, Avid has stated about half of that will be for their accounting re-adjustment chargeback (off the top of my head I'm thinking its 48 million US cash reserves / 23 million accounting fix - auditing costs). More specific info is out there but you will have to read the long Avid thread and jump to linked sites in the posts contained within it.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #283
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balou View Post
Funny, quite a few professional people around me have already switched from ProTools to Cubase and Nuendo sometime ago.

BTW, it would be interesting if Behringer would buy Avid. Hmmm...

UliTools!
Professional what... sure they did.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #284
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philter View Post
Professional what... sure they did.
Professional as in people who work in the music industry for a living and have done so very succesfully for decades. Like me.

Although, I've never switched from ProTools to Cubase and Nuendo, myself. I never owned PT but sometimes had to work with it. I started working with computer software on an Atari 1024 almost the day Steinberg came out with what was then called "Pro24", I believe. I still have the Atari and its successor ("Mega ST" something) around here somewhere, lol.

Later on I switched to PC but still kept using Cubase in all its versions and never looked back. I'm using the latest Cubase 7.5.10 on a pretty fast i7 PC and love it. Is Cubase the perfect DAW? No, but, imo, it's the leader of the pack.

I also noticed that quite a few people around me not only switched from PT to Cubendo but als from Mac to PC. Some make the switch from Logic and one went to Reaper. (As an aside, many also are switching from iphones to Android phones ;-) )

Some people even told me that they find it somewhat embarrassing to openly admit that they switched from PT/Mac to CB/PC but realized that the latter is a better deal, all things considered.

Do I think PT/Mac is bad? Not at all. I'm sure it's a good combo but I find it overhyped and overpriced so personally I stick to what works best for me.
1
Share
Old 22nd March 2014
  #285
Gear Maniac
 

I re-read the Forbes article linked on page 7 and it said "hemorrhaged cash" but didn't say anything about debt. So if Avid doesn't have much debt I would think they would be a reasonably attractive acquisition for any company looking for a bigger footprint in the pro audio/video market.

The problem, of course, is that unless the acquiring company changed something radical, there's no reason to expect Avid to bring it any more money than it does now, which obviously isn't much.

One thing to consider is that Pro Tools, for the very biggest installations, might actually be easier to replace than it would for the low- to mid-level facilities. In music, the biggest rooms and many of the biggest mixers still use large format analog consoles and PT serves much more like a very fancy tape machine compared to users mixing ITB. In post for blockbuster movies and whatnot, where they have several PT rigs locked together, same thing I would think. The audio is split out on large-format desks and a lot of the functionality of Pro Tools goes unused.

Compare that to the many of the small and mid-level facilities, especially in post. Most of those use Pro Tools from start to finish. They mix entirely or almost entirely ITB. Maybe some of the mid-level places have one of Avid's larger consoles, the smaller places a smaller one or none at all. But anyway, I would think the small to mid-level pro audio studio is more Avid's bread and butter than the very top of the pyramid. If that's the case, then it's even harder to make the argument that Avid can always afford to market very expensive products to it's pro customer base with impunity.
Old 22nd March 2014
  #286
Gear Maniac
 

It's unreasonable to think that Avid can keep affording to invest enough R & D money into their card based systems to make them "no compromise" awesome enough compared to the competition, and then sell only a few hundred or a few thousand of them to the very biggest studios in a market saturated with systems that still largely meet their needs. There's just not enough meat on the bone there, and Avid can't keep trying to make up the difference in the revenue they need by milking their entire user base with unpleasant upgrade prices.

They need to make a radical change in their pricing IMO. The R & D for the HDX and S6 is already baked into the cake, so it's natural for them to try and reap what they can from it. I just wished they wouldn't have gone back to the old business model when doing it. I just don't think it's gonna work this time. Too many of the needs of the market are still met by too many of the existing PT systems out there.
1
Share
Old 22nd March 2014
  #287
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Everybody is talking about PT PT !
PT isn't the problem ! Unless you understand the whole company as in Video and The Composition software, you don't get it!
AVID always had lots of cash and knew that Sony, Panasonic, and at times Harmon could target them for take over, they would then spend that cash buying some lower end company chasing the consumer market share that every "analyst ( the guy at any Wall Street firm who played guitar )" wanted them to go after. It got them market share but no profit and when Apple started to give away Garage band that market share disappeared !
If you ask the guy who still has HD why he hasn't upgraded its because Nobody has proven to him why he has to upgrade! 24TDM to HD was any easy sell to an industry that was banking on something better than 44.1/48. Boy that sure went well!!
When on the Music End the top studios (BlackBird etc) Still run G5 PCI HD rigs HDX is a hard sell as an upgrade investment!
The Post world likes HDX , HD native is doing well in the music side. The live world still loves Venue!
If AVID was a privately held company and had not chased the consumer pro-Sumer market it would be fine!
My dream is still that some how the folks at SSL end up with it, and open up things like Eucon!
If its split up the the seamless integration with the video side probably goes bye bye! That would mean open season in the DAW world and would not be a good thing!
Old 23rd March 2014
  #288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balou View Post
Professional as in people who work in the music industry for a living and have done so very succesfully for decades. Like me.

