Pro Tools 2019 !

[zion]

Originally Posted by Meads

+1
Don't know where this is coming from, Christopher. You always seemed very reasonable to me. Did Janne hack your account? Sounds a lot more akin to his brainfarting.

Yeah I think it was Janne! Christoper’s track record has always been reasonable and he has always held a well balanced opinion. Not overly biased. Stop it Janne! LOL!

[RobertDorn]

Originally Posted by capt kirk

Lots of pro's on here.....we makes a lot of money using protools, and dont have time to worry about pointless cra..p like mojave or whatever....if you cant be creative and earn a living without mojave or some stoopid plugin then you should go into plumbing....you'd probably complain about the wrenches or something...

You're missing the point. It's not about customers creativity, it's about AVID's creativity with their support/software-update plan, while they let customers wait for 7 months for a compatibility release.

I assume when you ask money from your customers you deliver them something in return for that. That's normally how businesses works, of course correct me if I'm terribly mistaken.

[Meads]

Originally Posted by Southsidemusic

I said you wont find the top tier guys here upset over releases that has been delayed as they dont work on the latest and greatest. No need for it as the systems they use works for what they need them to do or use other DAW’s for their needs.

But what's the point of that argument?
My grandpa is happily using my old Pentium 3 computer. Doesn't mean that this is a viable tool to work with for everyone and above all it doesn't justify paying Avid a yearly fee for basically nothing in return.
I mean, this has been discussed ad nauseam so I won't get into all of that again.

What I find baffling simply is the fact, that there are people trying to defend the way Avid does business. It's not customer friendly, it's shameless and just not okay.
No need to stress that any more than it has already been done.

But when others come out and defend that practice, or try to steer away from the topic, or to suffocate the "complainers", or whatever with the weirdest arguments, I just want to throw up in my mouth.
How is PRO (in all caps or not) users who heavily use outboard and outdated computers and software of any relevance in regards to people being p*ssed at Avid's conduct? How does other people not complaining make it any more fair to pay Avid $400/year for them taking a leak in the woods.
I'm a pro as well, meaning I earn a (decent) living on my work in audio. And I do like to work with recent technology, that makes my work more efficient (can use 10 instances of Altiverb XL instead needing to automate two because the computer can't handle more than that). I mean, there's a ton of arguments to be had, why modern hardware and software has its merits. Do we really need to discuss this?

Nobody said you can't get any work done with an old TDM system. But that's completey besides the point.
I couldn't care less if Avid decided to scratch their balls instead of doing some work if it were up to me to decide if I want to pay them for that or not. But as it stands I pay them in anticipation and good faith that they do work. And realize they don't after they already took my money and got their lovehandles wet in an eyes-wide-shut party or whatever they are doing with our cash.

It's not about the amount of money, it's about the principle involved.

[RobertDorn]

Originally Posted by Meads

But what's the point of that argument?

My grandpa is happily using my old Pentium 3 computer. Doesn't mean that this is a viable tool to work with for everyone and above all it doesn't justify paying Avid a yearly fee for basically nothing in return.

I mean, this has been discussed ad nauseam so I won't get into all of that again.



What I find baffling simply is the fact, that there are people trying to defend the way Avid does business. It's not customer friendly, it's shameless and just not okay.

No need to stress that any more than it has already been done.



But when others come out and defend that practice, or try to steer away from the topic, or to suffocate the "complainers", or whatever with the weirdest arguments, I just want to throw up in my mouth.

How is PRO (in all caps or not) users who heavily use outboard and outdated computers and software of any relevance in regards to people being p*ssed at Avid's conduct? How does other people not complaining make it any more fair to pay Avid $400/year for them taking a leak in the woods.

I'm a pro as well, meaning I earn a (decent) living on my work in audio. And I do like to work with recent technology, that makes my work more efficient (can use 10 instances of Altiverb XL instead needing to automate two because the computer can't handle more than that). I mean, there's a ton of arguments to be had, why modern hardware and software has its merits. Do we really need to discuss this?



Nobody said you can't get any work done with an old TDM system. But that's completey besides the point.

