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 15th April 2014
  #391
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
Also the guys who have been around long enough look at it this way, A new HDX rig and 12 core is still less than they paid for their Studer, and costs less and requires less downtime!
That (the cost of old gear) is never a good argument. You always have to look at the price in the current markets. The DAW market itself with all the competing products (which abound), the much much lower costs of electronics and computing technology to develop and build the products and the general studio market where prices are not really increasing, there is much more competition from much cheaper (or "free" for those that have a rig at home) studios and less paying customers.

Alistair
Old 15th April 2014
  #392
Lives for gear
 
jjdpro's Avatar
 

Red face

: ) I think were were talking about two different things. The Blue units will work, but not supported going forward. HDX's future? I don't know. Sometimes, it looks like a winner, other times, not so..

Why?

-Lack of compatibility (VST, AU)
- Money to be made is at lower ( mid level ) market
-Apple
-Adobe

Someone here said it best.. HDX's biggest rival are the (still working) TDM systems. We have 2 (HD3) excel and 1 HD native.. They work and sound great. 2 systems have the OLD ( Blue) interfaces and 1 with the Purple.. No problems. what so ever..

We're not looking to upgrade no time soon. In fact, most Engineers and studios (in my town) are "digging in" and firmly stating that "Until their Mac Pros and HD 9! units break..They will hunt down for older replacement units.. ! Yikes




Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
I have worked in every genre,
This isn't 2000-2009 ! Even then everybody preferred the plugin on a TDM Rig for control and recall!
I have never heard of anybody say "I would rather the hardware auto tune"
I have never heard " I'll take the Native studio over TDM".

At some point some new plug will come out that is not compatible with HDX or sessions will be dominated by the new Avid plugin format and guys will have to either go HD native or HDX, Just like they did when HD replaced TDM.

Avid isn't a bunch of saints, they should have found away of at least supported the old Blue interfaces via some " legacy port" like they did with the old systems.
They could have supported the old control surfaces.

BUT the stock tanking and somebody who understands what AVID is about buying it !
Because most of the stuff people hate about AVID has done was because of Wall Street !
But people have to remember its a video company first and always will be!
Also the guys who have been around long enough look at it this way, A new HDX rig and 12 core is still less than they paid for their Studer, and costs less and requires less downtime!
Old 15th April 2014
  #393
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Purple works with HDx up to PT 11 no support with 64 bit application.

The fact is at the top there is no competition except old TDM!

I know 2 Artists who dumped Neundo because they love that they can use the exact same plugs live.

I also heard about a girl who couldn't handle the latency of HDX!
Part of the problem for the Audio industry is that there is no longer a music industry, it's now a Celebrity industry and the time spent makeing music , getting it right is now spent being "seen" at important events.
Old 16th April 2014
  #394
Lives for gear
 

That's a very good point. In the past, musicians were simply musicians, for the most part.

Now, we have pre-packaged mutant musician/celebrity/product placement models/whatever. The whole package is huge in some cases, with music being a small part of the "artist's" job/career. For them, it is just as important to be seen, to hawk perfume, clothing lines, make the red carpet circuits, occasional movies, etc. So now management companies, more than ever, determine what music is done and when it comes out, and all of this affects the industry for sure, and not in a good way.

As long as my old systems work, I will be sticking with them. I'd like to upgrade in the next 12-18 months, but I will stick where I am until I have at least some idea of the medium or long term prospects for pro tools. I don't care the least about Avid as a company. They suck. But they happen to, for now, be the makers of the most useful tool in my studio. I hope that PT survives whatever is coming and thrives, whoever owns it.
Old 16th April 2014
  #395
Deleted User
Guest
I've been waiting for some indication of the direction of Avid for over a year. I finally gave up waiting. I bought Pro Tools 11 and installed it yesterday. This time my attempt with Pro Tools is on a Mac, and so far it's going better than my last try. I don't like it any less than any of my other DAWs, so that's a good thing. Tepidly stated: I'm liking it so far! Cubase survived Steinberg's troubled years. Sonar has survived two Cakewalk buyouts now, too. I started to feel like I would be waiting forever -- waiting for Godot. No sooner had I installed PT than I read about the upcoming "freeze" function. I suppose I could have waited for that, too. I'd like to be within any kind of grace period, but we don't know when or how that previewed feature will arrive. I figured I have to live today, not in some future changed industry.
Old 16th April 2014
  #396
Lives for gear
 
JSt0rm's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by claurence View Post
I've been waiting for some indication of the direction of Avid for over a year. I finally gave up waiting. I bought Pro Tools 11 and installed it yesterday. This time my attempt with Pro Tools is on a Mac, and so far it's going better than my last try. I don't like it any less than any of my other DAWs, so that's a good thing. Tepidly stated: I'm liking it so far! Cubase survived Steinberg's troubled years. Sonar has survived two Cakewalk buyouts now, too. I started to feel like I would be waiting forever -- waiting for Godot. No sooner had I installed PT than I read about the upcoming "freeze" function. I suppose I could have waited for that, too. I'd like to be within any kind of grace period, but we don't know when or how that previewed feature will arrive. I figured I have to live today, not in some future changed industry.
don't feel bad. I just upgraded to 11 myself. Let others fall on the sharp blade of .0 software.

