Control|24 and ProControl with Pro Tools 11?

[8dB.co.uk]

I don't own a ProC, mainly because I never enjoyed using it, but I fully sympathise with the people who are affected by this.

In the eyes of clients, your choice of kit reflects on your own judgement. Clients expect you to be up to date with kit that can fully support whatever mad ideas they have. For example I was recently asked to supply a mix at 23.92fps (that's not a typo).

As suppliers in the media business we are regularly subjected to f-bombs, and when five figure+ outlays are involved, it's understandable that this gets passed on.

I will never forget when a developer and sales exec from a massive console manufacturer sat in on a mix with clients where their latest flagship six figure kit wreaked havoc. They literally sat with their heads in their hands, sharing in the acute embarrassment and abuse that we received.

Needless to say that from that point on, they fully understood the pressures we come under, and their support was top notch.

Maybe Avid need to experience the same?



Sent from my C6603 using Tapatalk 2

[iMartin]

Is avid relying more on new customers eager do spend money (and don't know better) on expensive avid brand controllers, without thinking about their long-time much-spending customers? I feel ashamed of supporting this company.

I will continue to use protools (and Logic pro) but will never again buy a converter or controller branded by avid.

I'm a regular visiter at the musikmesse in Frankfurt as well as NAMM show and I promise I will smear this in their face every time I get a chance visiting their booth. Not that it will make any difference but anyway....

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by iMartin

.
I'm a regular visiter at the musikmesse in Frankfurt as well as NAMM show and I promise I will smear this in their face every time I get a chance visiting their booth. ....

This really is the way to affect the company and it's really the best way

Companies cannot survive with their customers telling future customers that they do not do business in a correct manner

And yes it will matter and you tell anybody who will listen to you - That is in effect making change unfortunately it's a slow ripple effect -

But imagine every pro control and control 24 user telling 300 people in the next year that Avid and ProTools don't do business in the correct manner that really does affect the bottom line

[louieshowers]

Originally Posted by YYR123

This really is the way to affect the company and it's really the best way

Companies cannot survive with their customers telling future customers that they do not do business in a correct manner

And yes it will matter and you tell anybody who will listen to you - That is in effect making change unfortunately it's a slow ripple effect -

But imagine every pro control and control 24 user telling 300 people in the next year that Avid and ProTools don't do business in the correct manner that really does affect the bottom line

agreed. and on a side note, i Don't forsee Avid on the map long term. All evidence points toward the fact that they are struggling.. I don't see them surviving through this decision.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by deanrichard

...The only difference between the Control 24 and the HUI should be a few extra messages (which they need to support anyway) and the ethernet communication layer.

With modern computers that makes sense and may well be the case with C24.

In this case, we're talking about a custom controller that performed better than any third party back when Pro Tools was TDM-only. My understanding from friends who worked there at the time is that every trick in the book was being employed just to make Pro Tools 4 able to play 64 voices. The controller code used by Pro Control and Control 24 may well be baked into DAE at a very low level while more recent controllers are supported in a more conventional manner.

What I'm writing is obviously speculation but no more so than an opinion that it should just be trivial and this is all an evil conspiracy.

[Control24orbust]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

What I'm writing is obviously speculation but no more so than an opinion that it should just be trivial and this is all an evil conspiracy.

this is not a conspiracy. It was public and deliberate.
The definition just does not match even if we wanted it to

It is evil though

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by louieshowers

agreed. and on a side note.

Agree with your agreement - and on a another side note - I still enjoyed Kenny's story

[guitardom]

Originally Posted by louieshowers

agreed. and on a side note, i Don't forsee Avid on the map long term. All evidence points toward the fact that they are struggling.. I don't see them surviving through this decision.

There is no one or nothing else that can compete with what they do. This has been predicted many times over the years but every other product that gets close ends up in failing along the way for whatever reason. They have the magic of top audio and video software along with the necessary hardware as well as the dsp many require. Nobody else can match this couple that w the thousands upon thousands of engineers who have spent the majority or all of their career working on avid audio and or video systems. Until someone can offer a better solution of a revolutionary new product, they will continue to hold the market. Obviously the lower end home studio, bedroom warriors, etc. don't apply to much of this. When this group gets to be the next generation running the studios who know????

[Shan]

Originally Posted by deanrichard

...From the perspective of the internal workings of the software - unless it is horribly written code - a controller is a controller is a controller. There should be a communication layer that translate any controller's input into messages that are passed into the underlying code. The only difference between the Control 24 and the HUI should be a few extra messages (which they need to support anyway) and the ethernet communication layer.

I fully concur and agree with Dean's statement above. A controller is a controller. It's age also has nothing to do with it. There is no advancement with solo and mute buttons etc that would deem a modern controller superior or an improvement in performance with one that is 20 years old. An older controller would also not invoke any type of bottleneck in performance. You press a button, it sends out a hex code for pressing it, and another for releasing. Done. Speculation and opinion is one thing, but when one actually has a look, the Control 24 outputs MIDI commands via ethernet. Though it's skeuomorphic appearance makes it look like a mixing console, it's nothing more than a very basic computer terminal.

As far as any communication layer goes, even that is simple in form. I can take an Xbox game controller and make it's 10 buttons and two joysticks control just about anything in Pro Tools. 30 minutes for a compiled executable including testing. 35 minutes at best with a coffee. This estimate is from my own first hand experience. There is no massive R&D or technical breakthroughs needed for a computer terminal like a Control 24 that outputs MIDI commands via ethernet. Those API's, specs, and protocols where all done decades ago. My 30 year old completely unsupported Roland Jupiter 6 works mighty fine with Pro Tools 11 via a hardware MIDI spec that is clockin' 30+ years old now. Funny how that old beast has been EOL'd for decades, yet works great with PT 11.

I've tried to look at this from Avid's side and even in their defense, but always quickly come back. Even from the viewpoint of a business decision, getting the Pro Control/Control 24 software profiles operational would definitely send out a very strong message that all Avid controllers have longevity worth investing in more than any other competitor out there. In my opinion, I can't think of any controller company that wouldn't want that type of message out there to the consumer.

Shane

[Pie Hole Sound]

Originally Posted by Shan

I fully concur and agree with Dean's statement above. A controller is a controller. It's age also has nothing to do with it. There is no advancement with solo and mute buttons etc that would deem a modern controller superior or an improvement in performance with one that is 20 years old. An older controller would also not invoke any type of bottleneck in performance. You press a button, it sends out a hex code for pressing it, and another for releasing. Done. Speculation and opinion is one thing, but when one actually has a look, the Control 24 outputs MIDI commands via ethernet. Though it's skeuomorphic appearance makes it look like a mixing console, it's nothing more than a very basic computer terminal.

As far as any communication layer goes, even that is simple in form. I can take an Xbox game controller and make it's 10 buttons and two joysticks control just about anything in Pro Tools. 30 minutes for a compiled executable including testing. 35 minutes at best with a coffee. This estimate is from my own first hand experience. There is no massive R&D or technical breakthroughs needed for a computer terminal like a Control 24 that outputs MIDI commands via ethernet. Those API's, specs, and protocols where all done decades ago. My 30 year old completely unsupported Roland Jupiter 6 works mighty fine with Pro Tools 11 via a hardware MIDI spec that is clockin' 30+ years old now. Funny how that old beast has been EOL'd for decades, yet works great with PT 11.

I've tried to look at this from Avid's side and even in their defense, but always quickly come back. Even from the viewpoint of a business decision, getting the Pro Control/Control 24 software profiles operational would definitely send out a very strong message that all Avid controllers have longevity worth investing in more than any other competitor out there. In my opinion, I can't think of any controller company that wouldn't want that type of message out there to the consumer.

Shane

Whack! - Out of the park Shane!

Avid's course of action thus far is stupefying. I'm totally guessing here, but I'm thinking there is one-single strong personality in Avid pushing this ridiculousness. This reeks of the thought-process of one misguided individual - somebody in total or near total authority.

I believe Avid's official response to this thread (50 or so pages ago) lays to rest any suggestion that the reason this happened is a technical one (as in the controller code is tied in at a low level with DAE); This was and remains a purely financial decision. It could have been, and still can be done if the will at Avid existed - probably in two weeks if they were motivated to do so.