We're gonna bounce !

[lamp]

Oh...by the way...I listen to Stern too !!! (I'm the suit that still wears jeans and Nikes to work, don't hate !!)

I never listen to Stern, his anything goes style just drags our youth and America in general, down. I don't buy Nikes.
And I try very very hard to never hate.

But im really getting off topic here so anyone interested
in one perspective on clear channel can read Paul Lehrman's
article in Mix here. http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_law_unto_itself/

[Gio Mix]

Rule #1 in my studio to all engineers
LISTEN TO YOUR BOUNCE ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
Saves my butt, saves their Jobs, and saves face with the client when their program hits the air complete, without any mistake, and exactly the way they expected it.
Non real time........well faster yes, off to the bar sooner, but what if its wrong, forgot an edit, or a volume was just not right.... ready to find out while its on the air? Guess you'll find out when your client calls you and says, what happened?
You guys, being the station, cant use the excuse of, "the guy at the radio must have loaded it wrong"....
Good luck

[WestPhillySoulzition]

what do we need to do to make clear channel spontaneously combust.

[Djtricky]

Careful what you say...Big Brotha is always watching !



Djtricky

[slangification]

I will miss the little hand icon that would pop up on occassion as Pro Tools would chug through it's processing to make a :32 second commercial fit into a :30 second time window. I honestly believed that the little hand was waiving to me. Little did I know that it was waving goodbye ! Numbers like -9072, and -9034 and phrases like "drive too slow or fragmented" will be distant memories echoed in our production minds.

Ah yes, and you will have an entire dialect of new terms to learn. Save a speed dial button for the IT guys.

Here's some software that might be really helpful when you're trying to get your computers to work:

http://mark-knutson.com/t3/

The site explains how Windows was not designed as a "Real Time Operating System", (it was not designed for music), and it suggests ways to approach workarounds.

Good luck!

[s0nguy]

Rule #1 in my studio to all engineers
LISTEN TO YOUR BOUNCE ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
Saves my butt, saves their Jobs, and saves face with the client when their program hits the air complete, without any mistake, and exactly the way they expected it.
Non real time........well faster yes, off to the bar sooner, but what if its wrong, forgot an edit, or a volume was just not right.... ready to find out while its on the air? Guess you'll find out when your client calls you and says, what happened?
You guys, being the station, cant use the excuse of, "the guy at the radio must have loaded it wrong"....
Good luck

True True....I worked at a radio syndication house and they did non-real-time bounces. Well....after the show ships they listen to it every week before it hours before it airs. That week the editor forgot to cut out a piece where the announces said:

"I just cant get that right can I?"

It was so funny because I hated my job and to watch my boss scramble was quite entertaining......I had nothing to do with the show though so I didnt feel bad watching them run around in "damage control" mode.

-S0nguy
\

[infojunk]

I think you guys must have missed this post from Eric:

"I agree Kingfish, Your final product must to be "Quality Checked" before leaving the door. It may be old school, but it is definitely good business sense. We have a department that is dedicated to exactly that. They listen to the final mixed master CD or file, while our producers continue to work on other projects. By the time they finish QC'ing the product, we can have other product ready for delivery and QC (assembly line type production). If there was a problem with the final product, I don't want to have to wait another 20 minutes or 1 hour for the fixed file to render, risking missing a shipping or air deadline..<snip>"

This allows editors to continue editing while a dedicated group proofs/QA's the final product. Also, they already have a number of PC's being used for audio production, so this is not uncharted territory. Bouncing a 50 track, 4 minute song in 4 minutes is awesome. Bouncing a 4-8 track, 1 hour show in 60 minutes is just too long. If there is something that needs to be changed you have to add up to another hour to your production and that is just too long. PT just doesn't fit the niche in this particular case.

Aloha,

-Chris

[PTUser NYC]

I agree that those who are arguing that a real time bounce is a good idea based on Quality Check have not understood that Clear Channel does that in a different department. I understand that Clear Channel needs a faster than real time answer to rendering their shows. That makes sense to me. But then you say:

Bouncing a 4-8 track, 1 hour show in 60 minutes is just too long. If there is something that needs to be changed you have to add up to another hour to your production and that is just too long. PT just doesn't fit the niche in this particular case.

I think we have already shown that this was not the case. Bouncing 15 or 20 minute reels in parallel certainly takes a lot less time than 2 hours. Then, fixes are made as punches, and don't take long to render at all.

Clear channel can do whatever they like. If they prefer not to work that way, that's their call. But to say that it can't be done is just plain wrong. it CAN be done - it just takes proper technique.

[infojunk]

You are absolutly right that it is possible to speed up the process somewhat but that creates more steps and the point here is production speed. Plus it will never be as fast as some of the competing products. Given that it is time to replace the equipment anyway it makes the best sense to chose a solution that works best in our current environment. It is not a slight against PT, it just does not fit here. Why make it harder than it has to be?

I realize human nature is to defend whatever we prefer, but sometimes it is not always the best choice.

Aloha,

-Chris

[PTUser NYC]

Hey info, like I said, Clear Channel can do whatever they like. They are a consumer, and consumers make choices as they are comfortable.

I just think that with a little technique, your concerns are easily answered with a Pro Tools rig. You say: "it is possible to speed up the process somewhat but that creates more steps and the point here is production speed." I disagree. It doesn't create any more steps than deciding that a line should be louder or softer, for instance. The extra steps I've detailed would take less than one minute in and of themselves.

I don't disrespect your choice. That you prefer another platform is enough to make your choice valid. You aren't wrong, you're doing what you like and this is certainly your perogative.

What I can't accept is the idea that this task is not possible on Pro Tools, even given your constraints and issues. I've clearly laid out ( for free ) the way in which they can be accomplished. Keep in mind that faster than realtime bounces DO take time too. I believe that I have shown that my method would add exactly 15 minutes to your production time, that are avoided using another platform. That's certainly a valid reason for you to choose to change if you like. But don't make it seem as if its more than that. Unless the length of your sessions varies by less than 15 minutes, this doesn't slow you down any more than any other aspect of the process. Hiring better engineers, for example (no slight at who you have now, I'm sure they are fast!) would also save you time.

Basically I'm saying I respect your choice, please respect the truth about the platform that my business is invested in. Irresponsible untruths abound against Pro Tools, and threaten my investment. I need to clear up what is true and what is not to protect my business.