Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools M-Powered (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-05-2007, 05:48 AM
Ninia Ninia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30
Default Why PT?

I'm considering moving over to PT (M-Powered for the interface flexibility). As I don't want this to turn into a flame war or a trolling exercise I am not going to ask for comparisons nor will I mention what I currently use.

I do live recordings of small ensemble groups and recital recordings. I also handle all of the audio editing, mix-downs, mastering and production (limited).

Recording live classical ensemble groups usually takes no more than eight microphones and quite often is done with just four mics. Recital recordings vary between four and six microphones. Generally the mics are arranged as follows;
1) An M/S pair for the primary stereo image.
2) A focus mic for quite vocalists (usually younger performers)
3) A pair of satellite mics to for a broader stereo image
4) Sometimes certain ensembles will require a spot mic or two.

For the audio editing and processing I don't usually use much more than a limiter and a compressor.

Production is handled through an outboard disc cooker.

Here is why I am asking about 'Why PT'

Several people that I have talked to have commented that I should examine PT as it is an industry standard. This leads to my title 'Why PT'.

Here are some basic questions if any one can answer them.
What are PT's audio editing capabilities like, what editing features are available?
What are PT's audio recording systems like, what would be required to handle 8 seperate mic inputs?
What kind of a Mac system is needed to run competently? (I currently have a SR MBP 2.4 GHz with 2GB RAM)
And finally, is there anyway to demo PT without having to purchase hardware that I wouldn't use if I decide against it?

Sorry for the long post, but I thought that if you understood the context it would help with the answers.

Thanks for any advice.

Ninia
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-05-2007, 09:31 AM
M.Brane M.Brane is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 1hr N/W of LA LA land
Posts: 1,999
Default Re: Why PT?

http://www.digidesign.com/products
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-05-2007, 10:32 AM
EGS's Avatar
EGS EGS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,691
Default Re: Why PT?

Brilliant!!! Using the internet as a source of information!
__________________
Desktop build: PT 2020.5 / Win 11 / i9-11900K @ 5.1GHz / 64GB / 4TB NVMe PCIe 4 / Gigabyte Z590 Vision D / PreSonus 2626
Laptop: PT 2020.5 / Win 11 / i5-12500H / 16GB / 1TB NVMe / Lenovo IdeaPad 5i Pro / U-PHORIA UMC1820
Ancient/Legacy (still works!): PT 5 & 6 / OS9 & OSX / Mac G4 / DIGI 001
Click for audio/video demo
Click for resume
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-06-2007, 07:30 AM
Ninia Ninia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30
Default Re: Why PT?

Okay you both got me on that, thanks for the link. (I had actually gone through some of Digidesigns website earlier but I apparently missed that information)

I finally located a link on their website for the PT reference manual which allowed me to do a modest comparison of features with my current DAW. They seem to be similar in their capabilities.

The hardware question seems to be answered by what the ProjectMix I/O would provide, along with a second smaller interface (possibly a Transit or a MobilePre) unit for when I want to sit at Starbucks and edit lesson material.

Although I do know what the minimum requirements for a computer are what I would like to know is what makes for a decent setup (laptop, external drive, etc).

So this leads to a couple of more questions.

So why is PT considered to be the Industry Standard? Is it that the audio engine is, perhaps, better? Is PT more stable than other DAW systems? Is the workflow more intuitive?

And then on a more personal level, is there anyone on this board who has worked with any of the other DAWs out there that is now working on PT and if so can you give some idea as to why PT works better for you? (as I mentioned before I am avoiding a flame war so don't mention what the 'other' DAW was)

Once again, thanks for your insights and help.

Ninia
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-06-2007, 09:52 PM
M.Brane M.Brane is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 1hr N/W of LA LA land
Posts: 1,999
Default Re: Why PT?

Any of the Macs on Digi's list of qualified machines will work. Of course if you go above, and beyond the minimum requirements you'll get better performance. How much you really need depends on what you're doing.

Pt is the industry standard simply because they got in the game early, and became established (entrenched? in most pro studios.

Whether or not DAWs sound different is a matter of debate, but it's generally agreed that any difference there is is not enough to make or break a mix.

Workflow is much more important than any minor differences in sound. Whether or not PT fits the way you wish to work is impossible for me to say. I've had limited experience with a few other DAWs on both Mac OS, and Windows. I find that PT on a Mac suits the way I work much better.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-07-2007, 05:26 AM
Ninia Ninia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30
Default Re: Why PT?

Thanks for the reply M.Brane.

