Running LE without 002r hardware attached ?

[Noiseboy50]

It really would be excellent if Digi went the cardbus route. I rough mixed an entire album last year on the tour bus but my 002 and 17" PB take up a full table and 2 seats which is a pain on a crowded bus.

[Slim Shady]

I don't think I've ever seen anyone berated for wanting the feature, but there's been lots of people flamed for the way they go about demanding it.

What you guys seem to be missing, is that you're actually asking for a new version of ProTools. The LE/MP/HD versions use a proprietary way of speaking to audio hardware called "DAE" - ProTools does not use CoreAudio, which is the way most other Apps communicate with audio hardware in Mac OS X. It's not just a matter of making the authoriztion happen on an iLok (it already does for MPowered and HD), but the fact that they'd have to write a new CoreAudio version of PT. While that may not be the most difficult thing in the world (i.e. PT Free for OS9 and the super old "Pro-mix" or whatever it was called), it would probably be nearly impossible to have both versions on one computer (which was the case with the PT Free OS9 version - it couldn't coexist with LE). In order to get what you're asking for, a version that could run with and without hardware, they'd actually have to re-write PT from the ground up using CoreAudio instead of DAE (DAE is much better btw), which would then make it accessible to any CoreAudio hardware, which would essentially kill Digidesign as a business as they are primarily a hardware company that happens to make the most popular audio software on the market. In order to stay alive, they'd have to start charging the same for the PTLE software as the competition (i.e. Logic for $1000), whereas now you get the software practically for free when you buy the hardware. I'd rather be able to buy into PTLE for $450 (Mbox) than have to spend $1k plus a hardware purchase, even if it means toting the Mbox around with me.

I'm rebuffing the fact that it would be a nice thing to have, I would totally jump on a hardware-free version in a second, but it's just not a logistical possibility for several different reasons. Now, a Cardbus version for Laptops would be pretty sweet, except it'd exclude all the iBook owners and 12" powerbook owners out there, which is probably a decent portion of the laptop PTLE market on the Mac side.

[wangell]

Supporting something like coreaudio requires development of a driver (less than 1/10 of 1% of the typical code base), not the entire software. Protools already supports multiple drivers including ASIO and Waveaudio. AND, in the recent past they have had both ASM and Coreaudio support (currently available in the free version of protools) and considering that they have current core drivers for their hardware I'd be extremely surprised if they don't have current core drivers for PT v6.9.2 if not v7.

[Slim Shady]

Right. Like I said, that's not the hard part since it's basically been done already. The hard part is then getting both a DAE and CoreAudio version to exist on the same machine so that you can switch between them. The even harder part would be the whole price-restructuring that would happen in order for PT to be available as standalone software. It would also mean a decline in quality control (in addition to the already declining performance) of a system than would now have to support any old CoreAudio interface instead of the tight integration of software and hardware that PT offers.

Again, I'm not trying to dissuade your request, just trying to look beyond the normal consipiracy theories that surround this oft-talked about topic and see what other issues may actually stand between hope and reality. I'm not an expert by any means, but having lived and worked through many different versions of PT now, and these are things I think might be prohibiting this from happening.

[wangell]

From a technical standpoint there is no co-existence issue, it's purely a marketing decision. A single copy of PT can support multiple drivers and worst case is they'd need to update their coreaudio driver, but even here I'd guess it's already current. There are no technical differences between PTLE and PTMP, they've just disabled certain capabilities in each as a marketing decision. They could choose tomorrow to go to a single version that would support DAE, coreaudio, and ilok. A version that could run standalone on a laptop with an ilok for copy protection.

