Digi Rumor

[Kuba Pietrzak]

maufau,
thanks a lot for explanations...
I do not fight with any Daw and I do not press anybody to use this or other app. Despite the fact, that right now I am at the front of really nice PT HD setup, this is not my rig, so I think I can be objective about the point 1. I bought Cubase because I wanted to learn something new (point 2). I know, that native setup could be really useful - 5 years ago I edited 24 tracks of foley, having all 5 reels in one session and it was on Mac G4/800SP and my little Mbox (point 4). Having knoledge about digital mixing process and differences between float point and fixed point maths I do not support "myths", which are spreaded around the internet (point 6).
From my point of view, it is critical, if a particular system is checked with big sessions, which means lots of tracks/edits/automation and those sessions lenght (from 20mins reel to 90min tv). I saw lots of comparisons made by music people, who used one song as a example, so that's why I asked the question...
Let's have this discussion continued...

all best,
Kuba

[maufau]

Originally Posted by Kuba Pietrzak

maufau,
thanks a lot for explanations...
I do not fight with any Daw and I do not press anybody to use this or other app. Despite the fact, that right now I am at the front of really nice PT HD setup, this is not my rig, so I think I can be objective about the point 1. I bought Cubase because I wanted to learn something new (point 2). I know, that native setup could be really useful - 5 years ago I edited 24 tracks of foley, having all 5 reels in one session and it was on Mac G4/800SP and my little Mbox (point 4). Having knoledge about digital mixing process and differences between float point and fixed point maths I do not support "myths", which are spreaded around the internet (point 6).
From my point of view, it is critical, if a particular system is checked with big sessions, which means lots of tracks/edits/automation and those sessions lenght (from 20mins reel to 90min tv). I saw lots of comparisons made by music people, who used one song as a example, so that's why I asked the question...
Let's have this discussion continued...

all best,
Kuba

Sure. I posted the stuff about music simply because I had the screenshots handy and they were from a prior discussion on native track counts and power which I felt applies even though it was music. audio/automation/plugins/tack counts are common denominators in both realms and I believe that it is the session that puts demands on the DAW not the type of material. I've recorded and mixed a 12 minute song before @ 70 tracks, lots of automation, lots of edits, 10 fx sends, 12 groups/auxes, lets say 3 plugs per track on average (some more than others) and the cpu sat pretty at 35%. On a laptop. My argument was if my laptop can handle this, then surely a Quad Core with 4gb of ram and a 7200rpm or 10,000rpm hard drive can handle a 20 minute 70 track spot, and I'm sure a film, as it is already being done.

As far as large tracks counts, editing, etc, with software programming, there are only so many ways to load data from a file or memory, and seek to locations within that file. The cpu, disk and memory handle this loading and seeking not Dsp chips, correct me if I'm wrong. I think in this respect the DAWs are the same as they are all "native" at that point.

Also, EricG gave you his nuendo film details, but didn't post screen shots :-( However, I would think the video interviews on the euphonix site should say enough, 60 percent of those guys are doing post with high track counts, lots of plugs, automation in nuendo.

Maybe I should blog this or something with video's and screenshots. And that is a lot to prove something that steinberg should be doing (if they haven't already

[cmaynes]

Originally Posted by maufau

Sure. I posted the stuff about music simply because I had the screenshots handy and they were from a prior discussion on native track counts and power which I felt applies even though it was music. audio/automation/plugins/tack counts are common denominators in both realms and I believe that it is the session that puts demands on the DAW not the type of material. I've recorded and mixed a 12 minute song before @ 70 tracks, lots of automation, lots of edits, 10 fx sends, 12 groups/auxes, lets say 3 plugs per track on average (some more than others) and the cpu sat pretty at 35%. On a laptop. My argument was if my laptop can handle this, then surely a Quad Core with 4gb of ram and a 7200rpm or 10,000rpm hard drive can handle a 20 minute 70 track spot, and I'm sure a film, as it is already being done.

As far as large tracks counts, editing, etc, with software programming, there are only so many ways to load data from a file or memory, and seek to locations within that file. The cpu, disk and memory handle this loading and seeking not Dsp chips, correct me if I'm wrong. I think in this respect the DAWs are the same as they are all "native" at that point.

Also, EricG gave you his nuendo film details, but didn't post screen shots :-( However, I would think the video interviews on the euphonix site should say enough, 60 percent of those guys are doing post with high track counts, lots of plugs, automation in nuendo.

Maybe I should blog this or something with video's and screenshots. And that is a lot to prove something that steinberg should be doing (if they haven't already

staistically there are an overwhelming amount of films being done on PT vs Nuendo though.

So, just because John Ross is on Euphonix' website doing some work on features should not mean that his is the typical workflow...

[Kuba Pietrzak]

Originally Posted by cmaynes

So, just because John Ross is on Euphonix' website doing some work on features should not mean that his is the typical workflow...

As I remember, John Ross has changed his setup from System5MC (and Nuendo as a mixing engine) into full sustem5, which basically means, that now console's onboard dsp is responsible for mixing process...

Kuba

[Tobias Eichelberg]

About this rumor i find a couple of things to be quite unrealistic:

The strenghts of Pro Tools HD are not only track count and plug-in count, its strenghts are (in my opinion):

1. Reliability
Hardware recommendation and test cost time and money. Apple sure doesn't bother trying to iron out the bugs in Logic Pro - and Logic is soooo buggy.
2. Low Latency in real world applications - driving sessions with lots of plug-ins, lots of automation, even lots of elastic audio editing - and still having low latency throughout the system.
3. ADC and advanced session import features. As long as digi holds back on delay compensation and the session data features for LE/M-powered, HD will not go away.

I don't believe they will ever go the firewire route for pro systems, because 1. firewire is a bottleneck, certainly not usable for blown up, 72 inputs / 72 outputs recording setups.

2. Firewire might soon be history as the industry is working on another revision of firewire and USB 3.0. We've seen in the past that Apple likes to introduce new technology to their computers like a thief in the night - the next MacPro might even not have firewire any more - it happened for sure to Apple Talk, ADC and SCSI.

Frankly, the rumored "pro" firewire interface doesn't seem to be much more than a higher quality replacement for the 003/003R. I don't see much of a difference...
Toby

[maufau]

Originally Posted by cmaynes

staistically there are an overwhelming amount of films being done on PT vs Nuendo though.

So, just because John Ross is on Euphonix' website doing some work on features should not mean that his is the typical workflow...

I never said one is better than the other, and that Nuendo is being used more than PT, its more of a -

"yes, people are using native for film",
"yes, native can handle that power",
"yes, you can get a powerful setup for < 10K"

I provided the examples from Euphonix, because you can read someone say or watch a video of nuendo being used in a post facility, which many people say "isn't possible" or "isn't done" or "only PT" or "native would never have a place in post".

And to your point - what about Studio Hamburg (Nuendo Only), Steve Tushar (Nuendo Only)? Did you read those as well? Nuendo IS "their typical workflow" - here
http://www.euphonix.com/pro/news/new...io_hamburg.htm
http://www.euphonix.com/pro/video/sy...iles/index.htm (@ bottom) It is being used, with people saying it is their workflow. However, I think euphonix is doing a better job promoting nuendo than steinberg LOL

I don't care about the statistics, we are all well aware of PT stats, but that has nothing to do with the competency of a product, right?

Mind you, I use PTHD as well, I think it is a great product, but my issue with an HD setup is the price only, compared to the power that is available today from native at set price.

[audiogeek1]

Originally Posted by maufau

I never said one is better than the other, and that Nuendo is being used more than PT, its more of a -

"yes, people are using native for film",
"yes, native can handle that power",
"yes, you can get a powerful setup for < 10K"

I provided the examples from Euphonix, because you can read someone say or watch a video of nuendo being used in a post facility, which many people say "isn't possible" or "isn't done" or "only PT" or "native would never have a place in post".

And to your point - what about Studio Hamburg (Nuendo Only), Steve Tushar (Nuendo Only)? Did you read those as well? Nuendo IS "their typical workflow" - here
http://www.euphonix.com/pro/news/new...io_hamburg.htm
http://www.euphonix.com/pro/video/sy...iles/index.htm (@ bottom) It is being used, with people saying it is their workflow. However, I think euphonix is doing a better job promoting nuendo than steinberg LOL

I don't care about the statistics, we are all well aware of PT stats, but that has nothing to do with the competency of a product, right?

Mind you, I use PTHD as well, I think it is a great product, but my issue with an HD setup is the price only, compared to the power that is available today from native at set price.

I guess I do not understand what Nuendo has to do with a digi rumor. I understand the native thing. I think Native is very powerful today that is for sure. But most people who are running native are not running native. They have UAD cards, They have TC cards etc... That is no longer native to me. Do I care about Nuendo being able to do post sure. I know it can. I have worked on it. Would I want to do it regularly? No but I feel better on Pro Tools. This is my opinion.

Mike

[Craig F]

Originally Posted by Tobias Eichelberg

2. Firewire might soon be history as the industry is working on another revision of firewire and USB 3.0. We've seen in the past that Apple likes to introduce new technology to their computers like a thief in the night - the next MacPro might even not have firewire any more - it happened for sure to Apple Talk, ADC and SCSI.

as far as I know USB 3.0 still uses the host CPU for command interrupts making it less reliable that something w/ a dedicated controller (FW or eSATA)

[Starcrash]

A whole new generation of Digi's "flagship" HD line based on firewire connectivity seems pretty doubtful to me. Not exactly cutting edge.

What I would like to see is one Pro Tools Native software and a completely new line of portable stackable or rackable DSP units that would use something fast and universal like CAT5 ethernet. No more PCI cards!

I'm not really a tech guy so I don't how it would work exactly, but the basic idea would be that users could either stay native if it suits their needs or buy DSP units to gain more reliable horsepower.

[maufau]

Originally Posted by audiogeek1

I guess I do not understand what Nuendo has to do with a digi rumor. I understand the native thing. I think Native is very powerful today that is for sure. But most people who are running native are not running native. They have UAD cards, They have TC cards etc... That is no longer native to me. Do I care about Nuendo being able to do post sure. I know it can. I have worked on it. Would I want to do it regularly? No but I feel better on Pro Tools. This is my opinion.

Mike

It didn't have anything to do with it until the post by Noiz, saying that native was a "joke". I replied simply, with - "not true... we use, blah blah blah", then it got to people thinking I was full of it, with no proof LOL, that is all. We don't run UAD and TC cards, neither do half the people I know - but some of them just like the "plugins" - not the power, as UAD and TC have their limitations. Also, I never said anyone should choose one or the other, just that the power is there for the price point.

And that has something to do with the "digi rumor", maybe a less LE version of LE or a more portable HD1. Being that there is power in Native, the crippled version actually doesn't convert people like some think it does. A 64 track version of PTLE with ADC would be a killer as far as sales, we all know it would. If other systems can do it, and have surpassed that - why can't digi? And I think they may be doing something to change that.