Unfortunately the Digi software is "carbonized"

[AG]

I keep hearing this when running into problems using Soft Samps in ProTools. MachFive, Kontakt, Impakt or Kompakt. Same problems, usually when using big samples. My question to Digi is, "is this true?" and "Will this be addressed in the 6.4.1 upgrade?" If the below quote is true, then the summer 6.4.1 release won't address this. I'm sure there are other Mix users that would like to keep using ProTools as a sequencer and would really appreciate a response.
Thanks,
_Scott

From Doug at East/West:
<<Unfortunately the Digi software is "carbonized" meaning it is not native OS-X. They have plans for releasing a native OS-X version in Q4, but until then you will not get the same performance as you would using a native OS-X audio sequencer as the host, or using the product in "standalone" mode.

There is also the problem that RTAS has a 32k sample limit. This is disastrous for the large libraries. If you need to use this in PT it is much better to use HTDM, but it still isn't as good as using any of these libraries with a native OS-X application.>>

[Chief Technician]

For the record, the Finder for OS X was carbonized until v10.3.

If Digidesign is rewriting the carbon code for their next release, it certainly won't make it to MIX users, because as they said with the G5 announcement, they can't continue to develop for a product that is no longer shipping.

[AG]

Also for the record, all of these products were advertised to work in ProTools under RTAS and or HTDM, way before 10.3. They actually do work much better in DP and Logic. I don't mind upgrading to HD if in fact this Q4 fix will solve these problems. Digi, some comment on this? Will this be v7.0 or a 6.4x fix.

[Saracino]

From Doug at East/West:
<<Unfortunately the Digi software is "carbonized" meaning it is not native OS-X. They have plans for releasing a native OS-X version in Q4, but until then you will not get the same performance as you would using a native OS-X audio sequencer as the host, or using the product in "standalone" mode.

There is also the problem that RTAS has a 32k sample limit. This is disastrous for the large libraries. If you need to use this in PT it is much better to use HTDM, but it still isn't as good as using any of these libraries with a native OS-X application.>>

Sorry Folks, but this explanation just plain false (and more than a little misleading). I posted a response on another thread, but just saw it pop-up in it's own. Please excuse the lazy copying of my first response.

True, Pro Tools is a "Carbon" application. However, in spite of Apple's propaganda efforts, Pro Tools (and every other Carbon application) is just as OSX-native as a MachO application. More importantly, there is no performance difference between a Carbon application and a “MachO” application (they both execute PPC code in nearly the same way). There can be technical issues for some developers who've chosen to target their products for MachO, but this depends on the plug-in.

Also, RTAS does not have a "32k limit which destroys the large libraries." He may be referring to a fixed RTAS buffer-size of 32 samples, but this has nothing to with libraries (or their destruction .

-- Joe
Digidesign Engineering

[Dan Pinder]

I don't believe there is a single (Major) DAW on the market that is a Cocoa app. This goes for Logic as well, which has the maximum use of Apple's development resources should they want it (or should Apple demand the Cocoa-ization of Logic). Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Vaporhead]

Sorry Folks, but this explanation just plain false (and more than a little misleading). I posted a response on another thread, but just saw it pop-up in it's own. Please excuse the lazy copying of my first response.

True, Pro Tools is a "Carbon" application. However, in spite of Apple's propaganda efforts, Pro Tools (and every other Carbon application) is just as OSX-native as a MachO application. More importantly, there is no performance difference between a Carbon application and a “MachO” application (they both execute PPC code in nearly the same way). There can be technical issues for some developers who've chosen to target their products for MachO, but this depends on the plug-in.

Also, RTAS does not have a "32k limit which destroys the large libraries." He may be referring to a fixed RTAS buffer-size of 32 samples, but this has nothing to with libraries (or their destruction .

