PT10 or Hd native

[starburst]

Guys, thinking of getting mac mini i7 or used 2010 mac pro and hd native with omni. But I'm not sure I want to spend all that money on Hd native. How are people finding the standard pt 10?

[WombatStudio.Org]

Right tool for the job.

Do you frequently record orchestras, rock bands, track acts or VO?

[TOM@METRO]

At this point, Standard PT (as competent as it is) would not be enough for me. I need the features of HD in order to work the way I feel most comfortable. Educate yourself as to the features, and consider your workflow and expectations.

[P,B,S]

Originally Posted by starburst

Guys, thinking of getting mac mini i7 or used 2010 mac pro and hd native with omni. But I'm not sure I want to spend all that money on Hd native. How are people finding the standard pt 10?

There are a few basic things HD offers that really set it apart from standard PT with CPTK

First and most important is latency.
This is the deal breaker for any very serious studio wanting to save a few bucks . HDN , HDX or TDM offers much lower latency .
Of coarse you should know already latency is the time it takes for the sound source to be played and referenced back through monitors or headphones.
Standard PT has noticeably more latency (wait time) that for some serious players or studio,s would consider unusable , playable and totally unacceptable.
While hobbyists or project studio,s this is a hurdle that can become vary frustrating but is usable as many quality projects have been recorded this way.
And this is a major selling point of PTHD because with there hardware they can guaranty latency times. CPTK and HDN as you know offer basically the same feature set in terms of music but does differ slightly for video if my memory serves correct.

Some will say that with HD even HDN there is a more direct and natural sound feeding into PT because the HD cards act as a bypass for unnecessary cpu parts allowing a straighter more direct way onto the hard drive thus a cleaner sound because less stuff for it to change the sound.

There are many other reasons but the reason why most people buy it is because of the sound quality and the latency. Features are nice but sound quality trumps all in my opinion. Another thing to consider is if you ever plan to rent your studio ,HD is a much higher standard and considered the professional tool for the industry.
Standard PT can do wonders as well but HD will sell extra studio hours just because it is HD . So over time it helps pay for itself a little faster.
If you have the means PTHD is the only way to go in my opinion.
But standard PT still does great things and can even sound terrific with a good cpu and interface. If your even thinking HD get it you will not be disappointed.

[nst7]

If the Omni is sufficient for your I/O, and you were thinking about getting a high quality interface, and considering the complete toolkit, then it's a no-brainer to get the HD Native bundle, because you'd be spending almost as much anyway.

On the other hand, if you need a lot of inputs to track bands, etc., and you didn't need the complete toolkit features, then the price difference would be greater, vs. regular Protools only, and a lower priced interface.

[starburst]

Thanks for the replies guys. I'm currently on tdm mix 6.4 and i've got used to the reliability of the system. I couldn't bare to go back to the pt le buffer errors of my previous rigs.
But computers have come along way in recent years so that's why I'm trying to gauge how standard pt 10 would perform. I don't have to rely on clients, this is for my own use but I can't be messing about with buffers errors. Audio quality is a concern, I want to get the best I can and I need 4 ins, may 8 on the odd occasion. I usually use a mixer on the front end so never find latency to be a big issue. I guess its down to audio quality and reliability for me. Of course, money too!

[Craig F]

you can get a demo of 10 (30 days I think)
if you have the computer you could take it for a test spin to see if you need the HD