Pro Tools 6.0: Some Mac User's Disenfranchised!!!

[snapple]

OUTSTANDING! you have given the most INSIGHTFUL post I have ever read! Excellent! I appreciate your thoughts and value them! You are absolutely RIGHT! Great term, "power user"! I'm going to use that for a long time! Thanks a lot! That's what this board is for!

[Chompers]

Wider stereo image

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">???

[Rock_Artist]

Wheter it's cosmetic or not the major AGP/PCI problem with PT6 is caused by OS X.

OS X is hungry OS compared to the mac OSes so far.
This requires more memory and it uses the latest concept as AGP... Accelerated Graphics Port.

What's the thing? While PCI goes through the PCI bus (can be a problem for 001 users for example) AGP goes directly with the CPU. rather it enables faster graphics or whatever it takes less CPU time.

The h/w buffer size error known for LE users and especially PC users is cause when PT can't get the processed data from the CPU in time. in PCI you get more cpu cycles wasted on graphics this could limit the system.

I'm too really miss PT6 as I use PB/g3 300 with MBox. but still the main limits is by Apple's OS X. also, I believe with faster G3/G4 models (above 500-600mhz) you can eaisly loss power but get PT6 running with no probs.

[The Mighty Burner]

Not cosmetic for me...

I've been waiting a long time to finally utilize that second processor in my dual 450 AGP when running PT....now I can finally dedicate an entire cpu to PT!

But if I had a single processor, I agree that it wouldn't be quite as attractive or practical (I do like the new interface though...), since there is no sonic improvment and all my plugs won't work in PT6!

I guess that's why I still find myself working primarily with 5.1/OS9 though! Wierd...I guess it will be a slow transition...

Don't beat yourself up to much dude...PT5 is still awesome and works just as good! When you are ready to upgrade to a new 'puter, well, by then we will probably have PT6.2 with all the bugs worked out anyways...

[VK$$$]

Wider stereo image
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

???

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Its like going to 11 on the panning, or listening with headphones!! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously, is there any reason why PT6 should sound better than PT5? I´d really like to know.
I still got PT5 and plan to stay here for a while.

[smirky]

I'm running a G4 350 AM111 and have been thinking that MAC upgrade time is soon with the price drop on current G4s. My G4 has just turned 3 years old!

I have just received my PT 6 LE upgrade today and had a bit of a session with it tonight.
I'm definitely getting better performance with this set-up compared to 5.2.? 32 tracks on 9.2.

I believe that because Jaguar OS X.2.3 hands more of the video processing off to the video card instead of the CPU (as has been stated) I'm getting to use a few more CPU cycles for Pro Tools. Thats the AGP working the way it was designed to at long last. Thanks Apple.

It's also cured the metering and counter jitter that I've been putting up with for at least 18 months after spending hours searching the DUC, stripping down Hardware and OS, and changing every combination of settings trying in vain to solve this annoying problem.

This upgrade has bought me some more time to think about which plug ins to upgrade or faster hardware or whatever.

The Blue and White G3s sure are/were great machines but they are quite old now [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] It's a testament to the extra mileage you get out of a MAC compared to PC [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

B&W G3s are probably the most stable Macs I've ever used. We've still got a G3 450 at work running as a Harlequin RIP imaging film that runs for months & months between restarts. (OS 8.6)

Pro Tools 6.0 IS worth the switch for some situations. Still there's nothing wrong with keeping on with 5.* on 9.2.

Apple will probably dump a lot of cheap G4s on the market when G5 is finally ready!

warmest regards to you all.

Stephen
New Zealand

[where02190]

Originally posted by The Mighty Burner:
Not cosmetic for me...

I've been waiting a long time to finally utilize that second processor in my dual 450 AGP when running PT....now I can finally dedicate an entire cpu to PT!

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">My understanding, from all I have read (which is everything I can get my hands on about PT6) is that it utilizes about 20% of the second processor at this point. Future upgrades will incorporate more.

The results from the posted Davec tests are not very impressive. Some improvement, but nothing drasitc. We get excellent results with our current set-up, and see no need to subject clients to a very new (and not without it's problems) software, when what we have is working fine.

Regarding audio quality, it's stil the same converters, which are the major deciding factor in audio quality.

Hope this is helpful.

[snapple]

Any word when the G5's will hit the street?

Thanks!

[The Mighty Burner]

According to the documentation I recieved with the upgrade, setting the CPU usage to 99% dedicates an entire processor solely to PT6. I haven't done extensive testing, but when I did this I got very significant increase in processor performance when running the included demo session.

Any way you slice it, regardless of the technical percentage number for multi proc usage, it beats getting 0% percent out of my second proc when running PT5 under OS9.

As supported sample rates are the same, and I'm still using the same converters, I don't really percieve any improvement in audio quality. But to be fair, again, I have not done any extensive testing or comparisions....

[Kickin.da.speaker]

Any word when the G5's will hit the street?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Probably the day after you finally decide to buy a new G4 [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]