-- Joe
Digidesign Engineering

Hey Joe, Thanks for chiming in. I must, however, point out that whatever the technical facts may be, the practical fact remains that pretty much every RTAS softsampler available for use in PRO TOOLS is still pretty damn unstable and not one person from DIGI has ever commented on that issue. I can use the NN-XT sampler (of course NOT RTAS) for weeks without so much as a hiccup, but as soon as I introduce KONTAKT or MACH 5, quite quikly there after something almost always goes south. Things seem to be getting slightly better in this area, but then again maybe I'm applying my whishfull thinking mode to that question, I don't know. I do know that alot of us would feel better if we just at least heard an acknowledgement from you guys that you are aware of the problem and that you care about trying to solve it. ADC is awesome and thank you for it. We truely do appreciate it when you guys put the cool stuff in the product. The fact that it is cool is a cold hard fact. The fact that the softsampler in RTAS issue is still an issue is, on the other hand, not too cool. Just thought that it could possibly be helpful to point this out. Anyway..........Thanks in advance for any comments....................

[markjohn]

I definitely second that post. I'm about to upgrade to 6.4 TDM and while I'm totally excited about ADC I'm very frustrated about soft samplers on PT. I've bought everything and only NNXT works. That sucks!!!! All the while I'm trying to find an unused G3 around here to get Soft SampleCell under OS 9.2 working. Very UNcool. Anything is helpful at this point.

Thanks
MM

I want my SampleCell back.

[Saracino]

Hey Joe, Thanks for chiming in . . . . I do know that alot of us would feel better if we just at least heard an acknowledgement from you guys that you are aware of the problem and that you care about trying to solve it. . . .

It's tough to chime in on every technical discussion on the DUC -- creating a thorough answer takes time away from our main job (making Pro Tools better) and there are just too many threads. However, there are many folks in Engineering that follow the DUC pretty regularly.

Commenting specifically on this issue -- we've been speaking with engineers from several third-party plug-in companies about performance of RTAS synths and samplers. Every plug-in has unique technical issues, but we're also looking at general ways to help improve their performance. I can't offer much more in the way of specifics without going into technical details, however, the important point is that efforts have been underway to improve the performance of RTAS synth and sampler plug-ins.

-- Joe
Digidesign Engineering

[AG]

It's tough to chime in on every technical discussion on the DUC -- creating a thorough answer takes time away from our main job (making Pro Tools better) and there are just too many threads. However, there are many folks in Engineering that follow the DUC pretty regularly.

Commenting specifically on this issue -- we've been speaking with engineers from several third-party plug-in companies about performance of RTAS synths and samplers. Every plug-in has unique technical issues, but we're also looking at general ways to help improve their performance. I can't offer much more in the way of specifics without going into technical details, however, the important point is that efforts have been underway to improve the performance of RTAS synth and sampler plug-ins.

-- Joe
Digidesign Engineering

Yes Joe, thanks for the acknowledgement and explanation. I'm sure it's a daunting task to implement all the third party plugs into protools. It's also tough when the consumer gets conflicting reports from the various companies whose products are supposed to work together. Please keep us up to date on any progress.
Thanks,
_S

[Vaporhead]

It's tough to chime in on every technical discussion on the DUC -- creating a thorough answer takes time away from our main job (making Pro Tools better) and there are just too many threads. However, there are many folks in Engineering that follow the DUC pretty regularly.

Commenting specifically on this issue -- we've been speaking with engineers from several third-party plug-in companies about performance of RTAS synths and samplers. Every plug-in has unique technical issues, but we're also looking at general ways to help improve their performance. I can't offer much more in the way of specifics without going into technical details, however, the important point is that efforts have been underway to improve the performance of RTAS synth and sampler plug-ins.

-- Joe
Digidesign Engineering

[/QUOTE]


Hey Joe, Thanks for returning with an informative comment. It is greatly appreciated and it is a relief to know that you guys are on this specific case. All the best in getting back to your main job of making Pro Tools, an already pretty great product, better.