D-Control--Why so large?

[grivel]

>As well, Digi would not give the v6 EDL to TASCAM, so here you can see how they (digi) have no >interest in making the facility work easier, by allowing existing machinery to work with v6

I forgot to mention the workaround to avoid the facility having to do it:

SAVE SESSION COPY IN: Choose Pro Tools 4 / SDII

[Henchman]

>As well, Digi would not give the v6 EDL to TASCAM, so here you can see how they (digi) have no >interest in making the facility work easier, by allowing existing machinery to work with v6

I forgot to mention the workaround to avoid the facility having to do it:

SAVE SESSION COPY IN: Choose Pro Tools 4 / SDII

The fact they'll sue anyone who adds pro-tools import/export to their software is a little troubling as well.

But let's stay on the subject.

I still can't see any of the large facilities who use large, multi mixer consoles, dumping them for single mixer Icon's.

A dual 24 channel set-up would still cost, when all is said and done, around $180,-k. Just for a control surface.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[grivel]

>I still can't see any of the large facilities who use large, multi mixer consoles, dumping them for >single mixer Icon's.

>A dual 24 channel set-up would still cost, when all is said and done, around $180,-k. Just for a >control surface.

>Please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are correct. I wouldn't waste any time even thinking about it, because it will never happen. Digi isn't going for the high end post market, they know they can't. They aren't a console manufacturer and can't compete with the history that many of these companies have, as well as the product itself. The MPC, DFC, and System-5 service corporate / major studios that separate themselves from the MID level guys by using this grade of equipment.

I am starting to think they may attempt to target the OB/VAN & Broadcast markets, lower end post stuff

[cmaynes]

Henchman-


The PT 6.0 session format is the same as 5.0

some changes occured to accomodate th +12 gain setting, but it is still compatible.


charles maynes

[cmaynes]

Hello. Charles look at it through the parameters I laid out. Before any Native LE systems existed, Pro Tools was already a mainstay in Post. Before it entered any single music application of any kind Pro Tools was already the standard in Post. And if both LE systems and music applications went away tomorrow, Pro Tools would be here to stay in Post for many, many years. That is what I mean.

And even if you are correct that you are now only getting the features you asked for years, the fact remains that the majority of the development of the software through the years has been focused on applications for Post. Whether those were features that were not usable for you or you needed others that weren't met until now doesn't matter. What matters is that the focus of the company has been and always will be Post.

You think you have been asking for stuff for years? MIDI and other music related stuff has been for longer than that and they still haven't done them. It's one thing if you don't think that Pro Tools measures up as a great tool for your Post application. It'a another to say that Pro Tools is more of an audio music tool, which I think the facts back me up on this.

I hate to disagree here- But I was very close to ProTools 1.0 (and lived to tell the tale)

Post has been a market for Digi since Q-Sheet/Q-Sheet A/V and the revolutionary for its time Sound Designer II, but music has been and continues to be their most significant market.
And they were most certainly NOT a standard system for post until after ProTools 3.0 (the first TDM version) which was around 1995.

In fact, up to that point, ProTools was simply too costly and clunky for serious post work- In the Pre-3.0 days the Grey Matter System Accelerator disk controller was required for greater than 4(!) tracks of playback and allowed for more than around 200 files to be in use at a time, but it was a really dicey piece of gear- No, only when the TDM based Disk i/o card was available which increase the track count to 16 disk voices did the system start to make serious inroads.

And as to the MIDI capabilities- Digi was always aware of the MIDI shortcomings of ProTools, so it relied on the 3rd party apps such as StudioVision and Digital Performer to shoulder that burden.

And actually, some of us have been asking for features (some of which just showed up in ProTools 6.4 for over a DECADE!)

Hope that clarifies some of the history-
And yes, I stand by what I previously stated.

btw- If you are a ProTools post user- You should be on your knees thanking God that Danny Caccavo is now very active in the development and project management of ProTools- he knows his stuff backwards and forwards, and has been onboard since the original Sound Tools system- He is indeed a man who knows our pain and is doing everthing before Heaven and Earth to make us happy!


charles maynes

[cmaynes]

[
The fact they'll sue anyone who adds pro-tools import/export to their software is a little troubling as well.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Actually it was my understanding that the biggest issue with Digi allowing a company the capabilty (via their developer program) was that the device had to be able to import AND export into ProTools format. This of course may have changed.

charles maynes

[froyo]

By cmaynes

Post has been a market for Digi since Q-Sheet/Q-Sheet A/V and the revolutionary for its time Sound Designer II, but music has been and continues to be their most significant market.
And they were most certainly NOT a standard system for post until after ProTools 3.0 (the first TDM version) which was around 1995.

Hello. Well actually that is actually what I meant. Digidesign was already a standard in Post production by mid to late 1998. Up until that time there were no LE systems. And up until that time not one music project that I know of was ever done with Pro Tools.

And when I say Post, I use that term in the broadest sense. Not only Film mixing stages and film dubbers, but Post in every sigle application. TV audio, videos, independent films, commercials, etc.

My point was and is that up until then, mid to late 1998, Digidesign was already entrenched as a Post production tool. Music projects were a non issue as no one in the business was using them and LE systems did not even exist. If neither of those had ever happened , Digidesign would have still fluorished to the point it did in Post, later becoming indispensable in all aspects of Major features, as well as all other facets of Post.

I don't know why you think music is their most significant market. As I said before, think about this. Say they drop LE systems tomorrow altogether. Gone. Finito. Say Logic 7 comes out tomorrow and all music projects drop PT for Logic (or Nuendo, Brand X, whatever). Can you honestly not see that the Post world wouldn't care about that? They would continue to use it. All aspects of Post.

Was Pro Tools created, intended or marketed as a Post production tool? Probably not. Where did it find it's commercial success and stronghold? Post. As an analogy, the HHB Portadrive was clearly created and marketed towards location/production audio. But say, for whatever reason, it finds a big audience in music project studios. Does that make the Portadrive a tool for Post or music?

This is obviously just a difference of opinion. However I think the facts that I laid out back up my interpretation and my opinion. I always said, from the very first time I commented, that before LE systems ever even existed and before any music projects used PT at all, Pro Tools was already a staple of Post. I assumed everyone understood that by Post I was using the most broadest definition of that term to encompass all of its applications.

I had just not mentioned years. Mid to late 1998. By then Pro Tools was everywhere in Post. LE systems did not even exist and I invite anyone to find any music project of any consequence in any studio anywhere that used Pro Tools then.

[cmaynes]

Froyo-

I agree that we seem to disagree about this, I intend this to be my last comment on this end of the thread.

The one point I feel I want to clarify is that I do not believe MIDI sequencing to be the only "musical" use of ProTools. Most people who have been using ProTools for music have been using ito track and or edit musical performances, not do MIDI sequencing in it. And actually there were a number of early adaptors of ProTools (before PCI actually) including Roger Nichols and Walter Becker, Michael Hedges, Trent Reznor and John Paul Jones. This would be around 1994/1995...


charles maynes

[Henchman]

Henchman-


The PT 6.0 session format is the same as 5.0

some changes occured to accomodate th +12 gain setting, but it is still compatible.


charles maynes

Ex\cept that Digi does not allow anyone to make software that can convert a Pro-Tools session to another format. And they are one of the only companies who refused to implement AES31 as a crodd-platfrom transfer tool.

[cmaynes]

Ex\cept that Digi does not allow anyone to make software that can convert a Pro-Tools session to another format. And they are one of the only companies who refused to implement AES31 as a crodd-platfrom transfer tool.

Henchman-



you might take a look at this - http://www.cuibono-soft.com/home.html

I do agree that AES-31 would be nice to have, but it has not been that big of an issue here in the film community-

charles maynes