[Icabod]

What I would love, and I think would be quite easy for Digi, is for them to take an Mbox, strip out everything but the headphone pre. Then they could package it in something about the size of a Griffin iMic. This device could have no way of inputing audio. Since it could be made from parts of an Mbox, it would use the DAE, not Core Audio. They could sell it without software and charge $50 to $100 for it and make a killing. The catch is, you would have to currently own some form of Digi hardware to have access to LE.
I understand that people could run LE on two different machines with this device, but I don't think it would hurt Digi, since no recording could take place. It would only be a playback device.
I know it is a pipe dream, but I am sure that if Digi doesn't do it, someone will take an old Mbox apart and do this (probably in an Altoids box!), soon.
Keep watching the hardware hack sites!!

[KathyLaBonte]

Well, how about this one: Running LE WITH the 002 attached but DISABLED.
Perhaps I should start a new thread on this as well but here is what I mean and why the hardware can actually get in the way sometimes.

I am building a studio in which I will have a control room and live tracking room separate from each other. I do own Logic and Nuendo as well so I have a Mackie Control surface in operation along with my Digi 002 Console. It was nice to see that the Mackie and the 002 play well together and actually give me 16 channels of hands on control when operating side by side.

However....

In my rather unique circumstance of being setup for both a Pro Tools environment and a Logic/Nuendo environment (using MOTUs), I don't WANT to always use them side by side. I am keeping the 002 out in the live tracking room with a Hart Dynamics electronic drumkit (makes it very simple for me to record drumtracks out in the live room when alone). The 002 and drumbrain will both be wired (half normalled) into a patchbay next to them which will then go under the floor and into the control room for further access to the 002's inputs if desired while tracking guitar in the control booth (as well as providing the drumbrain signals to the MOTUs too).

Once drums are recorded and I'm sure I don't need to be in the live room for anything else, I can unplug all the 002 connections swiftly and bring it into the control booth where it can sit alongside the Mackie as a team. That's fine. But....

In the event that I'm recording someone ELSE playing drums, for example, and I'm in the control booth using the Mackie to control Pro Tools, I CANNOT access the first 8 channels or use plugins or anything. Why? Because the 002 out in the live room is holding on to the first bank of 8 channels and there is no way that I know of to release it. I would like the Mackie to be the sole surface controller in this situation. I can't shut the 002 off because then there is no hardware connected! I can't put it in standby mode because that is effectively the same thing - Pro Tools will quit.

When trying to access or use a plugin on the Mackie a message will showup saying: "HUI must be MIDI Controller #1 to assign or edit inserts. " So, apparently the 002 is #1 and will not release or even swap the first bank of 8 channels so that I can use them on the Mackie. Even if I could swap them that would be great. I could let the 002 take channels 9-16 while I needed to work in 1-8 and then vice versa.

Most people, most of the time would be thrilled that there are 16 tracks available for surface control when the 002 and Mackie are turned on and I agree. But in my case, it really would be nice to override that feature when needed. I don't know how to make my setup work by keeping the 002 in another room and trying to use the Mackie for controlling tracks 1-8.

Basically, I'd like to be able to control one bank of 8 tracks from either of two possible locations - the same 8 tracks from either controller I choose to be at. Instead of 16 continuous tracks being definitively broken up into two banks, one forceably assigned to each controller/location.

Any thoughts or ideas?
I think it's another argument for having the software run without hardware. Or at least to have a solution to operate PT without the big 002 attached when not needed (just like when wanting to mix on a laptop while traveling and the 002 is not around).

Kathy

[DJ Insomaniac]

From a technical standpoint there is no co-existence issue, it's purely a marketing decision.

No, there is a co-existence issue. You can't have M-Powered and LE on the same computer. I tried installing a demo of M-Powered way abck when (when it was first announced), and it stopped the installer and told me that i would have to delete LE to run MP.

There's also the fact that PT Free couldn't be used on a computer with LE, or it would cause LE to cease functioning.

[martian]

i'd be happy if it ran on internal outputs like PT free and had ilok authorisation..

[supercell]

So If I have LE can I get a M-Audio hardware and use it without buying M-Powered software?

I have a 002 at my studio but I do alot of Final Cut work at home and I would like to use pro tools for some editing and sound enhancement?

So can you run LE with M-Audio Hardware?

Thanks all,

b.p.