*I did a paid upgrade to mountain lion 3 weeks before mavericks because I knew that would be hell for a while.
1
Share
Old 16th April 2014
  #397
Lives for gear
 
3rd Degree's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Thanks Alistair - exactly my point. I'm not quite sure how tracking with hardware AT is industry standard either...I don't think I've ever seen the box used!

As for native solutions...I've come to the conclusion over the past year or so that I've not yet used a software monitoring system that I think is good enough for recording vocals - I notice a latency even at low buffer sizes. A software cue mixer is tight enough, but then you lose the option of plugin processing.

With many sessions, the cue mixer option would be fine; but like I said, workflow-wise it's a backwards step. At the moment, I'm not paying a shed load of cash just to then have to make compromises.
I can see your point of view. For me, I have my system routed two ways, one through my interface, the other through my mixer. The more picky someone is, the easier it is to just route things through the mixer. I personally don't use auto tune or the like but if I did, it would be quite easy to patch it into my monitoring system then fine tune it once I, or likely someone else goes to mix with the plug in. It's just my opinion but when someone wants the snare up, the drums up, the beat turned down, etc, it's easier for me to route everything to my mixer in PT, run that through my headphone amp. Once everything is good on their part, I monitor directly as that is what I need to be hearing for accuracy. That's why I personally have both and it wasn't a big investment since I have to have things routed similar to that anyway for other things I do. For me, it gives me the best of both worlds but I do see your point and can't disagree.
Old 16th April 2014
  #398
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
Really? They have been out since 1999

1) TASCAM TA-1VP Vocal Processor with Antares Auto-Tune | Musician's Friend

2) ANTARES AVP1


My main work for the last 15 years has been in Gospel music productions. Working with many of the top US artist with multi platinum projects. They have been and continue to use these hardware devices for tracking for years.

These devices are also used in R & B and Hip Hop/Pop sessions as well. Ala T-Pain ( auto tune vocals) sound…
Yes, I'm well aware of the box...the only times I've ever seen them, they've not been switched on!

I've not worked in gospel...maybe things are different there. I've done a lot of pop, and UK urban stuff (I hesitate to call it hip hop, but garage/grime/and yes, RnB). Ever since PT has been able to run TDM Autotune, that's what people have used. Whenever I've done sessions for American stars (hip hop/pop) who want this, they expect the plugin....no-one's ever asked me for the hardware version! As I said - in this day and age, it's a work-around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
Most top Artist won't stand for outboard auto tune.
Many projects get passed around and the auto tune settings have to be part of the session.

Just because YOUR clients don't demand it, in no way makes it SOP at the top.
Monkey is talking about the projects at the top of the food chain, the ones everybody wants to be a part of, but this mentality trickles down the food chain.
Part of it is this simple you can spend time selling your way or you can spend some money adopt the standard way of working and not only spend less time selling but watch less work go somewhere else.
That's kind of my point. Because everyone else can do it simply, a studio wanting to compete has to have the simple solution as well.
Old 16th April 2014
  #399
Lives for gear
 
jjdpro's Avatar
 

Uhmm.. Auto tune works well the RTAS version in Protools HD (TDM). Has been for a long time.. No latency ..

Are you saying that you and your PT HD (TDM) rig can't track with auto tune plugin (insert) ..??

Are you saying that only HDX can achieve this? An HD3 axcel ( TDM) cannot? HD (6) ?


My home studio I also run Nuendo, with Soundcraft Ghost.. I can track with UAD and Autotune plugin with no latency..

well
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Yes, I'm well aware of the box...the only times I've ever seen them, they've not been switched on!

I've not worked in gospel...maybe things are different there. I've done a lot of pop, and UK urban stuff (I hesitate to call it hip hop, but garage/grime/and yes, RnB). Ever since PT has been able to run TDM Autotune, that's what people have used. Whenever I've done sessions for American stars (hip hop/pop) who want this, they expect the plugin....no-one's ever asked me for the hardware version! As I said - in this day and age, it's a work-around.