I couldn't care less if Avid decided to scratch their balls instead of doing some work if it were up to me to decide if I want to pay them for that or not. But as it stands I pay them in anticipation and good faith that they do work. And realize they don't after they already took my money and got their lovehandles wet in an eyes-wide-shut party or whatever they are doing with our cash.



It's not about the amount of money, it's about the principle involved.

+11111 that’s exactly the whole point. They ask money, no they force to pay money, annually, for the ability to obtain software updates. The ‘free’ choice of opting out is not so free at all since you’ll get a penalty when you want to opt in later on with a reinstatement support fee which is about 3 times the annual fee.

If ‘top PRO’s’ should describe the customers who don’t care about paying AVID annually without expecting something in return for that, because that makes them PRO (?) they’re most likely the customer base that educated AVID to behave like they do today.

I find it hard to believe that...

[gnjlee]

Originally Posted by RobertDorn

+11111 that’s exactly the whole point. They ask money, no they force to pay money, annually, for the ability to obtain software updates. The ‘free’ choice of opting out is not so free at all since you’ll get a penalty when you want to opt in later on with a reinstatement support fee which is about 3 times the annual fee.

Yep like I said earlier, that is my primary complaint. The punitive reinstatement fee. It is designed to entrap. Without it, we would be free to drop out when they can't deliver, which clearly is what the situation is right now.

[coolbass]

The point is that a lot of moderators here and self proclared pros are defending Avid with arguments that are beside the issue.
Who cares whether pros use the greatest or latest, or use Pro Tools 8.2.
Who cares if they visit the forum often.
Don't patronize your fellow customers.

We pay Avid for updates and service.
They should deliver. They don't.

[jasonkalman]

Originally Posted by LDS

I do think there is a bit of a divergence from reality happening here. We exist in what is largely a service industry, not a tech industry. There is something puzzlingly odd when manufacturers drastically rehash the same basic design into three new products in the space of 5 or 6 years. UA and Antelope are some of the biggest offenders in that regard. Can you honestly charge your clients more for owning an Apollo x8 over a silver Apollo 8? I would really question the quality of the original Apollo 8 if a client heard any marked difference, particularly enough to charge for it.

Most serious manufacturers in this industry really do make equipment that stands the test of time. The Wiggles are still touring with a Digidesign SC48 for FOH. They are consistently one of the biggest money earners in the Australian entertainment industry. Why would you spend more for a 'new' console when it will still do the job just as well as the old one? It's wasted money. SSL's Duality has been around for 13 years now. Prism have been selling the same basic converter platform for almost two decade. The Sound Devices 788 was released in 2008 - Ben Osmo used four of them to record Mad Max Fury road in 2015. Sound Devices still sell it new. Allen & Heath iLive desks lasted a decade on the market. Digico's SD stuff is in it's 8th or 9th year. Good equipment and good investments should kick around for a very long time.

If you are comparing an MTRX to an Apollo or Lynx interface, you really are only using the MTRX to about 30% of it's potential. It has insane flexibility in terms of connectivity. It has a built in monitor controller that can be used with Eucon and an iPad app. It has the ability to host speaker processing internally for surround and immersive formats. And you can split the I/O of a single MTRX and share it to two Pro Tools systems simultaneously. It is an extremely serious piece of kit... just like the S6, or a dub stage with 7.1.4 atmos monitoring. You will find a lot of chatter about them in the post section of the DUC.

Sure, Mojave support would be great... but... the reality is that people out there are potentially making a more lucrative living running Pro Tools TDM and Snow Leopard. If that hasn't hit you like a dump truck falling from the sky, it really should. Saving money and stretching every inch of life out of hardware and software is the game most of the industry is playing. Lining up for the newest, latest and greatest is something that kids do when buying a new iThing to be cool amongst their friends.

I don't know if the new converters that UA offer in their new Apollo lineup are that much better or noticeable from the original silver Apollo, but the reviews seem to imply that there is a significant and noticeable difference. Is 133 db vs 118 db of dynamic range audibly noticeable? Again, I don't know. UA seems to tout this as a significant upgrade along with dual-crystal clocking. I would love to be able to get an A/B test, perhaps there are some on youtube that I can check out and hear for myself. I would love to think that my silver Apollo's converters and clocking are still in the same league. Paying for a new interface every few years doesn't make economical sense. But if the difference is worth it, I might take the plunge. I'm happy with my Omni as it stands. I think the converters are good...same specs as the silver apollos. The real issue for me is I don't use outboard gear so the software issues that Pro Tools have is the main issue for me and why I switched back to Logic Pro. Logic Pro's mixing and editing interface is nowhere close to as precise and elegant as Pro Tools which is why I am really hoping 2019.5 addresses the CPU issue.