Although, I've never switched from ProTools to Cubase and Nuendo, myself. I never owned PT but sometimes had to work with it. I started working with computer software on an Atari 1024 almost the day Steinberg came out with what was then called "Pro24", I believe. I still have the Atari and its successor ("Mega ST" something) around here somewhere, lol.

Later on I switched to PC but still kept using Cubase in all its versions and never looked back. I'm using the latest Cubase 7.5.10 on a pretty fast i7 PC and love it. Is Cubase the perfect DAW? No, but, imo, it's the leader of the pack.

I also noticed that quite a few people around me not only switched from PT to Cubendo but als from Mac to PC. Some make the switch from Logic and one went to Reaper. (As an aside, many also are switching from iphones to Android phones ;-) )

Some people even told me that they find it somewhat embarrassing to openly admit that they switched from PT/Mac to CB/PC but realized that the latter is a better deal, all things considered.

Do I think PT/Mac is bad? Not at all. I'm sure it's a good combo but I find it overhyped and overpriced so personally I stick to what works best for me.
For tracking, nothing IS better. Every other option has compromises and work-arounds. No-one is switching at pro level - by which I mean commercial studios, the sorts of places labels hire.

Sole owner/operators, individual writer studios, etc - yes, lots of other software in use there. But this was never the industry PT was the "standard" for. Admittedly, if they were, perhaps they wouldn't be in this mess.

I've just not seen any real tracking facilities switch from PT - I've never looked at hiring somewhere, only to be told they're now running Cubase instead of an HD rig. It depends on your clientele, your business model etc, but the commercial world carries on as before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
One thing to consider is that Pro Tools, for the very biggest installations, might actually be easier to replace than it would for the low- to mid-level facilities. In music, the biggest rooms and many of the biggest mixers still use large format analog consoles and PT serves much more like a very fancy tape machine compared to users mixing ITB. In post for blockbuster movies and whatnot, where they have several PT rigs locked together, same thing I would think. The audio is split out on large-format desks and a lot of the functionality of Pro Tools goes unused.

Compare that to the many of the small and mid-level facilities, especially in post. Most of those use Pro Tools from start to finish. They mix entirely or almost entirely ITB. Maybe some of the mid-level places have one of Avid's larger consoles, the smaller places a smaller one or none at all. But anyway, I would think the small to mid-level pro audio studio is more Avid's bread and butter than the very top of the pyramid. If that's the case, then it's even harder to make the argument that Avid can always afford to market very expensive products to it's pro customer base with impunity.
I see what you're saying, but it doesn't sound like you've worked in the worlds you're talking about. Lots of film mixing is done ITB using ICON and so on; yes some is done on digital boards. Lots of music mixing is done hybrid, from top level pros down. Even the die-hard SSL users are slowly switching to a hybrid way of working.

And at the end of the day - there's no system that does what HD TDM/HDX does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
The live world still loves Venue!
Many forget this...so many venues I see VENUE at.
Old 23rd March 2014
  #289
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
For tracking, nothing IS better. Every other option has compromises and work-arounds. No-one is switching at pro level - by which I mean commercial studios, the sorts of places labels hire.

SNIP

And at the end of the day - there's no system that does what HD TDM/HDX does.
I started using PT before it was PT, it was sound tools on a clunky mac IIfx. Then it was mostly Avid AudioVision, and then also PT from version 3, always with Dsp cards.
DSP/TDM/HD was a requirement to be able to run the program.
Finally after Avid took the jump with PT9 to let go of hardware restrictions, the only reason to ever use HD or HDX at our facility is the limits that Avid created themselves, limitations that really doesn't exist at all and where the sole purpose of them existing is to sell more hardware. Satellite technology beeing the only possible exemption.

We still have five PTHD systems (and two regular PT licenses). All the hardware (but one) is in storage though, licenses and software works fine.

But in the mean time, about eight years ago we started looking at Nuendo. Our Nuendo use started on a small scale, but now we have nine Nuendo licenses.

And you know what, with Nuendo I don't need no DSP cards.

YES there ARE situations where dedicated hardware is safer and more convenient! be it a HDX low latency system for recording a large band, or a 24track 2" recorder, or a dedicated location sound recorder like Aaton Cantar or a sound devices unit.

