PT10 any improvement for composers?

[Rubicon]

Thanks for the help, DTS! Obviously Ron is really upset with the state of vi's in pt. I would still rather print rtas vi's in pt than work in a different app.

After the economy kills off the engineers and mixers, all that will be left is the composers. Maybe by then vi's will be fixed and work properly.

Rubi

[ronwasserman]

Originally Posted by Rubicon

Thanks for the help, DTS! Obviously Ron is really upset with the state of vi's in pt. I would still rather print rtas vi's in pt than work in a different app.

After the economy kills off the engineers and mixers, all that will be left is the composers. Maybe by then vi's will be fixed and work properly.

Rubi

I'm not upset. But in other DAWS I can open 35-40 instances of Kontakt and have my scoring templates all ready to go. Obviously I'm not using all of them at once but it sure saves time to have everything available and ready to go.

And freezing beats the hell out of printing VI's in PT especially when you have ridiculous deadlines as I deal with daily. (not that you don't.)

:)

[ronwasserman]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

I guess that depends on what you mean by 'soon'. Much of this work has been in development for years already, if that's any indication of what it's taking to make it happen.

With the massive amount of work involved I would say "soon" would be 1-2 years.

FYI - The moment VI's work smoothly in PT I will only use IT for all composing.

Thanks!

Ron

[Rubicon]

Thanks for the kind post, Ron. =)

I just found out I'll need a new mac pro for hdx. Arrgh! Cheers to someday getting vi's "right" in pt! And I hope sooner than later!

[dterry]

As a general response to the thread title, the biggest change I'm seeing in 10 for composers is that with large midi template, many functions are now much slower than PT9 - record enable a track takes 1-2 seconds, track selection is slow, stop record takes 2-3 seconds, change tempo values in the tempo dialog box and PT takes 3 seconds or so to enact the change and be ready for playback. This was not the case in PT9.

There is a thread about it here, and I've posted it as a bug on the Ideascale list here as well.

I hope this can be remedied with a faster timeline than VI performance improvements are on. I run my template on slaves, so VI performance is secondary for the moment. This may become enough to send me back to PT9, despite disk caching and clip gain.

[25ghosts]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

I hate to be the bearer of (possibly) good news, but we completely understand the need for better VI performance in Pro Tools and it's one of the things on our 'high priority' list. Unfortunately, the work necessary to make that happen is, to put it mildly, tremendous. It's basically a complete rewrite of the Pro Tools engine.

FYI - there is nothing inherently 'superior' about AU or VST. In fact, RTAS functionality with regard to control surfaces, inter-application communication, etc. has always been superior. The performance aspect with regard to VI's is more due to the DAW engine than anything - and that's the part that we still have to work on.

Yup... RTAS as concept is superior to to AU. AU = 16 Midi Channels Max. Pfhuiii
Same goes for outs... Not good. But AUs are more stable in they DAWs the run than most RTAS VIs in PT...

AVIDs own VIs, however are IMO as stable as any VI... 3rd pty RTAS VIs... now THAT is another brew !

[Andy R]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

...Much of this work has been in development for years already...

I'm glad to hear that, thanks!

Management may see it as a 'wonder feature', not at the top of the list, but I think they should rethink that strategy.

Even with it's spartan MIDI feature implementation, PT would destroy the competition if PT VI were as stable as PT tracking and mixing, and known as such.

I may have a BA in bong-hits instead of business, but I know this would translate into a giant pile of ca$h. ^_^

[dterry]

Originally Posted by Andy R

Even with it's spartan MIDI feature implementation, PT would destroy the competition if PT VI were as stable as PT tracking and mixing, and known as such.

It already has quite a few advantages for scoring over the competition, despite the smaller feature set on paper. Other than the midi function select lags with PT10, I'm quite happy with PT for my work. For the way I work, it is already faster than any other DAW I've used.

VEPro is not just a workaround, but a rather attractive solution regardless of PT's 64-bit future or internal VI performance (and really, slaves will be a requirement for larger scoring rigs as one system simply can't handle the load, even the fastest PCs/Macs are limited, for what some of us need at least). Having both is optimal of course.

Perhaps regardless of the 64-bit aspect, Avid should team up with VSL to offer a VEPro package deal. Just a thought. It isn't a workaround as much as a valuable addition to the toolkit.

[Marsdy]

Originally Posted by dterry

It already has quite a few advantages for scoring over the competition, despite the smaller feature set on paper. Other than the midi function select lags with PT10, I'm quite happy with PT for my work. For the way I work, it is already faster than any other DAW I've used.

VEPro is not just a workaround, but a rather attractive solution regardless of PT's 64-bit future or internal VI performance (and really, slaves will be a requirement for larger scoring rigs as one system simply can't handle the load, even the fastest PCs/Macs are limited, for what some of us need at least). Having both is optimal of course.

Perhaps regardless of the 64-bit aspect, Avid should team up with VSL to offer a VEPro package deal. Just a thought. It isn't a workaround as much as a valuable addition to the toolkit.

+1 for all of the above.

I really like the MIDI side of PT, even if there are some things missing.
I was a Logic veteran of 14 years. Drove me ******* nuts in the end. I'm finding PT/VE Pro far more productive.

I could well imagine still using VE Pro even when PT has gone 64 bit.

[Phil Buckle]

Absolutely. VEP has enabled me to lock the current system down.
I don't think about computers or software anymore. I just make music everyday.

If I was tracking bands or orchestras I might be singing a different tune but at the moment I want for nothing.

PT10? Don't need it at the price.
If it was a normal upgrade price I would get it just to be up to date.

On the other hand if the immanent VEP5 upgrade was $1000 I'd buy it in a heartbeat.