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]

Originally Posted by 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

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.

[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 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]

Originally Posted by 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 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]

Originally Posted by JMS40

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.