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 18th April 2014
  #421
Lives for gear
 

Do you really think anyone running PT7 and a G5 computer is going to upgrade at this time given the uncertainty of Avid just for a small increase in compatibility? If it even comes up in the conversation with a client you explain you have a rock stable locked in system for no downtime, that PT10 is potentially buggy and PT11 absolutely is buggy. If still needed for that client you rent a rig for that need. You DON'T jepordize further capital in Avid until you are for sure they are going to live or you see what happens with PT under a new owner. In most cases you treat a PT11 project the same as you would a Logic or Cubase project on your PT7 rig. It's not just a "if it ain't broke" mentality, it's more of a "do I risk this capital for this little return at this time" thing (it's a business thing).
Old 18th April 2014
  #422
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Unless you've seen the new remote collaboration tricks Avid had up their sleeve at NAB, I think banking on AVID's demise is short sighted. There's a serious reason for upgrade for me now - and it's got nothing to do with sample rates, converters or other BS. It's all about efficiency and work flow. I'm not going to do it yet, but they are redefining the way we will work in the future, and they have done it in a very efficient and elegant manner that will keep PT on top. IMO of course. $.02.
Old 19th April 2014
  #423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassmankr View Post
Do you really think anyone running PT7 and a G5 computer is going to upgrade at this time given the uncertainty of Avid just for a small increase in compatibility? If it even comes up in the conversation with a client you explain you have a rock stable locked in system for no downtime, that PT10 is potentially buggy and PT11 absolutely is buggy. If still needed for that client you rent a rig for that need. You DON'T jepordize further capital in Avid until you are for sure they are going to live or you see what happens with PT under a new owner. In most cases you treat a PT11 project the same as you would a Logic or Cubase project on your PT7 rig. It's not just a "if it ain't broke" mentality, it's more of a "do I risk this capital for this little return at this time" thing (it's a business thing).
I'm not looking at the hdx investment yet because I'm still waiting for a few plugins.

I'm buying a 2nd HD io to add to the one I bought last year.

Im with bill here though - There's plenty of people still investing in new rigs, and whilst there's been a couple of horror stories on here, I know many more personally who are getting on fine.

The speculation has been stirring for a while now, and still avid keep coming out with updates and new products. In fact, no one I work with has even mentioned this situation. I can see the need to make sensible investment, but the chances of being left with a boat anchor at this time are slim. IMO.
Old 19th April 2014
  #424
Lives for gear
 

drBill and psycho, only you know what your specific needs are, whether the cash outlay will result in bankable time savings or just less hours for less pay, and the level of risk you are comfortable with. My main advice through this soap opera has been for others to educate themselves by reading the entire long main Avid thread (which has spilled over to this one) so if they do make any Avid purchase/investment/upgrade, they do so with their eyes wide open (which you have). To pretend there is not substantial risk involved now is foolish unless you have financial information to reveal to us that is not restated/linked in the threads. The reason this has dragged on was because of Avid's actions of not releasing financials, seeking a year's extension from being delisted from the NASDEQ stock exchange despite still not complying resulting in it's delisting, and firing it's auditors with no cause given after an unexplainably long audit period with no specific date being released as to when they will provide accounting information. That simply is not how solid companies are run.

Since you are waiting at least for a short period of time, you may want to wait until Avid reveals it's full financials with adjustments (they keep insisting it will be any day now) to see how solid the company really is. You may also want to rethink commiting to part of "Avid's plan for the future" as it means a switch to subscription (renting software) just as they are now rolling out with the video side of things. If you think Avid had you by the balls before and ignored/abused it's users, just start renting software and see what happens. Make the choice to say no to ALL software rentals as it's not in the consumer's best long term interests (one sided rental agreements which further restrict/eliminate consumer rights and recourse).
Old 19th April 2014
  #425
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Of course if everybody takes the advice to wait Avid will do worse and the doomsday prophecy will come true.

