Pro Tools 2019 !

[JCBigler]

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.

You don’t get hardware and DSP with Ultimate. You get those with HDX hardware. You do get surround mixing. And the ability to use HEAT. And higher track/voice counts.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

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

Oh, sure :) like my point you don't NEED over 32 i/o for most recordings fair enough

[JCBigler]

Even now, it would be nice to just plug an Ethernet cable in to the network switch and record everything via DVS, than to have to lug around my HD Native Thunderbolt box with Focusrite Red 8Pre and an HD32R to get 64 channel in to Protools.

And therin lies the point.

Avid and Protools are losing market share because you can carry a laptop and an ethernet cable or USB cable and record 64 channels (or more) to any other piece of software, which you can’t do with Protools without whole racks of other gear which costs nearly $5,000.

And then there’s the fact that Protools just isn’t as reliable enough in most people’s eyes to do live recording. Avid needs a Protools Live that is super stable and will serve as just a bit bucket for live recording for up to 64 (or unlimited) channels to compete with Nuendo Live, Waves Tracks Live, or Reaper.

[studio 1311]

With regards to using PT for live capture, I can't think of the last time I've not used REAPER for that task. Like you say, bring a laptop and a cable and off you go. I'm setting up 24 trks and all are recording whether I need them all or not for every set. Patching inputs on the fly. Import into PT for mixdown.

In my experience, PT is just not trustworthy for that critical of a job such as a live event, I'm afraid.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by studio 1311

In my experience, PT is just not trustworthy for that critical of a job such as a live event, I'm afraid.

My experience is a whole lot different

[studio 1311]

Originally Posted by JFreak

My experience is a whole lot different

That's great. I would rather be in PT.

[dankin]

I've done a lot of live tracking with PT on a MBP, mostly with Dante these days. Zero issues. I just wish it had more than 32 I/O, as I'm forced to use something else beyond that. I did 48 channels with logic recently with no issues. For anything less than 32 channels I always stick with PT.

[studio 1311]

Originally Posted by dankin

I've done a lot of live tracking with PT on a MBP, mostly with Dante these days. Zero issues. I just wish it had more than 32 I/O, as I'm forced to use something else beyond that. I did 48 channels with logic recently with no issues. For anything less than 32 channels I always stick with PT.

Dankin, have you always found PT to have zero issues for live tracking?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JCBigler]

Originally Posted by studio 1311

Dankin, have you always found PT to have zero issues for live tracking?

I've done a ton of live recording straight in to Protools. Check out the recording tab on my website linked in my signature below. Everyone of those recordings was done live to Protools. In the last 6 years that I have been doing live performance recording, I have not have Protools stop recording during the performance. And I've done a few recordings with HDX with 64 channels.

There have been a couple of shows, mostly musical theatre and a couple of orchestra pops shows where I had to use Nuendo Live because I had more than 32 tracks of inputs, usually 40-45, before I had access to HD Native or HDX hardware.

Years ago, though, before Protools 11 (PT 6-8), Protools would puke all over itself when trying to record 1 or 2 tracks even, just randomly. So the trust factor with Protools is certainly thin.

For live recordings, I do and everyone should, use a live back up. Either a secondary computer or a hard disk recorder like a JoeCo BBR or Tascam DA6400. It's just a PITA to have to import all of those files back in to Protools. And you lose some of the metadata, like track names, markers, and comments, etc... And if you stop the recording, like for the pause during intermission, then you have twice as much work to do syncing the second half of the show back together. It can take a couple of hours if you have large track count sessions, 64 channels. For that reason, I prefer to stay in Protools, since I'm going to be mixing in Protools anyway. Makes the post work a lot less tedious.

[abc1mce2]

Originally Posted by JCBigler

I've done a ton of live recording straight in to Protools. Check out the recording tab on my website linked in my signature below. Everyone of those recordings was done live to Protools. In the last 6 years that I have been doing live performance recording, I have not have Protools stop recording during the performance. And I've done a few recordings with HDX with 64 channels.



There have been a couple of shows, mostly musical theatre and a couple of orchestra pops shows where I had to use Nuendo Live because I had more than 32 tracks of inputs, usually 40-45, before I had access to HD Native or HDX hardware.



Years ago, though, before Protools 11 (PT 6-8), Protools would puke all over itself when trying to record 1 or 2 tracks even, just randomly. So the trust factor with Protools is certainly thin.

Just curious what sample rate, bit depth and samples (64, 128, 256, 512 etc) are you using while doing a live recording with HDX? Also what's the longest live gig you've recorded and how were your drives connected ( usb, thunderbolt etc)?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk