PT 10 offline or 'fast bounce'?

[mike connelly]

Originally Posted by Drew Mazurek

Does anyone know if other DAWs do up to 150x realtime?

The 150 number is pretty meaningless since it's going to depend on how complex the session is and how much processing, as well as how fast the computer and hard drives are. Obviously with an "up to" some sessions aren't going to bounce that fast while I'd think that with a fast enough computer, I don't know why there would be an upper limit.

I'm sure Avid wants to give the impression that they're super fast, whether the competition is just as fast or not.

[JFreak]

"UP TO" something is meaningless; what is important is that beginning with PT11 the system is not constrained by TDM/RTAS architecture which means realtime processing. If you can do a 45 minute TV show in 5 minutes, you probably won't be mad about "only 9X" improvement, will you?

[mike connelly]

Originally Posted by JFreak

"UP TO" something is meaningless

That's what I just said.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by mike connelly

That's what I just said.

Yes, and we are not in any way disagreeing :) It's just that I myself am kind of fed up with the marketing language where things look like they're out of this world...

In reality though, I would be happy if I could bounce a 45 minute TV show in 5 minutes which would allow me to brew a cup of coffee and then listen to what I just did

[WombatStudio.Org]

Originally Posted by YYR123

For True audio quality you have to bounce real time it's the only way to do it

;^)

They're saying that either way should null. I'm sure plenty of people will test and share results.

[Drew Mazurek]

Originally Posted by mike connelly

The 150 number is pretty meaningless since it's going to depend on how complex the session is and how much processing, as well as how fast the computer and hard drives are. Obviously with an "up to" some sessions aren't going to bounce that fast while I'd think that with a fast enough computer, I don't know why there would be an upper limit.

I'm sure Avid wants to give the impression that they're super fast, whether the competition is just as fast or not.

It's not meaningless. It's meant to show the upper limit of the speed, which is EXACTLY the point of the number. Of course it's tied to the complexity of the session.

If you make an hour long radio show, with a few stereo tracks and some dialog tracks, and it outputs in a minute and is sample accurate, then the number actually means something.

[mike connelly]

Originally Posted by Drew Mazurek

It's not meaningless. It's meant to show the upper limit of the speed, which is EXACTLY the point of the number.

But why would such an upper limit even exist? If new computers come out that are ten times faster, the bounce is still going to max out at 150x? Bringing up a number at all just seems like marketingspeak.

[Drew Mazurek]

Originally Posted by mike connelly

But why would such an upper limit even exist? If new computers come out that are ten times faster, the bounce is still going to max out at 150x? Bringing up a number at all just seems like marketingspeak.

It's just called information. To give you some indication as to how fast it will be. When computers are faster, they'll update it!

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by WombatStudio.Org

They're saying that either way should null. I'm sure plenty of people will test and share results.

I'm just trying to stir up the air here !!! I'm sure it won't matter and it might have problems initially but it will probably be sonically the same

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Craig F

you can do 1 and 2 easily using busses and recording to a mix track at the same time

Exactly, this is what I've been doing for years when I mix a live gig :) Just buss everything to a stereo audio track and feed that to the outputs. It also gives me (as someone who does a lot of live gigs) possibility to add some additional mics to the mixer, which do not go to the music mix but straight to the outputs.