Pro Tools 10 vs 12 Stability

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by earthcorp

yea - same here - installed menu's messed up!!

Again - this is a known issue and won't get fixed.

[MixerGuy]

bump to an old-ish thread

I'm super stable on PT HD 10.3.10 on Mac 10.8.5

and always print in real time (outboard hardware) so i have no compelling reason to upgrade to PT 12.x

how is PT 12.x these days?

thanks

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by MixerGuy

bump to an old-ish thread

I'm super stable on PT HD 10.3.10 on Mac 10.8.5

and always print in real time (outboard hardware) so i have no compelling reason to upgrade to PT 12.x

how is PT 12.x these days?

thanks

Depends on the specific revision of PT12 - you have but to read the forum.

[MixerGuy]

Originally Posted by musicman691

Depends on the specific revision of PT12 - you have but to read the forum.

thanks.

I just heard directly from a veteran tech, who really knows ProTools... all it
's versions.... used on massive projects....

that for strictly recording many audio tracks... PT 12 (current version) Aug 2017 - is fine. (almost no plugins)

But for really complicated mixing of just audio tracks (NO VI's) and also the video engine.... if PT 10 HD in 10.8.5 is really solid.... as it is for me... don't upgrade!!!

[gie-sound]

Originally Posted by MixerGuy

thanks.

I just heard directly from a veteran tech, who really knows ProTools... all it
's versions.... used on massive projects....

that for strictly recording many audio tracks... PT 12 (current version) Aug 2017 - is fine. (almost no plugins)

But for really complicated mixing of just audio tracks (NO VI's) and also the video engine.... if PT 10 HD in 10.8.5 is really solid.... as it is for me... don't upgrade!!!

Ok; I was thinking of going the HDX + PT12 route. But it seems I am still better off with my HD3 plus PT10 system

[MixerGuy]

Originally Posted by musicman691

Depends on the specific revision of PT12 - you have but to read the forum.

How is PT 2018.3 ?

[KV626]

Originally Posted by MixerGuy

How is PT 2018.3 ?

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=397781

[albee1952]

Keeping in mind that this thread started 2 years ago, its time for an update.
#1-regarding latency and HDN, I track full bands all day long at the 64 buffer setting(32 live inputs) and never hear a peep about delay in the phones unless I have something set wrong(examples: either the buffer is still at 1024 from a big mix session, or the session has a send that has no destination, in which case, PT will erroneously add over 1900 samples of compensation. Delete the send and everything goes back to correct)

#2-regarding performance, You shouldn't try to compare an 8-year-old computer and software to what's current because the hardware, PT software and current OS(whether Mac or windows) is very different. I still believe each major PT update requires more computer power to handle all the new goodies

My own experience; PT10 ran great on my computer from that time period. 11/12 were not good until I moved to a newer computer. These days, I run a very recent Pro-Tools-PC build and latency is absolutely a non-issue. I have even had a full mix finished(including a batch of UA plugins) when a client decided they wanted one more overdub. I dropped the buffer to 32 and tracked the overdub without issue.

HDN cards run at the 128 buffer have no more latency than the old 002/003 firewire interfaces at a 64 buffer(just one reason that HDN was a great move for me when I outgrew the 003 I ran for many years). In short, if HDN exhibits too much latency, or if your computer can't record at a 64 buffer(assuming 44.1 and 48K), then your computer is probably to blame

[Chief Technician]

Originally Posted by albee1952

Keeping in mind that this thread started 2 years ago, its time for an update.
#1-regarding latency and HDN, I track full bands all day long at the 64 buffer setting(32 live inputs) and never hear a peep about delay in the phones unless I have something set wrong(examples: either the buffer is still at 1024 from a big mix session, or the session has a send that has no destination, in which case, PT will erroneously add over 1900 samples of compensation. Delete the send and everything goes back to correct)

This can happen with any track that has an assigned output that does not feed the input of any other track. If you need a track with an output that doesn't do anything useful (i.e. a print track in v10.3.10 or earlier), create a physical output path that you do not use and assign it to that track. This is, unfortunately, the way it is. Pro Tools is not smart enough to realize that an output to nowhere should not be delay compensated.