That's kind of my point. Because everyone else can do it simply, a studio wanting to compete has to have the simple solution as well.
Old 16th April 2014
  #400
I think there's being some misunderstanding here...you clearly know your tools, but it's not being communicated very well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
Uhmm.. Auto tune works well the RTAS version in Protools HD (TDM). Has been for a long time.. No latency ..
Yes, RTAS works fine in HD. if you're using RTAS on a channel though, as soon as you put that channel into record, the RTAS plugin goes into bypass. The only way to prevent that is to put a TDM plugin first...but then you get the latency of the RTAS plugin (which with anything above AT5 is considerable).

So yes..I can track with AT TDM inline on an HD rig at near zero latency, but not with AT RTAS. With a native rig, I can use AT Live in the same way...but the latency (for vocals) is noticeable to me, but that's due to the throughput of the system more than AT Live.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
Are you saying that you and your PT HD (TDM) rig can't track with auto tune plugin (insert) ..??
No, I said the opposite. I said HD TDM/HDX can do this, where native systems can't - or at least can't with as good latency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
Are you saying that only HDX can achieve this? An HD3 axcel ( TDM) cannot? HD (6) ?
No I didn't say this. In fact, HDX can't yet - you can't get AT in AAX DSP format. Right now, for my job TDM is the best solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
My home studio I also run Nuendo, with Soundcraft Ghost.. I can track with UAD and Autotune plugin with no latency..
You might be able to do it on a system with a low throughput buffer, and have it "close enough". But it won't be as low latency (when using plugins; when not monitoring through plugins, I'm sure it is) as a TDM rig, and I just think that people perform better when they've not got the distraction of possible latency.

In other words - it's a step back from a TDM rig, which is why I wouldn't pay to "upgrade" to a less flexible system - which has been my point all along.
Old 16th April 2014
  #401
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
In other words - it's a step back from a TDM rig, which is why I wouldn't pay to "upgrade" to a less flexible system - which has been my point all along.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. You'd think "engineers" would know this mantra by now, right PM? Almost 3 years later and TDM is still the better system over HDX.

Back during AES 2011 in New York one of Avid's reps told me HDX (AAX DSP) would be an easy port from HD Native. Apparently this isn't the case because there are a good amount of AAX plugins but they're not DSP. 5x the processing power of HD Accel is useless without the software. Avid has yet to find the "killer app" for PT11 and until they do they will continue to circle the drain and possibly be flushed entirely.
Old 16th April 2014
  #402
Quote:
Originally Posted by doom64 View Post
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. You'd think "engineers" would know this mantra by now, right PM? Almost 3 years later and TDM is still the better system over HDX.
I think most do know and live by this mantra, which is why Avid is in such dire straits... it's difficult to sell HDX systems to facilities that are still on PT 7.4/TDM and don't need anything newer. Regardless of even the plugin situation, if you are just running PT mainly as a tape deck, which many do, there is no compelling reason to buy in to the newer rigs.
1
Share
Old 16th April 2014
  #403
Lives for gear
 
jjdpro's Avatar
 

Smile

I see your point.. P.S . Since I use an analog mixer, so there's only absolutely no latency monitoring, because there's no ad/da conversion.

I also see your point about HDX (DSP) and Non DSP issues. However, HD Native has a near zero latency monitor mixer.

I know it must be frustrating to a lot of PT users with little support for AAX-DSP.

I'm hoping they have this figured out going forward.

It's funny, UAD has seemed to have "crack" the in-box no latency monitoring and tracking with their plugins, using their Audio Interfaces..

Take care..

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I think there's being some misunderstanding here...you clearly know your tools, but it's not being communicated very well.



Yes, RTAS works fine in HD. if you're using RTAS on a channel though, as soon as you put that channel into record, the RTAS plugin goes into bypass. The only way to prevent that is to put a TDM plugin first...but then you get the latency of the RTAS plugin (which with anything above AT5 is considerable).

So yes..I can track with AT TDM inline on an HD rig at near zero latency, but not with AT RTAS. With a native rig, I can use AT Live in the same way...but the latency (for vocals) is noticeable to me, but that's due to the throughput of the system more than AT Live.



No, I said the opposite. I said HD TDM/HDX can do this, where native systems can't - or at least can't with as good latency.



No I didn't say this. In fact, HDX can't yet - you can't get AT in AAX DSP format. Right now, for my job TDM is the best solution.



You might be able to do it on a system with a low throughput buffer, and have it "close enough". But it won't be as low latency (when using plugins; when not monitoring through plugins, I'm sure it is) as a TDM rig, and I just think that people perform better when they've not got the distraction of possible latency.