Any investment is a risk, some more than others but, the assets of Avid are valuable , and if it is liquidated it most likely won't end in the hands of somebody who will do any better.
Old 19th April 2014
  #426
Lives for gear
 

Yep, that's how free markets work however this has been a slowly sinking ship over the last four years starting with their yearly layoffs of 10% of their employees. It's the decisions they made for their own enrichment, especially executive compensation instead of focusing on their core businesses that have put them where they are today. There is the possibility that this slow slide down the drain has been a strategy for some to strip and profit. If/when they produce financials and depending on how good the accounting is we may never know. They are still moving in a direction to monitize (control their users) instead of providing exactly what best suits their users. Frankly, they might have been able to save their ass with the simple decision when deciding the details about their 64 bit Native version 11, to incorporate VST plug use instead of their AAX. Then there wouldn't have been a plug port problem preventing many from upgrading. Instead they got greedy (tried to monitize) concerning plugs even going so far as to crush the first VST wrapper. It's these constant bad decisions to control it's users and even control the workarounds people come up with so they can stay with PT that is killing their market one customer at a time.

Many here think Pro Tools would be better off under a different company such as what happened to Steinberg. The new owner would have to revamp and offer a better product to keep and win back users. That's what competition and free markets do best, make products better or offer a product at a lower price. I'm sure some believe "Why risk your capital now to end up with a far worse product under a future Avid when others will likely make a future PT better". You have to look after your own best interests just as Avid is looking at it's. The suggestion that users should reward bad managment to save a failing company so it can continue down it's well established and continuing path which is not in the user's best interests is not likely many will take.
1
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #427
Gear Maniac
 

I can see how a service that keeps track of changes made by different users to a session and then can automatically update any contributor's session with the changes by others would be very convenient. I'm working on a collaboration project right now where that would be very nice. But a game changer? Come on now. That's ridiculous. All it saves you is the time it takes to do a Save Session As with only the tracks you changed, then a Save Session Copy with the audio files and dumping the session to to a cloud storage like Dropbox. Then the other user just has to do an Import Session Data and grab the new tracks.

Are those steps inconvenient? Sure, but they only take a couple minutes for users that know what they are doing. Also, there exists the real possibility that these online collaboration sessions would often turn into a hot mess, with duplicated efforts, screwed up tempo and marker changes, messed up mixes, etc. I could go into many hypothetical scenarios, but anyone being honest can see the potential problems.

Another point to consider here is the disconnect this whole collaboration/cloud things means for those advocating that Pro Tools be a professional-only tool, or at least arguing that that's where they should focus most of their attention. The Avid cheerleaders on here don't seem to be acknowledging that. All of a sudden, it's now a great strategy that they're trying to create this big tent where everyone will be able to collaborate and share. Avid "Everywhere" is hardly the slogan you would come up with if you were just going to be focused on professionals at the very top of the pyramid.

And the reality--the whole reason, really--for all these Avid threads is that Avid has completely and utterly sucked at addressing the needs of anyone but the relatively few people who buy the card-based HD systems.

There's some Avid cheerleaders on here who will just not give an inch no matter what. It's almost like politics at this point. There's no point in arguing with those folks. To be sure, there are some people who's criticism of the company seems just as single-minded and unreasonable. But, I can at least understand the motivations of those people more. Their attitudes are typically born of frustration and the motivation is almost certainly an attempt to get the company to change for the better. I don't understand the motives as well for those who defend Avid no matter the criticism and come up with often-times tortured logic to try and avoid conceding any legit criticism.

