Howdy

Rain

mikespitzer

Why?


I

That's why I don't see this move by Avid as particularly game-changing. Back when everyone used tape, people went to studios because of other resources, including talent (of the engineer). Those other resources (good rooms, good mics, etc.) and talent will still matter.

rhythminmind


This is one example video of why I prefer PT's audio handling. This is an example of a very basic editing task done in both PT & SPE.

• Four multitrack audio clip/regions synced to the timeline (1:00:00)
• shifted/edited.
• Then set back to the original sync point down to sample accuracy.

http://www.youtube.com/wa.h?v=SYl2ojYx_BA&hd=1

I'll be the 1st to admit I'm nowhere near as proficient with Sonars editing tasks as in PT. But I haven't found a way to have = functionality for basic tasks like this in Sonar. With large projects I lose a lot of time & more importantly confidence that everything is time-aligned. PT has a handfull of easy ways to align anything to anything. And secondly what is with Sonars extending of clip/regions past audio content? Makes it a **** to get back to the original position. Preference option?

From a business angle I think you hit the nail on the head. My background is more business oriented than creative. From managing guitarist Yngwie Malmsteen, to building multi-million companies, to consulting for other corporations around the world to boost sales and profit , to helping companies design new products , etc...... I can tell you that clearly see the HD paradox. For years, PT-HD was PERCEIVED as this top of the ladder, professional recording studio environment in mush the same way big recordings studios in the 70s were seen. Now, that distinction gets blurred with Pro Tools 9.0 On one hand, AVID can embrace a whole new group of potential customers. On the other hand, they have a large list of existing customers who paid $15-20K to build a PT-HD studio and felt like they were ELITE. Now the value of some of the HD hardware has dropped overnight and the functionality of the higher end PT has now been opened up to a wider group of "common people". Technically many of the engineering pros on this forum may still understand some advantages of HD But in the real world ........... PERCEPTION BECOMES REALITY. The PERCEIVED differences in PRO TOOLS has been erased and now the HD folks not only feel "not so unique any more" ..... but also possibly threatened professionally by the possible lost of business they may experience.

Preference options?, I guess Snap setting is about it. The way the video was demonstrated I felt it was most suited workflow for PT, as for SONAR I think it's important to trim the start and ends first (with the correct snap settings) before proceeding with anything else. Then trying to get back to the original position should not be that difficult.

the functionality of the higher end PT has now been opened up to a wider group of "common people".

Now try to place that audio back where it just came from.
There isn't a easy method.

vicsant


Undo/redo history?

Just go back 3 months - if anyone had said to you, " I reckon AVID are going to massivly increase the functionality of LE -plus- give it ADC -plus- make it fully Native ..... " your guts would have been sore from laughing

Living Room Rocker

Lanceindastudio


No need to bash pro tools. It is a very nice product. Thing, is Sonar is too, and at a much lower cost for more under the hood.

Sony guts.

Rain

That's why I don't see this move by Avid as particularly game-changing. Back when everyone used tape, people went to studios because of other resources, including talent (of the engineer). Those other resources (good rooms, good mics, etc.) and talent will still matter.

Judging from what I hear these days, unfortunately, I'm not so sure. 


Studio acoustics aren't exactly at the forefront of the musical scene at the moment. When you finally happen to stumble upon a real drummer recorded in a real studio, it seems that 90% of his timing has been quantized/adjusted and the actual sound has either been either beefed up or replaced with samples. As a matter of fact, listening to some of my old favorites, I realize how much my hearing has been conditioned during the last few years. It all seem so sloppy...


Just look how much time and money developers put into emulating equipment of the past decade - and completely miss the target because it wasn't just equipment... Jimmy Page used a tiny amp he found in the studio hallway to record Since I've Been Loving You... 


David Glimour plugged straight into the desk for that beautiful lead in the intro on Wish You Were Here. Plugging into the desk wasn't glamorous back then - kids didn't go "wow, listen to that classic british console sound dude"... No one but geeky engineers cared about that stuff back then.

It's been a week today - Shine on you crazy diamond by Pink Floyd (though I'm not a Pink Floyd fanatic) has been looping in my head. Eating my breakfast this morning it struck me - why don't people write such music these days? Well, band don't jam, don't live the music - they exchange files over the internet, and go for the sound - trying to emulate that.


Poorly recorded good songs will always rule over pristine quality poor music.  Hey Jude will always get people to sing along, whether its on Youtube or from a worn out vinyl or a remastered CD. I'm not sure people will even remember any of the current top ten songs on iTunes right now just 2 months from now.
 
 
 
 
 

rhythminmind

 Try this for yourself.

1. Import 2 tracks with different content
2. Trim the start & end points of both tracks equally.
3. Now trim only one of the tracks & slide it somewhere.
4. Now try to place that audio back where it just came from.

There isn't a easy method.  Oh but we will be getting skylight in X1, It's just bizarre.=) 

I'm not sure in reference to your other points, but with regards to your 4 steps above, you can easily do by - right click - "revert clip(s) to original time stamp".

Resonant Order

Just go back 3 months - if anyone had said to you, " I reckon AVID are going to massivly increase the functionality of LE -plus- give it ADC -plus- make it fully Native ..... " your guts would have been sore from laughing

Actually, there are beta testers for PT9 that have been discouraging people from buying PT8 for the last four months on a few different forums.

PT will never support VST. Ever.

timboe


" ...... PT will never support VST. Ever. ...... "

Hmmmmmm .... what about:-

" There will never be a Native Version of PT "

" ADC will only ever be in the flagship version "

My point is that the old paradigms are changing very fast.  Usually, history is the best indicator of  the future ....... in the current DAW market however,  this is no longer the case.

tim

eratu

 Re: PT VST support: On the other hand, if Pro Tools never supports VST, that's probably fine too -- most of the major plugin developers already support RTAS -- let's face it, it's a huge market, and a market that is used to people paying money for plugins. I went through my plugin library and 75%+ of the plugins I own have RTAS support already, including ones I didn't think would. And 90%+ of all my *favorite* plugins are already RTAS. A big standout is Camel Audio, for example, which does not support RTAS yet. However, I just found an announcement on their website that says they too are working on RTAS support for Alchemy. So, this may be a non-issue for a large majority of people. 

Personally, I can see a strong case for them NOT to support VST. If they just stick with RTAS, with most of the major players already on board... it lends itself to a more stable environment. Rather than try to support all the myriad of VST developers and the endless subtle issues VST plugins have with hosts, they can just force developers to develop for RTAS, which puts the onus on the developer to make sure their plugins work for PT. It also ensures that every developer has PT on hand to develop for and support... So it's a rather compelling case for Avid to avoid VST altogether. Also, when the transition to x64 does eventually happen, I think it lends itself to a more orderly, rapid move for RTAS plugin developers. They'll only have one host to test for, plenty of warning if they're also on the PT beta team, and one large market that will move en masse when Avid says they should. ;)

Additionally, there are numerous excellent RTAS plugins out there with no VST version that I know of, including -- off the top of my head -- Avid's own AIR plugins (some of their VI's are really quite good) and the excellent McDSP plugins.