What next?

[Meads]

Originally Posted by JFreak

I can claim that I won lottery too. Would you believe it? It's saturday night here in Finland, there is a chance :)

Living in Finland you basically already won it, that's how I see it.

However, there sure are reasons why one might make having issues up. But given the severity of it I'm inclined to rather believe and be cautious.
And this tiptoeing while doing my day's work is pretty annoying. I've had enough of those blasts to really be afraid.

[rockridge]

I just checked out the 6 videos on CC.
I do appreciate the work that went into incorporating it into protools.

But the question is, what's in it for me?
I'd love to see a video on how to make money with this.

If I don't see that, why should I or anyone else care?

[KMcK]

The thing I don't get is...

Were people really having trouble collaborating before? There's already a plethora of ways to send and share sessions online, I don't get why anyone needed Avid's much-worse version.

I remember how excited I was to buy my first Pro Tools rig, a Digi 001, back in 2000. Now every time I have to buy an update or a support plan or whatever I feel like I'm going to be ill for giving those asshats more of my money.

To me, Avid is dead. They're just a giant pile of **** sitting around milking customers for corporate bonuses until the company collapses. I'll continue paying for updates because unfortunately my career depends on it, but secretly I can't wait until they go under and we can all run far away from their giant black hole of suckitude.

[controlfader]

here's a typical scenario:

i find a fellow PT12.5 user who is a session guitar player. i need some tracks done by him. we set up a session to share, and i post the basic tracks.

ok, let's try some parts. he plays some and posts the results. i sync to his new tracks and listen, but i don't like the sound he has chosen. he lays down another with a different sound. i don't think that locks in tonally either.

it's already starting to frustrate both of us. if i could hear him live, i could hear him run thru many sounds quickly and say "that's it ! nice" use that for the verse groove.

why can't we ? because we don't have live audio streaming between systems.

that is why this new "cloud collaboration" feature is useless. it was released before it was even thought thru maturely.

this will happen with singers, and all other musicians. being able to immediately respond to a performance to guide a musician before they pour their heart and soul into what is a wrong direction, or sound, or dynamic, or tonality, etc.

this is why your users are being critical of avid and it's leader - whose name is now forbidden from being mentioned for fear of being cast down with the sodomites. it's not a way to get people to tell the company what they want, and what would make it better. it simply breeds a fearful bunch of "yes men" who always tell the great leader that what he is doing is wonderful. how's that working out ? really well i hear.

[Chingy]

There are some very peculiar views in this thread - and many that are quite myopic. The world is flat and getting flatter in terms of potential collaborators. Not everybody lives in NYC or LA or Nashville or one of the music hubs. The more home studios there are, the less people need to congregate in a single space to make music. Avid has gone and made collaborating online easier than existing solutions (if you don't understand why it is easier, you need to pay attention a bit more to what they've done). The fact that Cubase did this is just an indication that Avid is not the only company that found the existing workflow subpar and wanted to improve upon it.

How is it supposed to make you money? Pro Tools isn't going to make money for you and neither is Avid. You're supposed to figure out how to leverage the tool to do that. And working with strong collaborators, no matter where they are located, should help add to that leverage. Want to hear them? Skype has 13 years of tech behind it that allows you to do just that.

Of course Pro Tools has many other things that should be improved upon and fixed, but don't devalue what you don't fully seem to understand.

[taylor4814]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Sheesh... Grab a PT|1st which is free. With same CC features (3 projects, limited storage, can buy more I think...)

Not yet, but coming, right? (cloud collaboration for PT|1st, that is...)

[Fidelis]

One of the reason why we have some many complains on PT 12 threads is the AVID attitude, not software bugs. What I mean by this is... After all that terrible way to announce the new subscription model (specially for HD users), they make the top cloud collaboration plan to a max of 10 projects (60GB) and 2 additional users? I mean, how can I take this serious? I can not even do a hole recorded because for that I need at least 14 songs! And 2 persons? I'm not talking about price here! I mean, when I saw this, I gave up... Didn't even downloaded 12.5 HD.

if you want us to collaborate, do a better job in the plans, seduce us to collaborate... Then maybe we'll do it!

[michael c]

Originally Posted by controlfader

here's a typical scenario:

i find a fellow PT12.5 user who is a session guitar player. i need some tracks done by him. we set up a session to share, and i post the basic tracks.

ok, let's try some parts. he plays some and posts the results. i sync to his new tracks and listen, but i don't like the sound he has chosen. he lays down another with a different sound. i don't think that locks in tonally either.

it's already starting to frustrate both of us. if i could hear him live, i could hear him run thru many sounds quickly and say "that's it ! nice" use that for the verse groove.

why can't we ? because we don't have live audio streaming between systems.


that is why this new "cloud collaboration" feature is useless. it was released before it was even thought thru maturely.

this will happen with singers, and all other musicians. being able to immediately respond to a performance to guide a musician before they pour their heart and soul into what is a wrong direction, or sound, or dynamic, or tonality, etc.

this is why your users are being critical of avid and it's leader - whose name is now forbidden from being mentioned for fear of being cast down with the sodomites. it's not a way to get people to tell the company what they want, and what would make it better. it simply breeds a fearful bunch of "yes men" who always tell the great leader that what he is doing is wonderful. how's that working out ? really well i hear.

I'll have to check out the Avid cloud collaboration videos. I just assumed it meant you can have live streaming between composers/producers/musicians and everything is immediate.

[coolbass]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Can't say what is the truth here, but I haven't experienced any, and Avid Engineering says they found the root cause because of us (DUC Users) so I have to give them the benefit of the doubt at least

Why? Their record hasn't exactly been stellar these last years.

[propower]

CC is all fine and good but I personally don’t care. What matters to me is reliability, latency and DAW efficiency. Reliable means that problems like Noise Blasts are troubleshot and fixed fast. Besides the numerous complaints over the years it took from October to end of March to get this last fix in. Although the fix was rumored over a month earlier it came during a 3 month - no update - period while CC was being born. That’s just crap in my book. And now we have at least inklings of more blasts but since its a “user forum” we get no word from AVID on it. Not keeping a public face on what is a problem and what is not just undermines any “faith” I might have as my PT12 HD and Vanilla licenses continue to go unused because I need confirmation of goodness before I put myself at risk…

Innovation in how things work is what I want. The simple age old problem of Native is how high does the buffer have to be for tracking. Why is this even an issue in 2016? Take 96k for example. The lowest buffer in PT is 64 in and out. That is 1.33ms. Todays CPUs are 2GHz or more. So let’s see - that’s 2.66 Million CPU cycles times the number of cores! And even that can just barely run in PT. How about a new class of AAX Native plugins that are defined by being low CPU. Lets say they can do what they do in 500 CPU cycles. Why can’t we then have a dynamic tracking latency using this class of Native plugins rather than 128 minimum. Use any number of these low CPU plugs you want and have a dynamic latency of 10 sample or less (plus A/D and D/A time). Just one of many ideas I could give you… That’s the kind of innovation that I would like to see...