I guess you just have to chalk it up to that Upton Sinclair quote: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
1
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #428
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
Their attitudes are typically born of frustration and the motivation is almost certainly an attempt to get the company to change for the better.”
I don't know about that man...Avid haters seem equally dogmatic as avid fanboys. Certainly those who have hitched their wagons to some other horse have every reason in the world to want to see PT go down in flames, that's certainly not my definition of objectivity.
Old 19th April 2014
  #429
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
One thing I am certain of. Naysayers have been predicting the demise of AVID for over a decade. They seem to have more lives than the proverbial 9 Lived cat. I wouldn't count em out yet. In another 10 we'll probably be having the same conversation.
1
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #430
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
I don't know about that man...Avid haters seem equally dogmatic as avid fanboys. Certainly those who have hitched their wagons to some other horse have every reason in the world to want to see PT go down in flames, that's certainly not my definition of objectivity.
I admitted that there are haters and some are equally unreasonable. Re-read my post. But I disagree they all wanna see Avid go down in flames. Quite the contrary. I think most just want to see them stop being such a lame company. But, I do think that most of the haters wouldn't shed a tear if they did go under, and would feel that they deserved their fate. Quite frankly, I think a lot of Avid supporters would feel they deserved it (I put myself in that camp). But again, that's not the same thing as wanting them to fail. I have a lot invested in Avid products and I like Pro Tools, and I absolutely do NOT want them to fail. But that doesn't mean I don't have issues with the company. It seems like when people get on here and offer criticism of Avid, they're branded as haters by the true believers. And that's a shame because it probably waters down the influence the criticism might otherwise have to cause Avid to change.

Regardless of the fate of Avid as a company, Pro Tools will surely live on in some form for a long time to come. There's too much value there and someone would acquire it. So as far as this prediction...

Quote:
One thing I am certain of. Naysayers have been predicting the demise of AVID for over a decade. They seem to have more lives than the proverbial 9 Lived cat. I wouldn't count em out yet. In another 10 we'll probably be having the same conversation.
…if Avid fails but their products live on is some form, I'm sure that person will be on here parsing their words and trying to come up with some excuse why they were still correct, and that's not exactly what they meant, and here's what they really meant, or just because they got bought out and re-branded it means they didn't actually fail, and yadayada. It's like arguing politics with an extreme ideologue. There's no criticism you can make they will acknowledge.
1
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #431
Lives for gear
 

While I agree that optimism is generally a good thing, since when is a software app/company the unsinkable ship? Ever heard of Lotus or Wordperfect? I'm sure some of their users (who were the majority of ALL computer users during their heyday) felt they would be around forever too. Typically it's a long process to go from healthy to unhealthy to sold or bankrupt. Business bankruptcies can take years to resolve also. We know Avid has gone from healthy to unhealthy by the fact it has been delisted and by it's stock price. Nobody here really knows what is probably going to happen until Avid releases financials however it's fairly easy to make an educated guess when you compare their stated financial info and compare that to others that were in a similar financial situation, most of whom ended up sold or sunk. In the long thread there is even a link showing this "death spiral" of companies and once in it how hard and how few escape it's grasp. This represents a real world risk regardless of the discussion/haters/lovers here.

The only way I see Avid saving it's ass at this point in time is taking the short term hit and responding to it's users needs instead of it's "monitize" path it's been commited to that got them to this point. Huge cuts in executive pay would help too but that culture is to take as much as possible regardless of company health or failure of the executive. The recent firing of Yahoo's CEO who after his failure and only 18 months on the job is getting a severance of 58 million dollars is a pretty good example of the culture. It's just how these guys operate these days, Avid execs being part of this problem.

Users need to ask themselves how would they be better served? If you feel PT is best served under Avid and it's known direction then now is the time to spend as per the few financial statements they have released they are losing more money than taking in (stated cash reserves have gone down). If you feel PT is best served under another company then wait it out and support them instead. I'm sure others will just use what they have for as long as practical and then look at the available options.
Old 19th April 2014
  #432
Gear Maniac
 

I think Psycho Monkey's argument with the person who recommended the hardware AT box as a replacement for TDM AT is a perfect example of how far the fanboys will go and how irrational they will get to defend Avid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Both good suggestions as workarounds in a situation where I have no other option. Both a backwards step in terms of workflow, not great for clients who expect it to be a simple one click operation, not good for flicking between sessions and so on.

If I upgrade to HDX, I expect it to be a move forward. These workarounds just aren't acceptable in a high end environment.
I mean, his argument basically boiled down to "waah, but I can't save the presets". Dude, for tracking, you're not going into graphical mode and tweaking. What are the settings that are so hard to recall? The key of the song and maybe a couple other knobs? You can't just put those in the track comments?

