Pro Tools 9 on non-Avid-qualified computers: Share your experience!

[katerkarlo]

I want to buy PT9 but I am not going to buy an overpriced HP or Dell workstation. I like to configure my systems myself and I have never had any problems running Cubase smoothly and with minimal system load on my desktop computer.

I don't see why Pro Tools should be different, but I have heard some horror stories from people who apparently ran into great problems with earlier versions of Pro Tools HD on their non-qualified computers.

Are all of you guys using Avid-qualified machines or what's your experiences with non-qualified computers?

My comp is Windows 7 64bit, Core 2 Duo 3.16, 8GB RAM

[miketeachesclass]

I want to buy PT9 but I am not going to buy an overpriced HP or Dell workstation. I like to configure my systems myself and I have never had any problems running Cubase smoothly and with minimal system load on my desktop computer.

I don't see why Pro Tools should be different, but I have heard some horror stories from people who apparently ran into great problems with earlier versions of Pro Tools HD on their non-qualified computers.

Are all of you guys using Avid-qualified machines or what's your experiences with non-qualified computers?

My comp is Windows 7 64bit, Core 2 Duo 3.16, 8GB RAM

There are plenty of people that are running non-qualified systems, and are doing so without problem. The difficulty is that in terms of support, Avid can just say "you're not running a qualified system, sorry". Much of the time (with some tweaking), you can get the system working just fine.

[miketeachesclass]

I should add that my above statement doesn't apply to running non approved processors, firewire chipsets, etc. No amount of tweaking can change basic requirements.

[lincol1]

You will spend more time figuring out why "pro tools" doesnt work than it would take to configure your system on the front end.

You are simply asking for problems. As for making comparisons to other daws to say what should be, that too I'm afraid might be a waste of energy...

Really if you bothered to start the thread it sounds like you already know your answer.

Very doubtful you will get responses here from people saying "you don't need a qualified system, all you need is blah blah...."

[QuikDraw]

I bought my current laptop (see signature below) for business use. MSOffice, Visual Studio, SQL Server, etc... I got the cheapest core i-series Intel machine I could find. I figured as long as I stayed Intel with a modern processor I should be okay. This was not intended to be my PT rig, but I figured what the heck, I'll try it. If it doesn't work I've lost nothing since this is already paying for itself as my work computer. I don't "work" in the audio industry; it's a hobby for me.

This laptop is not Avid qualified or approved. It's using the Intel integrated graphics of the i3 chip which is supposed to be a no-no. And I don't know that any i3's are approved. I do see some Core 2 Duos on the list though, and just about any i3 will out perform just about any Core 2 Duo so I figured it was worth a try.

Well, my system is no powerhouse by any stretch of the imagination, but I can record 16 simultaneous tracks from my Mackie Onyx 1640i mixer at a 32 sample buffer for over an hour with no problems or glitches. I can also mix sessions with 20+ tracks without a problem. But I must admit I don't use a whole lot of plugins.

I still plan to get a dedicated Pro Tools rig at some point, but this one was basically free to me since it was just laying around when I wasn't using it for work. I say give it a try. What have you got to lose? If it doesn't work you can always build or buy a qualified system. :D

[Rationalizer]

There's absolutely no reason to buy "qualified computer". Not one.

I've been on a custom build pc's for (at least) 7 years now. Been using Pro Tools since v. 7 with Mbox and many other DAWs for that matter (Cakewalk, Logic, Cubase and now Live).

Cheers.

[JMS40]

Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious, but custom builds that use qualified components ARE "qualified" computers. No one is saying you MUST buy a prebuilt "overpriced HP or Dell workstation". In fact, many long time users here would steer you away from these.
Read the sticky threads regarding working builds HERE (http://duc.avid.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17) and stick with proven components.
That is by far your safest bet.
Deviate from known working systems with Pro Tools at your own risk.

[spenner]

Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious, but custom builds that use qualified components ARE "qualified" computers. No one is saying you MUST buy a prebuilt "overpriced HP or Dell workstation". In fact, many long time users here would steer you away from these.
Read the sticky threads regarding working builds HERE (http://duc.avid.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17) and stick with proven components.
That is by far your safest bet.
Deviate from known working systems with Pro Tools at your own risk.

+1

It is the qualified components that matter. If someone puts those components together for you then you pay a lot more. It's that simple.

To the OP. I have Cubase as well. It is definitely not as picky as PT regarding using it on your average computer, but you still need powerful, fast components if you need to run a lot of audio and virtual instrument tracks.

[Rationalizer]

Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious, but custom builds that use qualified components ARE "qualified" computers.