Ninia
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-11-2007, 08:21 AM
Gilliss Gilliss is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: St. Croix, US Virgin Islands
Posts: 23
Default Re: Why PT?

I've used a bunch of different DAWs on Macs and PCs, from Deck to Vegas, and I still go to pro tools when I need to do some serious editing quickly. I find that the key commands are placed in such a manner than I can keep my left hand on one part of the keyboard and my right hand on the mouse (or on a mixed drink) and do most editing tasks with a minimal amount of physical repositioning.

As for stability, I really think that Pro Tools by itself would be a pretty solid piece of software. I think that a lot of the trouble people run into is when they start adding a lot of 3rd party plug-ins, which may or may not be up to date, or they don't follow the recommendations for system hardware/drives. I've only had PT cut out on me once or twice while i was actually recording a session. most of the crashes I get occur when I try to quit PT - after I've already saved the session (save first then quit!!) then i'll get the "PT has unexpectedly quit, would you like to send a report to apple." then i do the "pro tools shuffle" (delete all the prefs, trash the databases, repair permissions, etc) and it's back to normal.

I'm not a fan of the interface limitation as others have mentioned. I'd rather record through something else, like a Mackie Onyx into Logic and then bounce the individual tracks down and import them into pro tools (which is something I do quite frequently). But, with that being said, my MBox has never once gave me trouble, I can't say the same thing for the FW410 (into PTMP). it cuts out, makes loud thumping noises, and has to be restarted about 2 or 3 times a session. I don't think that all the PTMP/M-audio interfaces suffer from this issue, as I've used delta 1010, and it almost never flaked out. I should be getting the transit in the mail soon, and I'm hoping that it will work as well as my MBox as I'd love to have an interface (ie dongle) that will let me just edit sessions anywhere I want.
__________________
Wave Creative Services
Frederiksted, St. Croix
US Virgin Islands
www.wave-creative.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-11-2007, 08:21 AM
Eric Seaberg's Avatar
Eric Seaberg Eric Seaberg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,926
Default Re: Why PT?

If you feel you MUST use ProTools for compatibility with someone else, then do. If you're doing all recording, editing and mixing yourself then it doesn't matter.

Since you're doing classical recording, you will probably NOT like the mic pre options on any of the Digi (M-Powered) hardware. I'd recommend looking for an M-Audio interface with ADAT I/O and pickup a high-quality multi-channel mic pre that would feed the M-Audio box via ADAT. The M-Audio box, at that point, is merely a DONGLE so ProTools will run. The 1814 is a good choice for this, and it's what I use feeding it with a Focusrite OctoPre.

Happy shopping.
__________________
Eric Seaberg • San Diego, CA
A.E.S., I.E.E.E., S.M.P.T.E., S.P.A.R.S.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-13-2007, 06:38 AM
Ninia Ninia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30
Default Re: Why PT?

Gillis, thanks for your reply.

I've been testing out the PT Demo that came with the M-Audio MobilePre and I'm very impressed. The workflow was just about instantly intuitive and I love how easy it is to do audio edits. I was just doing this with a raw wave form that I recorded back in June of a private recital, and doing the edits on my older PB G4 1GHz. Now admittedly I am not pushing the system very hard but everything was running off of the internal boot drive and on only 512 MB RAM and it ran very smooth. (My new computer is an SR MBP 2.4GHz 2GB RAM, but it is in the process of being replaced by Apple due to having had 3 logic board replacements in less than a month)

The Audio Engine in PT also produces a different sound than what my usual DAW produces. I did a blind test with two friends on this and both of them indicated that they could detect a significant difference in the 'clarity' of the PT sound over the other DAW. They both liked the PT sound over the other sound output.

I'm very seriously considering a move over to PT, I'll still have the other DAW available just in case things don't work out so I don't see much risk (financially) to doing this.

Thanks again

Ninia
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-13-2007, 06:53 AM
Ninia Ninia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30
Default Re: Why PT?

Hi Eric

I do handle the entire production process myself, from recording to burning the final versions. As mentioned in the post above I've been 'test driving' the PT demo and it has been quite impressive so far.

You've mentioned that I might not like the quality of the Digidesign or the M-Audio mic-pre's. Could you give me a rough comparison with another product that would be close? (ie do they sound like Behringer mic-pre's, or are they closer to Mackie Onyx mic-pre's?)

I've noticed that the ProjectMix I/O has an ADAT port, I would assume that the Focusrite OctoPre can use that port. Is there any reason to NOT use a ProjectMix as a controller? (beyond the mic-pre's) It seems to have been well received by anyone who has posted a review of it.

Thanks for your input

Ninia
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:11 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com