Things are changing definitely changing and there are trends toward software as opposed to hardware based solutions like TDM and HDX. But audio work will almost always - I believe - require some hardware, if only high quality multi-channel converters. I don't see multiple audio inputs as being something that the average computer user would require, and would therefore always be a need that would be addressed through audio hardware makers.
For tracking, latency is a killer for me and I find it to be a groove killer. HD systems are where Avid believes the problem lies and the slow adoption of Native in place of our TDM systems was where they placed the blame for slow sales on the audio side.
In my opinion, and based on much of what I've read over many years on the DUC, many of us HD users have been anxious - ok frothing - for a replacement for our long in the tooth TDM systems and would have snapped them up. Part of the problem was that there was no update to the hardware for nearly a decade. And HD users wanted that. Being gearslutz(tm?), we have faster computers with memory that was considered practically inconceivable for even a hard drive when HD came out. Our monitors are almost comical in terms of size these days, as they've blossomed into these huge and beautiful raft-sized marvels. And the HD cards were being powered by a chip solution from the 90s. The plug-ins became more innovating, creative and powerful which demanded more and more from our cards and the only thing we could do was add more cards rather than invest in upgrades to more powerful or efficient cards.
Even now, they've unveiled the HDX but it still needs software support that will keep many HD users from upgrading until the software catches up. I believe that most people would be happy with a 5 year upgrade cycle on their systems. As has been the case, the systems can certainly have longer lives beyond what the design intention for those who aren't able to upgrade sooner. Some people change out computers every two to three years, which I think would be unsustainable for all but the highest end studio. I doubt that anyone would have suspected that in 2011 we'd still be running essentially the same cards we bought in 2003. We understand that certain acquisitions will (hopefully) be one time purchases - great mics, pres, etc. - but computer based tech will be constantly upgraded based on faster, more and better. We wanted that but nothing was released to address those concerns. HDX really should have been released in 2008. We expected it to be really. So a lot of people hunkered down, opted to "hold fast", and hope for a hardware update that was years late.
I think that the real ProTools problem was the same problem that Apple had before the return of Jobs: their product line has gotten out hand, some competing against each other with no clear lines of division. I believe they need to simplify their product line, focus on quality and innovation for fewer products instead of developing a huge range of hardware. It's the top tier that sets the course of the ship and when the ship runs afoul due to changing tides, firing the crew is not the answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Blaske
I have not been a big Avid/Digi fan in recent years, but in some ways, I don't know if I'd be so quick to heap tons of blame on the top-tier right now.
Too much is changing, and things are changing too rapidly. A company like Avid has a LOT of shareholder expectations, and they're also really locked down by many, many years of legacy systems and the responsibility to maintain standards and compatibility. The weight of all of this is oppressive. Running Avid is like piloting the largest oil tanker out on the high seas. A huge ship needs to plan turns and navigation a long time in advance. And if mistakes are made, the results are catastrophic (e.g. The Titanic). Meanwhile , the competition gets to race around in a Miata.
I was around back in the NED days and owned an EXTREMELY expensive NED system back in the days when the Digidesign guys were working out of a garage (I remember seeing them at an Emu get-together, when they were selling an editor for the original Mac, and had their display set up on a card table). The thought, at the time, that Digidesign would put NED out of business seemed silly. But, it happened. Their comparatively inexpensive cards in a comparatively inexpensive mass-produced Mac was the way to go at the time. NED was too late to compete.
But today, the question is if a really big, highly capitalized audio/video company really has any future in the market. How can Avid compete against a company like Apple that pretty much distributes Logic Pro and FCP as a gift for buying a Mac? Or, how can they compete against a product like Reaper that sells for $60, works on Mac/Windows/Linux, and supports a huge number of formats, plug-ins, etc., etc. (and is 64 bit, has track freeze, etc., etc.).
There are probably still some people who can use the latest, full-blown HDX system (if you're, say, posting a Hollywood blockbuster like Avatar), but most people don't need that. And, most people today don't want to spend tens of thousands of dollars on dedicated hardware that will be an obsolete dead end in the not too distant future. Also, since Avid is selling many different systems at many different price points, it needs to hobble software to make the more expensive systems more compelling. Compare that to Reaper being $60 for the top-of-the-line (and only) version. I've also heard rumors that with the next release, Logic will be a single, full-featured version.
It's my understanding that there are only four people who develop Reaper. Can Avid match that to be competitive?
Sometimes, things change so much, and so rapidly, that there is simply nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. I fear that Avid is being backed into that corner.
|