By Psycho Monkey's logic, any workaround is unacceptable in a high end environment. You've got to be kidding me. I don't know how it works in the UK or wherever you are, but in Los Angeles, if you're a working engineer your job is to keep the workarounds as transparent to the client as possible. If you blame the studio because they don't have such and such plug-in or only have so many faders on the console, or they don't have a certain mic, you don't get called back. If they provide you with a hardware version of AT for tracking, you shut up and use it and the artists doesn't even need to know.

I've worked in some of the best rooms in LA with the highest level clients and I can't think of even ONE session where we didn't have to compromise and come up with a "workaround" of some sort. Maybe the board didn't have enough faders so we had to get a side-car mixer with no automation. Maybe the artist wanted a mic we didn't have. Maybe the engineer would have liked four 1176s and we only had two. Maybe some faders were down so we had to crosspatch. Maybe there wasn't enough parking in the private lot for such-and-such's entourage so they just had to suck it up and park on the street. Maybe the famous artist wanted Studio A but it was booked so they had to settle for Studio B. And on and on…. I don't care how big the studio is, there's always the possibility you run into situations that require workarounds.

Does the studio you work at have EVERY SINGLE plug-in? What if someone brings in their session and they have an esoteric plug-in and your rig doesn't have it? Do you just buy it, always, every time? How many faders are on your console? No one has ever come in with a session that maxed it out, so they had to use the "workaround" of sub mixing inside PT?

Psycho Monkey, you draw your unacceptable-pain-in-the-ass workaround line in the sand at having to write down the settings for a couple knobs in one plug-in? The truth is, you DON'T draw it there and you know it. You're only drawing it there now arbitrarily to avoid losing the argument that HDX is unnecessary. I can't think of a single artist that would walk out on a session because they couldn't have their AT plug-in settings saved in PT. Especially if the engineer reassured them that it was no big deal, just a couple numbers from the hardware unit and they would document it in the comments.
2
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #433
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
I think Psycho Monkey's argument with the person who recommended the hardware AT box as a replacement for TDM AT is a perfect example of how far the fanboys will go and how irrational they will get to defend Avid.



I mean, his argument basically boiled down to "waah, but I can't save the presets". Dude, for tracking, you're not going into graphical mode and tweaking. What are the settings that are so hard to recall? The key of the song and maybe a couple other knobs? You can't just put those in the track comments?

By Psycho Monkey's logic, any workaround is unacceptable in a high end environment. You've got to be kidding me. I don't know how it works in the UK or wherever you are, but in Los Angeles, if you're a working engineer your job is to keep the workarounds as transparent to the client as possible. If you blame the studio because they don't have such and such plug-in or only have so many faders on the console, or they don't have a certain mic, you don't get called back. If they provide you with a hardware version of AT for tracking, you shut up and use it and the artists doesn't even need to know.

I've worked in some of the best rooms in LA with the highest level clients and I can't think of even ONE session where we didn't have to compromise and come up with a "workaround" of some sort. Maybe the board didn't have enough faders so we had to get a side-car mixer with no automation. Maybe the artist wanted a mic we didn't have. Maybe the engineer would have liked four 1176s and we only had two. Maybe some faders were down so we had to crosspatch. Maybe there wasn't enough parking in the private lot for such-and-such's entourage so they just had to suck it up and park on the street. Maybe the famous artist wanted Studio A but it was booked so they had to settle for Studio B. And on and on…. I don't care how big the studio is, there's always the possibility you run into situations that require workarounds.

Does the studio you work at have EVERY SINGLE plug-in? What if someone brings in their session and they have an esoteric plug-in and your rig doesn't have it? Do you just buy it, always, every time? How many faders are on your console? No one has ever come in with a session that maxed it out, so they had to use the "workaround" of sub mixing inside PT?

Psycho Monkey, you draw your unacceptable-pain-in-the-ass workaround line in the sand at having to write down the settings for a couple knobs in one plug-in? The truth is, you DON'T draw it there and you know it. You're only drawing it there now arbitrarily to avoid losing the argument that HDX is unnecessary. I can't think of a single artist that would walk out on a session because they couldn't have their AT plug-in settings saved in PT. Especially if the engineer reassured them that it was no big deal, just a couple numbers from the hardware unit and they would document it in the comments.
You miss the point it's not him it's the client!

You want the client to come back, you give him what he wants!

That's the thing a lot of us are not fan boys, we know what the client wants !
2
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #434
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
You miss the point it's not him it's the client!

You want the client to come back, you give him what he wants!

That's the thing a lot of us are not fan boys, we know what the client wants !
Actually you're missing the point. The point is that it's not possible to give every client everything they want and there will always be workarounds. So the notion that the unacceptable workaround is not being able to save the preset for one plug-in when it would only take less than a minute to save it and recall it manually is silly.

If that were true, how then would so many top mixers be able to justify mixing analog when having to use outboard gear means manually saving the settings for all sorts of gear and adding a huge amount of time for recall--knowing that a recall will never be 100% perfect even with all that?

Plus it's just dumb to assert that artists will walk out over not having two or three presets to AT saved when it's just for monitoring anyway. With the hardware version they would still be able to track with the effect. And anyway, the preset issue is the engineer's problem. I don't know how many high end artists you've worked with but in my experience non of them give a crap about the engineer's problems. They just don't wanna hear about it and it's our job as engineers to make sure it stays that way. But again, that doesn't mean there won't be problems or that you can buy your way out of every workaround. I've never worked at any studio that had the mentality that they would buy every last thing just so the engineer never had to come up with a workaround. It doesn't work that way, at least not for studios that stay in business.
1
Share
Old 19th April 2014
  #435
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
I think Psycho Monkey's argument with the person who recommended the hardware AT box as a replacement for TDM AT is a perfect example of how far the fanboys will go and how irrational they will get to defend Avid.



I mean, his argument basically boiled down to "waah, but I can't save the presets". Dude, for tracking, you're not going into graphical mode and tweaking. What are the settings that are so hard to recall? The key of the song and maybe a couple other knobs? You can't just put those in the track comments?

By Psycho Monkey's logic, any workaround is unacceptable in a high end environment. You've got to be kidding me. I don't know how it works in the UK or wherever you are, but in Los Angeles, if you're a working engineer your job is to keep the workarounds as transparent to the client as possible. If you blame the studio because they don't have such and such plug-in or only have so many faders on the console, or they don't have a certain mic, you don't get called back. If they provide you with a hardware version of AT for tracking, you shut up and use it and the artists doesn't even need to know.

I've worked in some of the best rooms in LA with the highest level clients and I can't think of even ONE session where we didn't have to compromise and come up with a "workaround" of some sort. Maybe the board didn't have enough faders so we had to get a side-car mixer with no automation. Maybe the artist wanted a mic we didn't have. Maybe the engineer would have liked four 1176s and we only had two. Maybe some faders were down so we had to crosspatch. Maybe there wasn't enough parking in the private lot for such-and-such's entourage so they just had to suck it up and park on the street. Maybe the famous artist wanted Studio A but it was booked so they had to settle for Studio B. And on and on…. I don't care how big the studio is, there's always the possibility you run into situations that require workarounds.

Does the studio you work at have EVERY SINGLE plug-in? What if someone brings in their session and they have an esoteric plug-in and your rig doesn't have it? Do you just buy it, always, every time? How many faders are on your console? No one has ever come in with a session that maxed it out, so they had to use the "workaround" of sub mixing inside PT?

Psycho Monkey, you draw your unacceptable-pain-in-the-ass workaround line in the sand at having to write down the settings for a couple knobs in one plug-in? The truth is, you DON'T draw it there and you know it. You're only drawing it there now arbitrarily to avoid losing the argument that HDX is unnecessary. I can't think of a single artist that would walk out on a session because they couldn't have their AT plug-in settings saved in PT. Especially if the engineer reassured them that it was no big deal, just a couple numbers from the hardware unit and they would document it in the comments.
I can't really reply to this in the depth I'd like to right now; other than to say you're missing the point completely.

Of course we all employ work arounds, all the time, although I disagree that some of the things you most are "workarounds".

What I'm SAYING (and please do me the courtesy of reading this properly before arguing with it, at the third attempt of writing it) is that I'm not going to "upgrade" to a less-efficient workflow, and I'm not going to plan that an "upgrade" will mean I have to enlist a previous "workaround" as part of my standard procedure. That is what is known as a "backwards step".

You'd be foolish to pay for that privilege. Of course I've worked in less than perfect situations and got the job done, that's not the point. I think buying a hardware AT, melting the playback etc just to do what I can already do in one click to be a backward step.

I'm in no way an Avid fanboy - god I hate that term, used by those with no real argument to make - I'm just defending against irrational attacks. I make no comment on the financial situ.

The VST thing - bassmankr, give it a rest. I've already stated why VST support is impractical (and the origin of this was Avid themselves). Read back in the thread...
1
Share
Old 20th April 2014
  #436
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I can't really reply to this in the depth I'd like to right now; other than to say you're missing the point completely.

Of course we all employ work arounds, all the time, although I disagree that some of the things you most are "workarounds".

What I'm SAYING (and please do me the courtesy of reading this properly before arguing with it, at the third attempt of writing it) is that I'm not going to "upgrade" to a less-efficient workflow, and I'm not going to plan that an "upgrade" will mean I have to enlist a previous "workaround" as part of my standard procedure. That is what is known as a "backwards step".

You'd be foolish to pay for that privilege. Of course I've worked in less than perfect situations and got the job done, that's not the point. I think buying a hardware AT, melting the playback etc just to do what I can already do in one click to be a backward step.

I'm in no way an Avid fanboy - god I hate that term, used by those with no real argument to make - I'm just defending against irrational attacks. I make no comment on the financial situ.

The VST thing - bassmankr, give it a rest. I've already stated why VST support is impractical (and the origin of this was Avid themselves). Read back in the thread...
Dude you're just flat out changing what you said. What part of "These workarounds just aren't acceptable in a high end environment" am I missing. Those were your words in regards to having to use a hardware version of AT. And your rationale for it boiled down to the fact that you couldn't save the presets. You can admit that you were wrong, but you can't parse those words. You said them, not me. I'm simply pointing out that I think it's a totally lame argument.

FWIW, I hate the term fanboy too. But it does have a definition we all agree on. As to whether I have an argument to make, I'll leave that to the other readers. IMO, you are the one with no real argument to make, just excuses.
Old 20th April 2014
  #437
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
One thing I am certain of. Naysayers have been predicting the demise of AVID for over a decade. They seem to have more lives than the proverbial 9 Lived cat. I wouldn't count em out yet. In another 10 we'll probably be having the same conversation.
I disagree with the notion that in the past Avid has had anywhere near the issues it now has to contend with. I don't see where it used up any of its "9 lives" before. To me the trajectory of Pro Tools is pretty clear. They came out first. They then released the Mix and HD systems. Both of these systems existed when card acceleration was absolutely needed to do professional mixing. Now it's absolutely not, at all, for anyone. Period. For a minute, it looked like they were gonna move on with the release of HD Native. Now they're back to their old business model with a ridiculously overpriced flagship product they protect by pissing everyone else off. The difference is that before, people needed it so they sucked it up and bought it (me included). Now they don't.

I don't see how a company that changes their software to support any number of third party interfaces then drops support for THEIR OWN interfaces can even look themselves in the face in the morning.

Anyway, to me it's pretty clear. In order for Avid "Everywhere" to be a success, by definition they need the support of the users they have typically sh*t all over. So they can either step up to the plate and offer them products that truly compete with what else is out there, or they can fade away into nothing, or maybe a small niche company that makes $15K rigs to sell to an ever-dwindling number of suckers--er, I mean studios--while the rest of the world moves on.

Edit:

They might not have much of a chance of getting back the goodwill and business of the lower-level users anyway. Certainly, some have moved on. For those that still use PT, the satisfaction of just being able to get a piece of the software the pros use, even though they know it's crippleware, has likely worn off for all but the newest of nubes. I'm sure users of anything but the HD systems are weary of being treated poorly.

IMO the only real option for PT to expand and realize its potential is to aggressively go after the user base it has always snubbed with sub-par products. I know it will never happen, but to me that would mean selling their HD cards at a much more reasonable price, re-committing to Native as the ultimate future of the DAW, offering PT 11 at a maintenance-release price since it's only bringing features to PT that other DAWs have had for years, new bundled Avid plug-ins, coming up with features that actually advance PT beyond the competition (maybe Avid Everywhere is a good start), etc, etc.

What is the likelihood any of that will happen under current management? Zero? And so it goes.
Old 20th April 2014
  #438
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
So they can either step up to the plate and offer them products that truly compete with what else is out there, or they can fade away into nothing, or maybe a small niche company that makes $15K rigs to sell to an ever-dwindling number of suckers--er, I mean studios--while the rest of the world moves on.
Maybe google what they showed at NAB. IMO, not only did they step up, but they passed the competition, and redefined how we will work in the future. They didn't look at ALL like a company 'circling the drain". Just my opinion, but feel free to naysay and call me a fanboi....
1
Share
Old 20th April 2014
  #439
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Maybe google what they showed at NAB.


Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
IMO, not only did they step up, but they passed the competition, and redefined how we will work in the future.
Only if they drive a Delorean: Here is a 2004 document detailing the integrated project sharing in Nuendo 3: ftp://ftp.steinberg.net/Download/Nue...Networking.pdf

Oh and here is info on Steinberg's VST Connect: http://www.steinberg.net/en/products...ect/start.html

So Pro Tools is finally but slowly catching up. Good. But still some way to go...

Avid just copied what Steinberg already had. There is nothing in the NAB video that didn't already exist in the Steinberg ecosystem.

PS: Also watch the Studio Pass video on the same page as the VST Connect stuff.

Alistair
1
Share
Old 20th April 2014
  #440
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
feel free to naysay and call me a fanboi....
Done! jk
Old 20th April 2014
  #441
Gear Maniac
 

I watched the video. It looks pretty slick and all, but when you freeze tracks and the other person doesn't have the plug-in, does it lock the track completely (i.e., you can't add any more plug-ins or do any automation etc.) and just let you hear the "frozen" audio, or does it act like a track that someone bounced with the plug-in effects on it? It's not clear how a frozen track behaves in the receiving person's session. Also, does that mean PT will have a real track freeze feature in general? Because that would be great!

I must admit it looks promising but it's hard not to think Avid will come up with a way to botch it. Like making it so you can't really use a frozen track from another collaborator in a practical sense without buying all the plug-ins. And then, just to rub salt in your wound, not implement an easy way to send a "frozen" track as you would if you bounced it with the effects on it (you know, the export function every other DAW has).

I can't wait to see that they charge for it. How about a $1500 upgrade fee? And non-HDX users will absolutely NOT have the freeze feature, and will only be able to upload mono tracks, and there will be a two track per day limit, and they can only have two collaborators per session unless they pay $2000 for the CPTK (Collaborators Production Toolkit), and elastic audio features will be stripped out of the uploaded tracks, and they can't have custom avatar icons just one with their initials followed by " - Amateur". And the new collaboration features will not work if you have a ProControl, Control24, C|24, DControl or DCommand hooked up to PT. Only if you have the new S6, or any other third-party control surface. And you will need a Mac with only very latest processors. And if you need support, Avid will need to have your credit card on file before giving you a support ticket number, which will then qualify you to pay per minute to figure out why the collaboration functions are causing PT to crash.

Am I bitter? yeah i guess so. But here's hoping they get it right this time.