In other words - it's a step back from a TDM rig, which is why I wouldn't pay to "upgrade" to a less flexible system - which has been my point all along.
Old 16th April 2014
  #404
Lives for gear
 
gainreduction's Avatar
 

The major studios still running PT 7.4 will have to upgrade when their clientele does preprod on newer versions that are not directly backwards compatible and the major studios rigs in the end are not even capable of running current plugins.

You can't be not compatible in the long run.
Old 17th April 2014
  #405
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
I see your point.. P.S . Since I use an analog mixer, so there's only absolutely no latency monitoring, because there's no ad/da conversion.
That's the other way to do it! Again no plugins on monitoring though..I can do it this way, and through the DSP....again removing one of these choices isn't an option right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
I also see your point about HDX (DSP) and Non DSP issues. However, HD Native has a near zero latency monitor mixer.
I know, I have HD Native at home. It's just the same thing as the RME cue mixer etc, but better integrated (and possibly less flexible). Still no FX, but useful if you've not got a desk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjdpro View Post
I know it must be frustrating to a lot of PT users with little support for AAX-DSP.

I'm hoping they have this figured out going forward.

It's funny, UAD has seemed to have "crack" the in-box no latency monitoring and tracking with their plugins, using their Audio Interfaces..

Take care..
It's not a question of "figuring it out" - the DSP plugins that exist work well - it's getting companies to develop the DSP version! I can't see why Antares are dragging their heels...even just a "live" version that runs on DSP would be fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gainreduction View Post
The major studios still running PT 7.4 will have to upgrade when their clientele does preprod on newer versions that are not directly backwards compatible and the major studios rigs in the end are not even capable of running current plugins.

You can't be not compatible in the long run.
To be fair, most major studios seem to be running v10 at the moment - I've not seen anything lower for a while. And to be fair, they don't need the extra instrument power of v11 - most people aren't going to be renting large tracking spaces and sitting there playing VIs in real time! They'll do the pre pro at home, then bounce to audio (offline!) and bring in parts for overdubbing/mixing, for which PT10 will be fine for a long time.
Old 17th April 2014
  #406
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by gainreduction View Post
You can't be not compatible in the long run.
That's what the companies want you to think. Planned obsolescence and all that.

If Avid could figure out a way to get musicians/record companies and other companies to budget more for the studio then we'd all buy more of their newer products. For that matter if Avid could stop music piracy so people actually paid to listen to music like back in the pre-Napster days.

If the money isn't there then just like I will repair my car instead of buy a new one so will the TDM users. That's how capitalism works.
1
Share
Old 17th April 2014
  #407
Lives for gear
 
gainreduction's Avatar
 

I've spent the last months jumping between PT8 and PT11 and it gets tiresome pretty fast. Tracking at studio on PT8 tdm, back to my place to edit/build roughmixes (that I can't play in the studio since the session and plugins don't travel), bounce new stems from my roughmix to bring to the studio... do some more tracking.... add to the roughmixes.... bounce new stems... feel handicapped at the studio when you can't access the roughmix...

Trust me, it gets old very fast. Anyone running a commercial studio relying on PT7/8 will see clients drop off in the long run.
Old 17th April 2014
  #408
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Anyone running a commercial studio relying on PT7/8 will see clients drop off in the long run.
I don't see many clients that run a PT HDX at home and then goes to a commercial facility for recording. Most artists / producers will work on typical Logic / Cubase setups at home. Those who use PT at home are mostly on native system so TDM or HDX plugins will not run anyway.
Old 17th April 2014
  #409
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ran_ks View Post
I don't see many clients that run a PT HDX at home and then goes to a commercial facility for recording. Most artists / producers will work on typical Logic / Cubase setups at home. Those who use PT at home are mostly on native system so TDM or HDX plugins will not run anyway.
No but people on native rigs might be using new AAX 64 bit plugins that don't exist at all in RTAS/TDM/AAX32 versions. The problem remains the same in the long run as the list of new plugins slowly grows...

Alistair
Old 17th April 2014
  #410
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
No but people on native rigs might be using new AAX 64 bit plugins that don't exist at all in RTAS/TDM/AAX32 versions. The problem remains the same in the long run as the list of new plugins slowly grows...
I haven't run yet in a plugin that is AAX64 only. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist but compared to the number of plugin that are not yet ported to AAX DSP, I think it's really small issue.
Old 17th April 2014
  #411
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ran_ks View Post
I haven't run yet in a plugin that is AAX64 only. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist but compared to the number of plugin that are not yet ported to AAX DSP, I think it's really small issue.
Today yes. That is why I wrote "in the long run ". At some point the situation should be reversed...