A MTRX doesn't make sense for home recording artists. It is way overkill for what we would need. That is why an upgraded Omni would be the way to go for the home recording market. I don't think that is too much to ask from Avid. Interesting point is, their MTRX isn't even made by Avid, but rather Digital Audio Denmark. So again, what is Avid doing? Are they outsourcing their hardware department? Have they downsized to the point where they can't even make their own hardware anymore? They seem to be struggling to just try and keep up with their software which seems to be lagging further and further behind the competition.

A pro studio wouldn't have this issue because they probably already upgraded to a MTRX and use mostly outboard gear and effects. VIs aren't an issue if you don't use them. Pro Studios record mostly live instruments so being able to run a VI equivalent of a symphony orchestra wouldn't apply. But for those that don't track live orchestras, VIs are the only way we can get it. I think Avid should at least strive to offer the ability to run VIs to the point where the computer becomes the weakest link not the software. I didn't spend $10,000 on a new iMac Pro to be artificially limited in VI counts due to Pro Tools inability to use the 10 cores and 64 gig of ram. Logic Pro was optimized to use the latest iMac Pros and runs VIs very efficiently. Why can't Pro Tools do this? I've said this before, but for Pro Tools to truly be the best DAW out there for everyone (not just Pros using outboard gear tracking live instruments) they need to address this and sooner than later. Over the last 10 years I've been using Pro Tools, they have never even closed the gap regarding VI usage and CPU efficiency. Someone at Avid should've made this a priority. As it stands almost every other DAW can run VIs much more efficiently. The new feature that Avid is touting that doubles the midi count is meaningless if the software can't tap into a computer's native resources.

As far as the Wiggles using an SC48 for FOH, that seems reasonable. I've been to a wiggles concert and their shows are really geared for kids and the live aspect of it....almost circus like with all the acrobatics etc. Their fanbase aren't audiophiles.

[gnjlee]

Originally Posted by jasonkalman

I don't know if the new converters that UA offer in their new Apollo lineup are that much better or noticeable from the original silver Apollo, but the reviews seem to imply that there is a significant and noticeable difference. Is 133 db vs 118 db of dynamic range audibly noticeable? Again, I don't know. UA seems to tout this as a significant upgrade along with dual-crystal clocking. I would love to be able to get an A/B test, perhaps there are some on youtube that I can check out and hear for myself. I would love to think that my silver Apollo's converters and clocking are still in the same league. Paying for a new interface every few years doesn't make economical sense. But if the difference is worth it, I might take the plunge. I'm happy with my Omni as it stands. I think the converters are good...same specs as the silver apollos. The real issue for me is I don't use outboard gear so the software issues that Pro Tools have is the main issue for me and why I switched back to Logic Pro. Logic Pro's mixing and editing interface is nowhere close to as precise and elegant as Pro Tools which is why I am really hoping 2019.5 addresses the CPU issue.

An MTRX doesn't make sense for home recording artists. It is way overkill for what we would need. That is why an upgraded Omni would be the way to go for the home recording market. I don't think that is too much to ask from Avid. Interesting this is, their MTRX isn't even made by Avid, but rather Digital Audio Denmark. So again, what is Avid doing? Are they outsourcing their hardware department? Have they downsized to the point where they can't even make their own hardware anymore? They seem to be struggling to just try and keep up with their software which seems to be lagging further and further behind the competition.