Sorry if I misunderstood but I thought the OP was referring to this: http://bit.ly/hcd11l (Pro Tools 9.0 Qualified Windows Computers).

[AxeDye]

All you really need to worry about is your OS... Pro tools will work clean with my experience if you have

2.66 ghz dual core, intel preffered or above.

4 gb of ram

Dedicated or disctete graphics card

Windows 7 or OS X


My asus can bounce a session with over 20 rtas plugins with a core 2 duo.

[SNAZ]

sometime ago I remember Digidesign (still not integrated on Avid) showed, as qualified computer, a Carillon systems from UK, a well done custom PC in rack, 100% silent, 100% effective, this unit was based on Intel motherboards, Nvidia video cards, Intel cpu (included xeon), Kingston memory, Seagate, Zalman, etc, all the best from different areas and windows XP tweaked version.
curiously there was a variation on the version, 7.3 to 7.4 or similar, and machines dissappear from the recomended and tested list. I asked Carillon why and answer was simple: "it is necessary to send another new unit with new software for test".
Resume, recomended or qualified units simple are tested for Avid people techs but if you mount a similar or parallel unit, this will work well also, simply must to follow a route book and apply some tweaking, the rest in only a simple label "Qualified by Avid".

[katerkarlo]

Sorry if I misunderstood but I thought the OP was referring to this: http://bit.ly/hcd11l (Pro Tools 9.0 Qualified Windows Computers).

Yes, this is the list I was referring to. Somebody told me if I didn't buy one of those HP or Dell computers I would run into problems.

Anyway, thanks for your comments. This is very reassuring. What about those "qualified components" some of you are talking about? Is there an official (Avid) list of components that are tested with PT9? Or do you simply mean "qualified by user experience"?

What about graphics, for example? I have a Radeon card in my computer. Should I buy a NVIDIA?

[albee1952]

All you really need to worry about is your OS... Pro tools will work clean with my experience if you have

2.66 ghz dual core, intel preffered or above.

4 gb of ram

Dedicated or disctete graphics card

Windows 7 or OS X


My asus can bounce a session with over 20 rtas plugins with a core 2 duo.
Not exactly accurate. There are some things to consider here. First off, there is a big difference between "unqualified" and "incompatible". Unqualified may only mean that it is untested(there are simply too many combinations of PC parts to test all of them). OS matters, but so does the chipset, firewire controller, hard drives and the cpu itself(Turion cpu's have power management features that make it a bad choice for Pro Tools), regardless of OS). The fact that Avid NOW recommends nVidia graphics merely means that they are seeing better or more consistent performance with them over ATI cards. If you have a working system with non-approved parts, that's great(and put that in your signature so others can see what you have working). Sticking to known working systems or parts is just a good way to save money over having to replace parts when you try something that doesn't work. Sometimes folks get lucky(I certainly have lucked out on a few of my dozen or so builds:D). In the long run, it is the users(all of us) that will support or expand the list of approved hardware.

[TOM@METRO]

Yes, this is the list I was referring to. Somebody told me if I didn't buy one of those HP or Dell computers I would run into problems.

Anyway, thanks for your comments. This is very reassuring. What about those "qualified components" some of you are talking about? Is there an official (Avid) list of components that are tested with PT9? Or do you simply mean "qualified by user experience"?

What about graphics, for example? I have a Radeon card in my computer. Should I buy a NVIDIA?
I run 3 ATI HD5450 fanless cards with no issues.

[hue]

I've personally found that certain ATI cards can cause issues. Somehow my silent 4350 was causing CPU spikes. I put an old NVIDIA 8600 in and CPU spikes went away. Unfortunately this may not be the case for everyone. It's likely an interaction between my particular hardware. That being said, I'm not a fan of the many bacground services that ATI cards require running. Even a driver only install did not seem to help.

[mixupandblend]

using a Dell studio XPS 1645 with i720q processor. PT 8 runs fine on it without any tweaking until you get to large sessions with much automation and 48+ tracks (including busses, reverbs, delays, master compression, etc.). When the session gets pretty big for an LE rig bad things start happening. I've learned how to work around it, but to me, Avid is pretty cavemanish where this is concerned. There really should be more stability. Studio One, Cubase, Reason, these are programms I use with absolutely no problem using MBox 2 ASIO drivers. It is beyond me why AVID can't design a programme that works better across the board. My opinion - there's politics behind there seemingly inferior design.

Honestly, I've gotten frustrated with AVID Pro Tools LE because of their crappy software design in this regard and am exploring other options. However, PT is still the best software I've used out of the leading software (Cubase, Logic, PT), so until I upgrade to a firewire interface like 003 or win an HD system, my best solution is to buy a AVID approved computer and run PT on it for complex mixes.