Alistair
Old 17th April 2014
  #412
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Today yes. That is why I wrote "in the long run ". At some point the situation should be reversed...


Alistair
But it's a vicious circle: if few people upgrade, soft companies have no interest in porting to AAX DSP or making AAX only plugin... And with no plugin people don't upgrade.

But yeah, I think we're on the same page anyway.
Old 17th April 2014
  #413
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ran_ks View Post
But it's a vicious circle: if few people upgrade, soft companies have no interest in porting to AAX DSP or making AAX only plugin... And with no plugin people don't upgrade.
True but I suspect many people that haven't yet upgraded will be reluctant to buy plugins that don't already support PT11 (and HDX for those that might go that route in the future). Well at least I would be. I haven't bought any plugins that don't have 64 bit versions since a few years already.

Actually I lie. I did buy one cheapo VST plugin that was only 32 bit at the time. luckily VST hosts are backwards compatible.

Quote:
But yeah, I think we're on the same page anyway.
I think so too.

Alistair
Old 17th April 2014
  #414
Lives for gear
 
gainreduction's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ran_ks View Post
I haven't run yet in a plugin that is AAX64 only. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist but compared to the number of plugin that are not yet ported to AAX DSP, I think it's really small issue.
Some of the aax64 plugins are renamed so although they exist as rtas/tdm they won't instanciate. In the eyes of PT it is not the same plugin.

The biggest dealbreaker however is you can't open a ptx session on a (ptf) tdm rig. So although both are PT they are not all that compatible going from 11 to 7/8/9.
Old 18th April 2014
  #415
Quote:
Originally Posted by gainreduction View Post
Some of the aax64 plugins are renamed so although they exist as rtas/tdm they won't instanciate. In the eyes of PT it is not the same plugin.

The biggest dealbreaker however is you can't open a ptx session on a (ptf) tdm rig. So although both are PT they are not all that compatible going from 11 to 7/8/9.
Indeed.

No excuse really for a studio not to be running pt10 now, which means the 10-11 conversion isn't really an issue!
1
Share
Old 18th April 2014
  #416
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Indeed.

No excuse really for a studio not to be running pt10 now, which means the 10-11 conversion isn't really an issue!
G5 PCIX
The most often heard reason for 7.4.
But a very large percentage are either using it as a tape machine only or are closed loop ie no incoming or out going project.

The other thing is a commercial studio isn't a gearslut who buys because he wants something, they like any other business need to budget for a $10k expense( new computer HDX and interfaces) As we start to see the economy and the huge advert. Spending of the 2016 presidential cycle start we will see more HDX investment .
Old 18th April 2014
  #417
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
G5 PCIX
The most often heard reason for 7.4.
But a very large percentage are either using it as a tape machine only or are closed loop ie no incoming or out going project.

The other thing is a commercial studio isn't a gearslut who buys because he wants something, they like any other business need to budget for a $10k expense( new computer HDX and interfaces) As we start to see the economy and the huge advert. Spending of the 2016 presidential cycle start we will see more HDX investment .
I would argue that no fully commercial studio should be running a G5 at this point either...too many Intel-Only plugins. Yes, in the circumstances above that would be ok..but that's not a general "major" commercial studio in my book, that's a specific case.
Old 18th April 2014
  #418
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
There's a good reason not to be running 10. It's a band aid, fix it quick so we have time to work on 11 release. Even the Avid guys admit it's buggy.

As for G5's & 7.4, there are lots of pro studio's running it. They are usually in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" camp, and it's a solid, and full featured release depending on what you're doing.
Old 18th April 2014
  #419
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
There's a good reason not to be running 10. It's a band aid, fix it quick so we have time to work on 11 release. Even the Avid guys admit it's buggy.

As for G5's & 7.4, there are lots of pro studio's running it. They are usually in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" camp, and it's a solid, and full featured release depending on what you're doing.
That was what everyone said about 9..and 8 before it! I've had few problems on 10, other than issues with running out of memory, as I try to use more and more intensive plugins.

7.4 isn't "broke", and I'd still rather use 7.4/G5 than native for tracking any day. I still think it's more "the norm" to have an Intel Mac these days. Many studios I know have upgraded Intel Macs at least once!
Old 18th April 2014
  #420
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
There no doubt that Intel's are "the norm", but that doesn't preclude pro studio's from tracking with G5/7.4 mac's.

The problem with 10 (as I've heard AVID guys tell) is that it is trying to bridge two worlds together, and in doing so, it's glitchy.
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump