PT & "hobby" users

[Dave Lang]

time to move on from this argument

[JFreak]

Pro Tools | Software (the full version without HD functionality) is far from crippled so just buy one if you need one. Pro Tools | First (the crippled one) will be great for anyone who wants to use it and not pay for the full software.

It used to be so that you always bought Pro Tools with hardware. Since PT9 it has been possible to run 3rd party interfaces with it, although max 32 i/o unless you have Avid HDN or HDX.

The LE hardware of the olden days could very well be considered crippled, with a whopping 18 i/o maximum, and no possibility to run the software without THAT very interface. Back then there was a very large gap between the real deal and the hobbyist version. Now anyone can buy the software that required a 10 grand TDM system before.

Oh, and that entry-level HD system was only capable of 32 i/o and 96 simultaneous VOICES (mono tracks) at lower sampling rates (48@96k and 24@192) so the current full version with 32 i/o and 96/48/24 mono or stereo TRACKS is even better than that.

But then again, some people considered HD1 system crippled so maybe you're right :)

[nigelpry]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Pro Tools | Software (the full version without HD functionality) is far from crippled so just buy one if you need one. Pro Tools | First (the crippled one) will be great for anyone who wants to use it and not pay for the full software.

It used to be so that you always bought Pro Tools with hardware. Since PT9 it has been possible to run 3rd party interfaces with it, although max 32 i/o unless you have Avid HDN or HDX.

The LE hardware of the olden days could very well be considered crippled, with a whopping 18 i/o maximum, and no possibility to run the software without THAT very interface. Back then there was a very large gap between the real deal and the hobbyist version. Now anyone can buy the software that required a 10 grand TDM system before.

Oh, and that entry-level HD system was only capable of 32 i/o and 96 simultaneous VOICES (mono tracks) at lower sampling rates (48@96k and 24@192) so the current full version with 32 i/o and 96/48/24 mono or stereo TRACKS is even better than that.

But then again, some people considered HD1 system crippled so maybe you're right :)

'Vanilla' is crippled to this day. It's just a bit less (and more subtly) crippled than it was.

The march of time, and the rise of more competitors in markets it decided to have a more determned crack at competing in, persuaded Avid that it had to remove some of the more ludicrous restrictions. Nothing more, nothing less.

But, cleverly, it maximised its income while it could, getting people to buy Music Production Toolkit, DV Toolkit or Complete Production Toolkit, to raise track/bus counts, add surround, provide AAF/OMF import/export, etc. etc. before unceremoniously dumping them when it figured most people who intended to buy had paid up, and the extent of crippling of LE compared to rival DAWs was becomng more and more difficult to justify.

But that trickle down of features from HD to 'vanilla' has also IMO enabled Avid to get away with far less innovation by way of genuinely 'new' features. That's why there's so much of a feelng that Pro Tools' feature set is falling further and further behind other DAWs.

Avid has given HD users a few useful new things (eg disc cache, meters options) but 'vanilla' users have been limited mostly to 'hand me downs' from HD, not much genuinely new stuff.

I don't include the 64bit rewrite, new Avid Audio Engine and Avid Video Engine as 'new' stuff simply because ALL DAW developers have had to do something similar AND they have managed to add new stuff as well at the same time, as well as beating Avid to the punch in delivering it in a timely fashion.

I do recognise and understand Avid's lingering mindset when it comes to how it views its market. But its current approach seems an almost perfect example of how to alienate (and ultimately discard) non-HD hardware users. We therefore have to assume that it is actually a strategy.

So, in the absense of evidence to the contrary (apart from the giveaway Pro Tools First) that's why I've taken the hint and am now gradually weaning myself off Pro Tools and back to other DAWs whose developers actually seem interested in enhancing feature set AND fixing bugs in a reasonable timescale.

I suggest that people who are not tied by an umbilical cord to AVID start considering future DAW requirements if they haven't already, though I guess most have been going through the same kind of analysis as I have.

Avid doesn't respect us as customers, doesn't appear to want us, and is failing to deliver stability and enhanced functionality in anything like a timely fashion. The new features for PT12 are of zero interest to myself, and I guess for the majority of its existing client base.

I've options elsewhere, so I'll keep PT10/11 for use with those clients who are impressed by the DAW's name/reputation over its stability and functionality, and use other DAWs as appropriate where clients are more interested in getting the job done without random crashes, reboots and use of convoluted workarounds during a session.

[WombatStudio.Org]

Better, more advanced & versatile I/O is available at less than half of what Avid is offering.

Their choice to release a featureless new subscription of software in a market that would buy HD software in droves if there were an affordable price on it ... just inconceivable ...

PT11 (supposedly a rewrite from PT10, but all the same errors come up with AAE instead of DAE) doesn't even work reliably. How many are STILL tracking in 10 and mixing in 11?

"Pro" - "Hobby" ... A Gibson Les Paul is a Gibson Les Paul no matter who is playing it. Some do better than others.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by WombatStudio.Org

Better, more advanced & versatile I/O is available at less than half of what Avid is offering...

If you think about it, that's the only way they can possibly compete with Pro Tools so it will always be this way no matter what Avid does.

[YYR123]

Latency is the only crippling feature.....imo

Everything else can be done another way

(when considering purely audio, recording/ tracking mixing)

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by nigelpry

Avid doesn't respect us as customers

OMG, c'mon...

[CygnusX-1Bk2]

Originally Posted by JFreak

OMG, c'mon...

He has a point. It's kind of always been that way.

[nigelpry]

Originally Posted by JFreak

OMG, c'mon...

I prefer OMGA, which pre-dates OMG by several generations.

I come from a generation that still adheres to the notion of respect.

Collectively, we (customers) should have Avid's respect, it wouldn't exist without us. If you feel you have it, I'm happy for you.

A failure to adequately communicate is possibly THE most fundamental form of disrespect a company could show to its customers, and is IMO inexcusable. I consider Avid's recent history, which is peppered with incomplete, ambiguous and, in some cases patently inaccurate communications, self evident of zero respect for its customers.