A pro studio wouldn't have this issue because they probably already upgraded to a MTRX and use mostly outboard gear and effects. VIs aren't an issue if you don't use them. Pro Studios record mostly live instruments so being able to run a VI equivalent of a symphony orchestra wouldn't apply. But for those that don't track live orchestras, VIs are the only way we can get it. I think Avid should at least strive to offer the ability to run VIs to the point where the computer becomes the weakest link not the software. I didn't spend $10,000 on a new iMac Pro to be artificially limited in VI counts due to Pro Tools inability to use the 10 cores and 64 gig of ram. Logic Pro was optimized to use the latest iMac Pros and runs VIs very efficiently. Why can't Pro Tools do this? I've said this before, but for Pro Tools to truly be the best DAW out there for everyone (not just Pros using outboard gear tracking live instruments) they need to address this and sooner than later. Over the last 10 years I've been using Pro Tools, they have never even closed the gap regarding VI usage and CPU efficiency. Someone at Avid should've made this a priority. As it stands almost every other DAW can run VIs much more efficiently. The new feature that Avid is touting that doubles the midi count is meaningless if the software can't tap into a computer's native resources.

Excuse my naivete, but PT can't use 10+ cores? I didn't know that. That seems excessively lame. If this is true, I am glad I went for an 8 core machine for my computer refresh. Granted that it seems like I can throw anything at my build at low buffers and it runs without issue...

[RobertDorn]

Originally Posted by jasonkalman

I don't know if the new converters that UA offer in their new Apollo lineup are that much better or noticeable from the original silver Apollo, but the reviews seem to imply that there is a significant and noticeable difference. Is 133 db vs 118 db of dynamic range audibly noticeable? Again, I don't know. UA seems to tout this as a significant upgrade along with dual-crystal clocking. I would love to be able to get an A/B test, perhaps there are some on youtube that I can check out and hear for myself. I would love to think that my silver Apollo's converters and clocking are still in the same league. Paying for a new interface every few years doesn't make economical sense. But if the difference is worth it, I might take the plunge. I'm happy with my Omni as it stands. I think the converters are good...same specs as the silver apollos. The real issue for me is I don't use outboard gear so the software issues that Pro Tools have is the main issue for me and why I switched back to Logic Pro. Logic Pro's mixing and editing interface is nowhere close to as precise and elegant as Pro Tools which is why I am really hoping 2019.5 addresses the CPU issue.

An MTRX doesn't make sense for home recording artists. It is way overkill for what we would need. That is why an upgraded Omni would be the way to go for the home recording market. I don't think that is too much to ask from Avid. Interesting this is, their MTRX isn't even made by Avid, but rather Digital Audio Denmark. So again, what is Avid doing? Are they outsourcing their hardware department? Have they downsized to the point where they can't even make their own hardware anymore? They seem to be struggling to just try and keep up with their software which seems to be lagging further and further behind the competition.

A pro studio wouldn't have this issue because they probably already upgraded to a MTRX and use mostly outboard gear and effects. VIs aren't an issue if you don't use them. Pro Studios record mostly live instruments so being able to run a VI equivalent of a symphony orchestra wouldn't apply. But for those that don't track live orchestras, VIs are the only way we can get it. I think Avid should at least strive to offer the ability to run VIs to the point where the computer becomes the weakest link not the software. I didn't spend $10,000 on a new iMac Pro to be artificially limited in VI counts due to Pro Tools inability to use the 10 cores and 64 gig of ram. Logic Pro was optimized to use the latest iMac Pros and runs VIs very efficiently. Why can't Pro Tools do this? I've said this before, but for Pro Tools to truly be the best DAW out there for everyone (not just Pros using outboard gear tracking live instruments) they need to address this and sooner than later. Over the last 10 years I've been using Pro Tools, they have never even closed the gap regarding VI usage and CPU efficiency. Someone at Avid should've made this a priority. As it stands almost every other DAW can run VIs much more efficiently. The new feature that Avid is touting that doubles the midi count is meaningless if the software can't tap into a computer's native resources.

Let’s hope the new seamless playback feature in PT2019 also has a tweak or 2 on the entire playback engine when it comes to efficient CPU usage.
But seeing is believing of course:)

[jasonkalman]

Originally Posted by gnjlee

Excuse my naivete, but PT can't use 10+ cores? I didn't know that. That seems excessively lame. If this is true, I am glad I went for an 8 core machine for my computer refresh. Granted that it seems like I can throw anything at my build at low buffers and it runs without issue...

Absolutely it can't.