But it does not mean that they are very useful for anything else exept in these special cases. Using a Cantar to record ADR would be pretty stupid.
Using a 24track 2" to keep working with a band that will need a lot of editing and transferring of files is not very convenient. It may be that right choice for the actual recording, but for any other use? Not really.

The main benefit I can see for using a HDX system is indeed when you need a really low fixed latency system. What other REAL (not made up by avid) benefits are there?

Ah, sorry... Your post made me go off topic...
I am supposed to say something bad about Avid right?
But they seem to do that by themselves these days so I really don't have to.
1
Share
Old 23rd March 2014
  #290
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
And at the end of the day - there's no system that does what HD TDM/HDX does.
Pyramix?

Quote:
Many forget this...so many venues I see VENUE at.
I wonder how Fairlight will do in that market with their new product: FairlightAU

Alistair
Old 23rd March 2014
  #291
I just don't see anyway to do low latency sends with FX from inside a DAW at the moment, without an Avid system.

Native systems have too much latency. Many don't seem to realise it, but they do. Maybe Apollo is the only way to run with FX and low latency (cue mixer with FX) but then you're limited to UAD plugins - whereas with HD I can build a mix and keep it, move between systems, and never have to think about it.

If you don't need to monitor with insert FX, you can use analogue cues or a cuemixer software, and have some of the same low latency. But I, like most commercial studios, have clients who know what they can and can't do - and telling them "no, you can't do that anymore" isn't conducive to business. Plus it introduces that term "workaround" which shouldn't really be usual practice in a high end facility. Workarounds are to get you through breakdowns, bugs or odd requirements.

To be honest - I guess for a lot of what you do, you DON'T need HDX. If I didn't have to track bands and just mixed, I'd probably go fully HD native. At that point, it's whatever software you like really.

As has been pointed out in this thread, part of the reason Avid's HDX sales haven't been great is because TDM is still doing such a good job! if I could run PT10 at 64bit with more memory (to prevent AT crashing, and better VI use), and had all the plugins I use on aux channels available as DSP, I'd upgrade my computer, run the vast majority of stuff natively, and just use DSP for tracking and aux channels.
Old 23rd March 2014
  #292
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Pyramix?
I had a pyramix setup on a session the other day - 1st time I've seen one since 2002 I think! Wasn't particularly stable (and this was a very experienced guy's setup). the Masscore thing is an interesting approach for sure.

Plus PC only. It just doesn't seem to have developed into a mature platform - still feels very much in development.

I honestly don't know what I'd do if PT development stopped. Keep running TDM for tracking...maybe reluctantly switch to Logic for production I guess. Would probably end up with 2 rigs for as long as the PT rig kept functioning!
Old 23rd March 2014
  #293
Lives for gear
 
pethenis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
As has been pointed out in this thread, part of the reason Avid's HDX sales haven't been great is because TDM is still doing such a good job! if I could run PT10 at 64bit with more memory (to prevent AT crashing, and better VI use), and had all the plugins I use on aux channels available as DSP, I'd upgrade my computer, run the vast majority of stuff natively, and just use DSP for tracking and aux channels.
+1 not going to happen, but I'd pay good money for PT TDM being thunderbolt aware. As it is, I'm getting a new MacPro for video and keep running my trusty HD2 on a seperate system.
Old 23rd March 2014
  #294
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I had a pyramix setup on a session the other day - 1st time I've seen one since 2002 I think! Wasn't particularly stable (and this was a very experienced guy's setup). the Masscore thing is an interesting approach for sure.
I've only used Pyramix once and that was with the Mykerinos DSP cards. I have read others people comment the MassCore stability... A shame really. Competition is good for us users.

Quote:
Plus PC only.
You see, it has benefits too. Just kidding...

Quote:
I honestly don't know what I'd do if PT development stopped.
Well I'm all native so it wouldn't be as much of a problem for me but I would sure miss PT HD for post production in the long run. Unless something new comes out or Steinberg implement proper VCA's in and other useful PT features and workflows in Nuendo...

Alistair
Old 23rd March 2014
  #295
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertow View Post
I wonder how Fairlight will do in that market with their new product: FairlightAU

Alistair
Live guy who's company owns Venues, Multiple Yamaha and Midas's "Fair who?"
Live is very crowded at the top, Only reason AVID broke through was ease of recording a show in Standard PT, and the fact you can run the same plugins as the producer used on the record!
Live guys don't need another desk to learn on the regional one night stand market that these days pays the bills for most musicians!
Old 23rd March 2014
  #296
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
For tracking, nothing IS better. Every other option has compromises and work-arounds. No-one is switching at pro level - by which I mean commercial studios, the sorts of places labels hire.