Seriously though, it will be fascinating to see if they cripple the collaboration features for non-HD versions. I have $100 on yes. Takers?
1
Share
Old 20th April 2014
  #442
Lives for gear
I missed the bit where contracts are worked out and signed between participating parties…..prior to uploading and adding to the Avid Marketplace

1
Share
Old 20th April 2014
  #443
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky View Post
I missed the bit where contracts are worked out and signed between participating parties…..prior to uploading and adding to the Avid Marketplace

That's easy. There will just be a button asking you to accept the terms of service. The terms of service being Avid owns the rights to anything in the Avid marketplace. It's for ease of use, you see. Nothing to do with greed.
Old 20th April 2014
  #444
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post




Only if they drive a Delorean: Here is a 2004 document dealing with the integrated project sharing in Nuendo 3: ftp://ftp.steinberg.net/Download/Nue...Networking.pdf

Oh and here is info on Steinberg's VST Connect: Start

So Pro Tools is finally but slowly catching up. Good. But still some way to go...

PS: Also watch the Studio Pass video on the same page as the VST Connect stuff. Avid just copied what Steinberg already had.


Alistair
Good points. And even if they did come up with it first, none of it sounds like anything another company couldn't implement pretty easily. There's no way around the fact that the PT side of Avid will succeed or fail on whether or not Avid offers the most amount of features to the most amount of users for the least cost. That would be a 180 degree turn for them so it seems unlikely.

Edit:
Wow I watched the videos. I'm a PT only user who admittedly has their head in the sand with regard to most other DAWs but that was a real eye-opener. I had assumed that Avid had come up with new stuff but they're clearly still just trying to play catch-up to the other DAWs. Like you said, good. But sad that they will probably try and charge a fortune for features the others have for free.

Heyyy, wait a minute! Those videos must be doctored!! How can anyone record anything without PTHD TDM or HDX??? The latency! It's bad enough on a Native system at a 32 buffer, but over the internet? Come on now. And I suppose we really went to the moon...
1
Share
Old 20th April 2014
  #445
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
Am I bitter? yeah i guess so.
Well there ya go...... finally.
Old 20th April 2014
  #446
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Well there ya go...... finally.
Lol but with just cause!
Old 20th April 2014
  #447
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post


...So Pro Tools is finally but slowly catching up. Good. But still some way to go...

Avid just copied what Steinberg already had. There is nothing in the NAB video that didn't already exist in the Steinberg ecosystem.

PS: Also watch the Studio Pass video on the same page as the VST Connect stuff.

Alistair
What would you expect from a company that took until 2011 to incorporate 32-bit floating point and 2013 to incorporate 64-bit?

"Avid Everywhere", huh? Everywhere except TDM. Man if I were at NAB during their presentation I would have pulled a Joe Wilson. ;-) Notice this "everywhere" stuff = buy more gadgets and doo hickies. The next time I'm mixing a Porsche spot, like they're doing in the video, I may invest in an HDX system. Maybe...

Old 20th April 2014
  #448
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doom64 View Post
The next time I'm mixing a Porsche spot, like they're doing in the video, I may invest in an HDX system. Maybe...
Man for mixing no one needs HDX. No one. The only remote rationale for HDX is tracking live musicians making music. So if you find yourself mixing a Porsche spot, pay yourself $$$ by keeping the money you would have spent on HDX in your pocket. You might be able to buy a Porsche with it instead
Old 20th April 2014
  #449
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFunk View Post
Man for mixing no one needs HDX. No one. The only remote rationale for HDX is tracking live musicians making music. So if you find yourself mixing a Porsche spot, pay yourself $$$ by keeping the money you would have spent on HDX in your pocket. You might be able to buy a Porsche with it instead
You make very good points.
Old 20th April 2014
  #450
Lives for gear
I don't mean to bust balls or go all forest gump, but *bitter is what bitter does*.

In spite of all the bitching and moaning about the music biz...this has NEVER been a game for the faint of heart. I came up under Wynton/Terrance/Clark Terry -have played/got my assed kicked by them - Those cats taught me to fight until I'm on my back in box.

The modern music game is a bunch of entitled ass pussies who think that because they blew family money on music they are entitled to something. GTFOH.
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump