ProTools 8 - Input Monitoring "Off"

[superbass]

Originally Posted by martthie_08

Basically this is the only reason while I'm still recording in Logic and then going to ProTools for Editing (and mix). It lets you work at a huge buffersize and still get good monitoring and they had it implemented for about 10 years now.

Agreed! Logic can disable the input monitoring, so it works great for punch-in with my Mbox 2 while monitoring through a Mackie Onyx mixer.

Digi - Hope this feature makes a point release for PT 8!

[VWYF11]

I have to jump in on this thread because the lack of this feature has been bugging me for a while now. I need this feature. I have given up on punching in on the same track and have resorted to using extra tracks and comping. Always having to mute the track to avoid two signals being sent to the headphone mix is an unnecessary annoyance.

[DigiTechSupt]

The layered signal from "software monitoring" while recording is not something you want to give the artist on their headphones.

And I'm assuming the 128 buffer size is too large when using this with software monitoring?

[maufau]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

And I'm assuming the 128 buffer size is too large when using this with software monitoring?

It is. I've yet to meet an artist that doesn't hear it. They all say, why does my [insert voice or instrument here] sound weird. Especially when comparing it to hardware monitoring or a mixer with cues set up. Its not that we want to add insert effects or anything like that, we just want what we would hear in a normal no or low latency cue mix. To test this yourself, grab any M-Powered device that has the hardware routing 410/610/2626/Ulta 8r (i think that is the model). Route an input with a mic to the main outs, then in PT hit the record enable button. You will hear it.

Or just set the buffer size to 128, and hit record enable. And now, you can't hear yourself until the punch in which when that time comes has a delay to it. I've yet to meet the artist that doesn't want to hear themselves sing along right before a punch in. The whole concept perplexes me. Or you could use Input Monitoring Only and you can hear the delay, but then again, you can't hear the existing track material. A good test would be to set this up with a pianist or a classical guitarist I'm sure they will point it out to you.

As I said before, with HD, no problems there as the latency is not noticable, I set up cue mixes inside of PTHD instead of a mixer, and have the input button at my disposal as well to combat that whole not being able to hear yourself until punch in issue.

But for the mobile setup when having to use LE or MP to track, I usually end up, scrapping that idea and using another DAW to track after complaints from the artist, musician, etc about their voice sounding wierd. Then come back and mix in PT.

[DigiTechSupt]

They all say, why does my [insert voice or instrument here] sound weird.

That would typically be a symptom of monitoring both through hardware AND through Pro Tools. Unless, of course, they're just saying their voice is delayed. If you're getting a robotic sound, turn off hardware monitoring (if you're punching) or mute the track you're recording to (if you're tracking).

I agree - 128 samples is about the far edge of usability, however I work with a lot of people who either don't mind it or get used to it, if punching in is absolutely necessary (usually I just have them do another take and comp it, or re-sing the section of the song that needs the punch, and comp that).

I understand the limitations of all this gear, and I just want to be sure you're using all available options. As I said - the 128 buffer size is bordering on the usable and we're looking at implementing smaller buffer sizes and/or the ability to turn off software monitoring.

[maufau]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

That would typically be a symptom of monitoring both through hardware AND through Pro Tools. Unless, of course, they're just saying their voice is delayed. If you're getting a robotic sound, turn off hardware monitoring (if you're punching) or mute the track you're recording to (if you're tracking).

I agree - 128 samples is about the far edge of usability, however I work with a lot of people who either don't mind it or get used to it, if punching in is absolutely necessary (usually I just have them do another take and comp it, or re-sing the section of the song that needs the punch, and comp that).

I understand the limitations of all this gear, and I just want to be sure you're using all available options. As I said - the 128 buffer size is bordering on the usable and we're looking at implementing smaller buffer sizes and/or the ability to turn off software monitoring.

I believe everyone here uses the available options, and thank you for being responsive. But muting a track in todays recording paradigm of stack stack stack, comping takes, punching; muting a track you are recording to is not an option. Its slow, and a hinderance to workflow.

People do get used to the delay, but still notice that its there and complain about it for the whole session or of course blame it for their crappy take every now and then , I give the option of not having to deal with it by tracking in a different DAW, but I'd rather not, esp when they want the tracking session delivered to them in PT.

Also, when punching, turning off hardware monitoring is not an option as the artist/musician wants to be able to hear themselves play/sing along with the existing material, without hardware monitoring, you now have a muted singer waiting for a punch in point, only to hear themselves with a delay at time of punch in, which not one singer/musician I work with approves of. They however don't get this issue when we track in HD as we have the Input button and low latency at our disposal. However, we do not always have access to the HD system. One could argue, I could record to a different track with input only monitoring,punch, then move region to the track I wish for it to work with, but I can't even see why someone would suggest that as an alternative, its slow, and not the same as just recording without software monitoring on.



You could save a lot of programming man hours just by providing the option to turn it off instead of shooting for lower latency I'm sure it would take less man hours to code.

[LesPaul666]

I though in Pro Tools 8, that the M-Powered and LE versions were getting the "I" button on the channel strip, and a 64 sample buffer size for USB interfaces?

I know this may be slightly off topic, but both of these things have to do with latency and input monitoring-The present computers' CPU's are powerful enough, and interfaces are fast enough now, to where this can all be implemented easily for both ProSumer Pro Tools editions. Anyone?

[maufau]

Originally Posted by LesPaul666

I though in Pro Tools 8, that the M-Powered and LE versions were getting the "I" button on the channel strip, and a 64 sample buffer size for USB interfaces?

I know this may be slightly off topic, but both of these things have to do with latency and input monitoring-The present computers' CPU's are powerful enough, and interfaces are fast enough now, to where this can all be implemented easily for both ProSumer Pro Tools editions. Anyone?

Well, sad to say, the "I" button is only in PT8HD, this is what their people have been telling others at the sneak peaks, you can even see it in the videos that Scott Church has on his site (great vids by the way).

[djani]

It would be really good to have the track option : mute when punched in !
I believe that its the most painless modification to make.

[maufau]

Originally Posted by djani

It would be really good to have the track option : mute when punched in !
I believe that its the most painless modification to make.

Exactly!!! That would be perfect, and that should be pretty easy to implement.

PLEASE DIGI!!!!!