Pro Tools 2019 !

[noah330]

Originally Posted by TMRRW-Media

I keep saying it, AVID, please please please think about the regular (non ultimate) Pro Tools users. The 32 channel I/O limit is a pain in the ass. No other DAW on the market has such stupid I/O count limitation.

We have a brand new C24 that is standing still unused for the last 2 years, because of this limitation. It is unworkable for us. We were forced to switched to Cubase. Upgrading to Ultimate with HDX hardware is simply too expensive for us (small studio).

Want to restrict the I/O count with a license model? Then at least push the limit up to a more modern value something like 64 or 96 I/O channels. That would bring us back into Avid / Pro Tools land for sure.

Really feeling left out here..

I say think about the Ultimate customers. The non-HD users have gotten buckets of perks over the past few years.

[etl17]

Couldn't agree more that it's time for some Ultimate perks to start showing up!

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by etl17

Couldn't agree more that it's time for some Ultimate perks to start showing up!

Or, knowing that people are likely never satisfied... get back to unified PT software with standard software pricing. Offer different levels of support if you like, but please only one software (plus the entry-level first software). Price it 999 without support and kill Nuendo.

Now that PT is already open for 3rd party interfaces since PT9, wouldn't it also be fair enough to open up the CoreAudio 32 i/o limitation -- because it wouldn't be Avid's problem if a Vendor X channel 96 has problems..? Just point to their support and advertise Avid's own interfaces.

With that said, having 64 i/o maximum for HDN is a hardware restriction and equal to the basic HDX1 system so no problem there. Whoever needs maximum number of Avid-supported i/o has always bought Avid's and will continue to do so.

---

BUT...

If this offering had been available for purchase two decades ago I myself probably would have never bought into MIX/HD/Ultimate. Even now I don't NEED more than 32 i/o all the time and I don't NEED to use surround mixer in every session..

Just that I needed more than 18 i/o so I needed to up my game from LE. I find it very hard to believe there is a business that NEEDS surround mixer or more than 32 i/o but cannot afford it.

[wwittman]

The “perk” of ultimate is the hardware and DSP porecessing. Otherwise you shouldn’t have bought it.

If you need to feel superior to Native users to justify your purchase that’s silly.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by wwittman

The “perk” of ultimate is the hardware and DSP porecessing. Otherwise you shouldn’t have bought it.

If you need to feel superior to Native users to justify your purchase that’s silly.

Surround mixer. Feel superior now?

[Bob Olhsson]

We did surround for features using LE!

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

We did surround for features using LE!

I did surround using analog gear, so what's the point?

[Eric Lambert]

For post, you really have no choice: Ultimate.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Eric Lambert

For post, you really have no choice: Ultimate.

Yes, today.

But we all know the post industry relies on SUPPORT the first and foremost, so scrapping standard/ultimate differentiation doesn't mean anything as long as Avid keeps selling them the Elite Support or whatever it is called. As long as Avid is listening to post for feature requests like before, nothing changes.

Avid makes the calls so even discussing about it is futile, but should someone ever ask me, I'd have one free PT (first) and one paid PT (no standard/ultimate but one unified software) and on top of that I'd sell support... standard/ultimate/elite like now, if you don't want to go back to the yearly upgrade fee and paid support code thing of the past

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by JFreak

I did surround using analog gear, so what's the point?

The point is that you don't NEED Ultimate to do surround.