I see what you're saying, but it doesn't sound like you've worked in the worlds you're talking about. Lots of film mixing is done ITB using ICON and so on; yes some is done on digital boards. Lots of music mixing is done hybrid, from top level pros down. Even the die-hard SSL users are slowly switching to a hybrid way of working.
That's exactly it--they only thing the DSP-based systems are needed for is tracking. That's all! For mixing, at any level, it's just not needed. And if it's just for tracking, you don't need HDX! A TDM system will work just as well.

As for me, I've worked in many of the biggest music studios in LA so I know that part of the market very well. I've also worked at a medium-sized post house with 15+ rooms, all Pro Tools. They didn't use control surfaces, and I can't see them upgrading to HDX any time soon. All they track is VO. I admittedly haven't worked in the very biggest post rooms, but when I see the pics I see huge Harrison consoles and the like. Not ICONs.

So if the only practical benefit of the DSP-based system is latency, and after one or two years (at most) the card-based system starts to create limitations that hamper development, why not have that be the compromised solution with limited functionality, not the flagship system?
1
Share
Old 24th March 2014
  #297
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
That's exactly it--they only thing the DSP-based systems are needed for is tracking. That's all! For mixing, at any level, it's just not needed. And if it's just for tracking, you don't need HDX! A TDM system will work just as well.
Well - many studios do both tracking AND mixing - ie most commercial rooms of any size. The multipurpose setup is going to need a 64bit DAW, so eventually we need PT11 and HDX. Yes it would be lovely if TDM would run PT11/64bit.

And whilst if it were up to me in my own mix room I'd definitely run a native rig, if I were mixing in a room where I was likely to need to switch things around at short notice (like in every commercial session I seem to do!) a DSP rig is the way to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
As for me, I've worked in many of the biggest music studios in LA so I know that part of the market very well. I've also worked at a medium-sized post house with 15+ rooms, all Pro Tools. They didn't use control surfaces, and I can't see them upgrading to HDX any time soon. All they track is VO.
You still need low latency for good VO recording (but admittedly no FX inline really).

Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
I admittedly haven't worked in the very biggest post rooms, but when I see the pics I see huge Harrison consoles and the like. Not ICONs.
I know what you mean - when it's scoring stages and theatres, a large digital desk seems to be the preferred option. Still, I've been to a few post rooms with plenty of ICONs in use too..I think for TV use/quick turnover it's probably the preferred system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
So if the only practical benefit of the DSP-based system is latency, and after one or two years (at most) the card-based system starts to create limitations that hamper development, why not have that be the compromised solution with limited functionality, not the flagship system?
Well, that might well be the case..although we're not at that stage yet.
Old 24th March 2014
  #298
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Small post guys Love Icon, it's about the speed, going from one project to the next!
Old 24th March 2014
  #299
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
You still need low latency for good VO recording (but admittedly no FX inline really).
Since you don't need any FX for tracking VO (at all, ever), I can't see how PT Native wouldn't suffice for pretty much all of the post world. Most of the VO recorded in post is just read to a script. It gets edited and placed to sync later. Sometimes it gets recorded to video, but even then it's just to a scratch 2-mix for rough placement. It always gets tweaked. So a 32 mS buffer should work just fine, or if you need even lower latency you could use the low latency feature in PT Native.

When a new Avid card-based system comes out, it's always easy to claim it's the no-compromise awesomest solution, so if you can afford it why wouldn't you want it. But that only lasts a short while. HD Accel had all sorts of limitation issues as it aged. Some were unprofessional limitations right off the bat. Like not being able to rearrange tracks on the screen without dropouts in playback. Or no offline bounce. Etc etc.

Avid still hasn't implemented a track freeze feature even though it makes total sense, because it would negate even the remote possibility of needing the cards for mixing. So here we go again. Avid feels they need to withhold key features the competition already has to try to force people into buying overpriced hardware they don't need. There's no other reason--none--not to make a track freeze feature. It would be extremely useful for VI tracks even more so than the processing plugs that run on the cards. But they can't even do it for VI tracks because that would make the naked attempt to force people into buying the cards that much more obvious.
Old 24th March 2014
  #300
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
Small post guys Love Icon, it's about the speed, going from one project to the next!
That's what I was saying. I think the small to mid-sized post market is more Avid's bread and butter than the biggest dub stages. The smaller shops have much more invested in Pro Tools, since the entirety of their workflow revolves around it. And smaller facilities don't just scoff at having to drop $15k + for a new PT rig. For the ones that stay in business, that's an expense they would put off for as long as possible. The post place I worked at wouldn't even buy plug-ins for each room if they could help it. They keep iLoks in the office and for nonessential plugs you have to share keys. It sucks, but OTOH it helps pay people salaries. They only even have a couple Waves plugs. They make do with what they have. Watching every penny is the sole reason they're still around while so many other places that spend too much on ICONs and stuff come and go. Same goes with the successful music studios, the ones that last.
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump