In what area is Pro Tools REALLY lacking??

[rinky]

Pro Tools is NOT lacking in its ability to perpetually charge for its updates.
$399 annually here.

[zion]

Originally Posted by rinky

Pro Tools is NOT lacking in its ability to perpetually charge for its updates.
$399 annually here.

[Glazik]

In the list made by deanrichard, I keep :
Folders (Insanely useful. Almost essential IMO.)
Render Queue (Extremely useful for creating different versions of a mix)
Sub-projects
FX groups
Track routing window
Melodyne ARA support
Better MIDI
Automation items - very useful
Item level FX. (not just clip level and a few other things, but everything)
Spectral Editing
DDP import and export (limited, but functional)
More complete plugin management (high on the list)
Customizations that let you create your own workflow
--Scripts and / or macros
--Customizable actions (I recognize a Reaper user ;-) )
--Editable toolbars, including toolbar sets (I recognize a Reaper user ;-) twice !)
--Customizable menus

I'm not a great fan of hotkey customisation for everything.

I would add :
Ability to hide tracks independantly in edit and mix window.
Pre and post fader plugins.
Split of edit windows in two or more sections, with independant per section zoom level.
Split of mix windows in two or more sections.
Integrated and offline loudness mesuring.

I'd put high on my list : Avid, hire great programmers, please ! Stop coding with your feet. Everybody have lots of ideas of feature PT don't have. Nevertheless, the soft is heavy, very slow at start and not very stable. WTF ?

[Bob Olhsson]

I think it's mostly lacking in marketing which has been the case from the very beginning!

First off, it's an audio editor and host for third-party plug-ins. If something can be done with a plug-in, don't hold your breath for Avid to include a feature that competes with their third-party developers.

It can be configured to do almost anything but such flexibility requires more know-how than other DAWs. Avid is also very dedicated to backward compatibility. You won't see many new features added that can't be played using earlier versions and you won't see a new version that can't open old sessions. They understand that we each invest more money in every project with our time than it costs to buy a new DAW.

If you look at the forums for every other DAW, you'll see just as many complaints. DAWs are complicated, demanding software yet we are but a tiny minority of the personal computer market. Depending on what you are doing, Pro tools simply works for a great many people. The same is true of Live and Logic.

[QuikDraw]

Efficient CPU usage at low buffer settings.

Pro Tools cannot even see an option for 16 samples on my Quantum 2 interface, and it can't run reliably below 256 samples anyway.

Studio One can run at 16 samples all day long without issue.

Very important when tracking a dry guitar track for reamping!

In Studio One I just set the amp simulation I like, and hit record. No workarounds, no hassle.

In Pro Tools, due to excessive latency at 256 sample buffer, I have to run an external mixer. Run a splitter from the guitar, one to a dry channel in PT, and another to an amp or simulator to another channel on the mixer. Then I have to mute the dry signal so the guitarist only hears the amped version. Why!

Really doesn't change my workflow much since I've been recording PT on slow computers for almost 20 years. But after trying Studio One it's really hard to go back to tracking in PT!

[ozinga]

For midi/sample based production:

Almost every DAW has their own Sampler/Drum Player that integrates very well with the program. Like Ableton Simpler/Drum Rack, Studio One Sample One/Impact etc
So one can chop an audio on edit window and send it to sampler or drum player with right click menu.

Protools needs these for sample based production. If not, at least the ability to drag/drop audio from playlist/soundbase to 3rd party plugins like Battery etc.So one can use at least those.

[uptheoctave]

32 channel limit for non HDX/HDN.
It is silly, in 2019, for this to still be a thing.

[@tention]

1. Multiple marker tracks.
2. Post fader inserts on tracks
3. A way to automatically solo the entire signal path including auxes.

[TimNielsen]

I could write a list of 100 pages easily...

Pan Window follows Track Selection!
Folders in region list.
Export Clip groups that actually contain pan and volume data.
Customizable pan window
How about automatible Pre and Post buttons!!!!!!

My biggest problem is that Avid continually implements things half-assed.

Freeze and things, sort of works, but they could do so much more. Clip groups.

[capt kirk]

2 things that would pretty much shut everyone up

1. performance at low buffer
2.folders and reworking the clip bin...

well 3......better MIDI

most other stuff theres a plug in

oh yea..better markers