Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

My current studio setup is a 32 ch mixer and Cubase 6.I have never used pro tools and would consider buying it.I Tried the pt10 demo...but from what i am hearing and reading concerning the input monitoring issue.I would not be able to input monitor correctly thru my console without having the latency issues...Are there any versions of pro tools that work and monitor well with a console, windows 7, lynx converters?

Thanks in Advance

P.S.I dont really hear a major difference in daws.I think pro tools 10 is good sounding software.IMO...AT THIS TIME.. 2012... any 32 bit poor monitoring DAW is not superior to everything else.I see alot of industry standard fan boy quotes going on here...BUT a realistic industry standard DAW should sound good,monitor well and perform just as well with other interfaces....I Tried the demo and was seriously about to buy it... BUT..I discovered this monitoring problem. If the only way to get this feature is pay 1500-3k whatever more for a toolkit or hd...just for a button that nearly every other daw besides Pro Tools has...I won't buy it...I'm Not Bashing really because I would buy it if they fixed this and offered 64 bit version.I guess avid can decide...if they want to be industry standard or substandard...its been this way since pt9 right?

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

There's this: http://www.tritonedigital.com/index....hk=1&Itemid=20

which does what you want. However if you don't want to go that route with PT then there's always alternative daws. Seeing as how you're on a Windoze machine I'd suggest you take a look at Sonar X1. I have an ancient Winbox that runs the older Sonar 8.3.1 and does pretty much everything you want. Reason I didn't go for the newer version? I'd need a new computer and I'm not buying another Winbox. Macs for me now and Sonar doesn't run native on a Mac.

Sonar - number of tracks only limited by your computer's power, works with pretty much interface you want, no latency compensation limits issues (limits that PT has), and is 64 bit and has been for years. And I think it's cheaper than PT.

And what part are you wanting to be 64-bit? Yes the pro tools app is 32-bit and can only address 4GB of ram. So if you use VI's I understand the complaint.

However you mention using an outboard mixer, so I'm guessing you're more of an audio only guy. And since version 9 pro tools has had a 64-bit float mix engine. And pro tools 10 can now use 32-bit float files and have 32-bit float pathways. Which is equal to any other DAW out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

Yeah my 64 bit complaint was memory access related.I am serious I nearly pulled the trigger on pt10.If I'm reading all the complaints threads correctly, Even if i had pt10, a control 24, and my lynx converters, no avid interfaces. I could monitor with lowish latency, but not equal the zero latency and tape style monitoring required of a pro recording environment...Again not bashing but seriously disappointed...I know how to export wav files so transfer from any daw is really not an issue for me...I was expecting the "industry standard" to do most everything the 500 competition will.It REALLY surprises me that it will not..Does mutetone on a mac(don't see a mutone for pc) give the same result as zero latency tape style monitoring??

P.S.Nearly Every DAW in existance already has these features...CUBASE 6 IS BOTH 64 Bit memory access and Direct monitoring tape style.. I'm Interested in pro tools and still would be, but ONLY IF I COULD USE IT WITH ZERO LATENCY W rec console lynx ect

I'm running I7 16g w7 Cubase 6(64 bit)@64 buffer

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

+1

Also your refer to Zero Latency recording... but that does not allow you to use any plugins while recording... like a nice verb for the vocalist to hear some room when recording... to do this.. even in Cubase, you have to turn off low latency monitoring or the effect is delayed behind the "low latency" recording (dry) signal....

The ONLY way to be able to do something like this in near Zero latency is to have external farm rendering... Ex is a TDM, HDX or even Native setup (these cards do the rendering of data externally from your CPU)

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

What Tom said.

And contrary to the first post, PT Native is not industry standard. That tagline refers to pro audio/post facilities using PT HD. From a Native standpoint, as you are displaying with the lack of input monitoring rant, there is absolutely no technical/feature reason to leave Cubase 6 for PT10. It comes down to personal workflow preference of what you want to use.

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

PT Native is PT software (Industry Standard) with a card that does some of the things a true TDM/HDX system can do, and you dont need a native card to open a PT session on a different type system so I dont know where the "Native is not standard" is coming from or what the point of that statement is. It does offer some lower monitoring option (lower hardware buffer) while recording with plugins (like I said monitoring a vocal verb while recording the dry vocal signal so the singer gets to hear themselves with some verb or compression and or gates as plug-ins (not being recorded but inserted for listening) on the drums/percussion).... Native does offer lower latency times while tracking...

However TDM and HDX systems are really what you want... not sure if they even make a farm render card for Cubase or any other of the DAW's on the market.

The bottom line is If you cannot afford a true (Low Latency) Pro Tools rig, than maybe another DAW is better for you... Pro Tools have more user options and configuration options than any other DAW out there and they keep adding more/new features.

The 32 bit mode is irrelevant unless your using a lot of RTAS/VST/VI and in that case you aren't going to have low latency monitoring even at 64 bit. Sure when PT goes 64 bit you will be able to have more VI/RTAS/VST's running and probably be able to run them at a lower latency/buffer setting, but the power is in the farm rendering cards.

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

It is not about what PT Native can do but rather about what pro facilities use. I have not once seen PT Native as the main rig in any pro facility I've used in the last 12 years. PT Native is a great DAW that I use daily... There are also other awesome DAWs like Cubase 6. However, the tagline "industry standard" refers to PT HD, plain and simple.

Re: Thinking of trying protools 10... questions
 

Man I Have No problem Staying with Cubase ...Only asking VERY LEGIT QUESTIONS and also COMPLAINTS...My purpose for posting was to find out if there was any recent native version of pro tools that will do what..I can currently do with NO latencey, With almost EVERY other DAW IN 2012... I ABSOLUTLEY do not care who may think I'm a professional or not based on the software i choose...cornered market 1988 days are gone... No DAW will give u an ear.What u can hear and learn more every day will make u a pro way faster than the time u spend crowing about Gear...So lets kill the gear snob bs OK


Another Reason I was considering the switch was Avid being a U.S. based company

I Hope if they fix these simple issues instead of trying to sell standard features as upgrades.Its really not 1990 anymore guys
A friend has won multiple grammys using freakin da-38s... please stop the pt industry standard jokefest... again not the purpose of my post