Hi all!
 
 
Reading statements on this thread that Pro Tools work fine and don’t need x64bit, can load all session in RAM, server-mode or whatever, I just plain nonsenses. It only tells that some people don’t know what they talk about or don’t understand in the end how this work. 3.4G / 4GB RAM is the physical limit for any 32bit software even for those that drunk the AVID kool aid. Add to think you are PRO because you use the yesterday’s DAW-software, making it not exactly better. We all have seen all the videos on “You tube” making yourself look like a fool, talking about how “pro” that is and you are and you don’t know what's next…later on add that you are using Pro Tools LE making it not seem any better.

 
No, there nothing better to use Pro Tools HD/LE that you can’t do with the rest of DAW's.
In fact all other DAWs like SONAR, Cubase, Nuendo, Studio One, Logic Pro, Samplitude, Sequoia, and Reaper do support x64bit already and all are 10-times more sophisticated than any Pro Tools version so far.
Haven’t we all heard it before: ”Pro Tools going to be x64bit soon”…yeah…like that ever going to happen. I won’t hold my breath for sure. Even if Pro Tools were x64 there are still nothing on AVID “Pro Tools” platform that excited me. 
 

They only thing AVID keep doing, in a result of not have the ability to present any good on the table themselves; are trying to buy anything good out there in the “music technology business”. Last were Euphonix what’s next, Roland SONAR? They sure need more help then ever to update that old wagon named Pro Tools.
   
 

64 Bit is not a pre requisite for creating and producing good music. We all know that I dare say more hits have been produced on Pro Tools than anything else. In the end it is good music over bad music that sounds better and the importance of 32 bit vs 64 bit becomes very insignificant. You certainly can create excellent and amazing sounding music in PT. Any limitations are in the hands of the user remember. All the AAX plugs are great and cover every base pretty well too. Pro Tools can and does excell in certain areas like all programs that are weak in others. It handles certain things in a certain way  better than other DAW's too.

People who say Pro Tools is bad are only demonstrating to me they don't know very much about the program. And it is obvious they don't use on a regular basis. If they did they would be less inclined to make silly statements. After having done 3 Avid courses now on that version 10 (part of teacher training) it becomes very clear that the program is in fact very very deep and complex and capable.

Other DAW's are definitely not 10 times better as some may claim. That is a gross over statement and needs to be pointed out. I was not a PT fan before doing the courses but it changed my mind after a bit. They even gave us a copy of the software. I do not use PT as my main DAW, instead I use Studio One now and interesting right at the moment I am using and teaching Logic 9, Pro Tools 10, and using Sonar (8.5 and HS7) and Studio One Pro 2 at home a lot. Out of all of them I am finding Studio One the easiest to use.

But Avid stuff is expensive and by the time you shell out a lot of money you only have the equivalent of other DAW's that have sold you the same or better features for much less. If you are prepared to spend then it might be OK for you. 3 of those HD cards ($10,500 extra!) running in the fastest Mac is a serious setup that  performs seriously well. Like 780 tracks with instruments and processing plugins everywhere all playing without a hitch. Very low latency as well. But all at a very high cost.

Other software developers are offering a lot for a lot less and that is where they are winning out. Avid have to get on board with much better pricing if they are going to seriously compete.

I'm only on my second night of working with the Pro Tools 10 thirty day trial.   I've got to admit that there hasn't been anything to my my socks run up and down my legs. There's some nice features I like. 

The i/o setup is much better than SONAR's and should be immediately ripped off. 
The included plugins are more graphically appealing to me.  They seem to do a good job.

The Mix view is just as bad (to me) as SONAR's.  In fact it may be worse.
The shortcut keys are definitely not Windows-centric.  They remind me a bit of Reaper's.

I've got plenty of time to make a decision whether to make the committment but I'm not seeing much benefit to me at the present once I get past the "I've got PT too" argument.

I am not sure if they supplied the demo projects with the 30 trial but if not, get to guitar center this weekend. Some of the stores are giving Protools workshops for free and they will give you the project files. Run those up on your system and tell me what you think of the reverbs and delays in PT. I personally think they are substantially better than the VST counterparts and overall RTAS, to me sounds better. Sonically I think it produces output which is more clear with a smoother high end. The basic tools that come with the product also seem to provide a wider array of audio control choices.

I don't use mix view but if that is your mode of working and it sucks, that is a valid reason not to go there. Personally I like the way you can shrink down the tracks in PT and get access to a wider array of the mix components in the track view. Very clean and accessible versus Sonar X1.

But that said, Sonar is miles ahead on interoperability with the soundcard, drivers and tuning for performance. That is a major pain in PT and is more voodoo than functional.  Also the routing in PT although more flexible is challenging to grasp and Sonar is much more straight forward for beginner to intermediate DAW users.