Problem with maximum Voices/Tracks in Pro Tools 2020.9

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by Obsidian Dragon

Both Logic and Reason are not Avid products. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Best thing I've heard all day

[sdelsolray]

The reduction in voices seems to be more of a mistake, which AVID is now working on fixing.

[capt kirk]

its a mistake....let it go.....shut this thread off.....

[Top Jimmy]

Originally Posted by capt kirk

its a mistake.....

https://youtu.be/I0AxrOUJ62E

[Bob L]

Originally Posted by K Roche

Yes indeed the DUC is almost as entertaining as the internet at large

What never ceases to amaze me is those who (may) otherwise be at least somewhat logical people, can jump all over such convoluted "conspiracy" notions apparently with out ever bothering to think them through to a logical conclusion

Like what would be actual point of intentionally reducing the "TRACK" count of vanilla by 1/2, and hiding it ????
In terms of writing the code, it would not reflect a reduction in cost to AVID, in fact intentionally RE -writing that portion of the code to reflect a reduce track count, and then re-re writing to put it back up, would increase costs for labor for the time an spent to re-write and then re -re write and make absolutely no business sense

And if the intention is to dump vanilla altogether (as per the, convoluted "AVID wants to dump vanilla users " theory" suggests BTW unsupported by any facts at all ), it makes no sense to "surreptitiously" 1/2 the track count, then backpedal and put it back. When simply announcing a reduction in track count for Vanilla from the start , would be much much more efficient in business terms, for intentionally causing Vanilla users to jump ship.

And given the fact that almost always, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one,,, like oh say for example ( human error resulting in an unintentional FU) ,, embarrassing ? YES,,,, sinister? pretty unlikely .

I speak only for myself, but I don't care whether the cause of this is incompetence or bad intention. Both roads lead to my eventual exit. S1 in hand, my last Avid tax paid up into early 2022.

[deanrichard]

I sure hope you're wrong about it not being tested at all, and I have to believe you are. There are differences between the versions, and if those differences aren't being tested the QA group should be let go. I worked in software QA early in my career, and putting out an untested version - even one that is almost exactly the same as another - is simply not acceptable. It's one thing to have sloppy or inadequate QA, quite another to have none.

Originally Posted by Teej

My guess is Vanilla isn't tested as much as Ultimate, or maybe at all. There was another show-stopper bug last year in which Vanilla sessions could become corrupted and only open once again in Ultimate. I worked with support tracking that one down, they were fantastic and it was fixed quickly. On Ultimate now anyway but it doesn't lend a sense of security to the Vanilla licence holders.

[Teej]

Originally Posted by deanrichard

I sure hope you're wrong about it not being tested at all, and I have to believe you are. There are differences between the versions, and if those differences aren't being tested the QA group should be let go. I worked in software QA early in my career, and putting out an untested version - even one that is almost exactly the same as another - is simply not acceptable. It's one thing to have sloppy or inadequate QA, quite another to have none.

As JFreak said, it's not two different builds, it's one build with more features unlocked for the Ultimate license. Furthermore, with an Ultimate license it is not possible to open with the Vanilla feature-set, you would have to have a seperate iLok with a Vanilla license on it. Should the beta team have some vanilla testers on it? Absolutely. Do they? Questionable. Especially considering the downsizing/outsourcing/etc that Avid has done.

Frankly I think this is pretty damning. The 2019.5 Vanilla session corruption bug last year was much harder to trigger. The 2020.9 voices bug, Vanilla users noticed immediately. If you use Pro Tools at any kind of professional level, how could you not? And yet it slipped past the beta team. To me that speaks to no Vanilla testing. Personally I feel much safer to be on an Ultimate license. That's not a good state of affairs.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Bob L

I speak only for myself, but I don't care whether the cause of this is incompetence or bad intention. Both roads lead to my eventual exit. S1 in hand, my last Avid tax paid up into early 2022.

And here in lies exactly the point. There are a number of alternatives and if someone is not satisfied with the product, there are actionable options. The "tax" quip while humorous is obviously specious, as "self inflicted toll" would be more accurate But again that is a different discussion than engaging in flat earth speculation.


Interestingly I actually have and use S1 (and it is certainly almost there ) I use it for a specific situation where I use my studio system to participate in a virtual open mic using the Zoom meeting apt, and of course with an Avid HD Omni interface, PTHDN still cannot be used by itself , for third party sound application while PT is open.

[deanrichard]

That's not true. I understand quite well, I was a software engineer for 23 years. They are still two different builds, though both are compiled from the same codebase. One version is built with one set of compiler switches, the other with different switches. The QA team has the ability to lock and unlock any version they like.

No need to expand on this any more.

Originally Posted by Teej

As JFreak said, it's not two different builds, it's one build with more features unlocked for the Ultimate license. Furthermore, with an Ultimate license it is not possible to open with the Vanilla feature-set, you would have to have a seperate iLok with a Vanilla license on it. Should the beta team have some vanilla testers on it? Absolutely. Do they? Questionable. Especially considering the downsizing/outsourcing/etc that Avid has done.

Frankly I think this is pretty damning. The 2019.5 Vanilla session corruption bug last year was much harder to trigger. The 2020.9 voices bug, Vanilla users noticed immediately. If you use Pro Tools at any kind of professional level, how could you not? And yet it slipped past the beta team. To me that speaks to no Vanilla testing. Personally I feel much safer to be on an Ultimate license. That's not a good state of affairs.

[JFreak]

Umm, no.. PT checks the available feature-set on boot time dynamically, according to which licenses you have. It is one software build.

First is different.