Pro Tools 10 is here

[Fixed Error]

re: the "pt sucks 'cause it can't...." crowd, set up 30 inputs with perhaps a few eq's/compressors inserted, and create a no-latency monitoring chain with at least 5 different effect variants to route to whichever appropriate monitoring channels, while guaranteeing at least x number of effects per channel for the other 100 tracks of the mix that's already recorded (along with outboard gear inserted). those are the reasons that pt is the "industry standard". for those users, if you can't do those day-to-day basics, any other features are virtually irrelevant. so for those users, daw x is useless, in the same way that for other users, not being able to manipulate loops or patterns is an automatic non-starter.
the "industry" is moving more toward the cottage, and so just about any daw would work for most purposes. the fact that cpu has improved to the point that you can finally do "real" mixes in the box AT ALL is really pretty staggering, but ssl's still selling $500k consoles, so "big" users are still out there, and someone needs to cater to them.

k

I do this almost every day at work with Cubase and a UAD system. Pro Tools TDM was a good system in the past but we now have better alternatives. Outside of the TDM system, Pro Tools does not offer any particular routing configurations or streamlining of resources that puts it ahead of the others. The reason that Pro Tools in "industry standard" is because it was one of the first out there in hard-disk recording to offer something useable. But its development has been lacking in recent years and it relies too much on its heritage to get it over the line. People are starting to take it to account, especially given the absurd costs of their hardware. Still, I'll always get idiot bands in who ask "Whats a Cubase?". I think it is more clever marketing than anything that has put Pro Tools where it is today.

Jim

[LawrenceF]

...it isn't really aimed at the music producing crowd. PT 10 is clearly aimed at Post if you understand the feature set and hardware offerings.

Life goes on and S1/2 is looking better and better

PT Bowling Leauge membership revoked!

PT 10 looks pretty cool. I think the post crowd will have small boners.

[koolkeys]

While I agree that PT stays relevant because of it's name, I disagree that it's the only reason. Most engineers I know who use it do so because they prefer it, not just because they have to. It's a fully capable host with plenty of great features, and if you're doing post work, or integrating with others who do, it's a huge benefit to have PT.

It's not the most cutting edge host around, but it IS a good host, and that's not just marketing. As for development lacking lately, I disagree partially. The version 8 update, for instance, was a HUGE one that added tons of great things to it. 9 was all about setting it free. 10 is about the post crowd. 11 is about getting "current". So it seems to be a focus cycle, and each group of people has to wait for "their turn", it seems.

Brent

[LawrenceF]

It's "fall release time".

Vegas 11 just came out also. The new title thingy looks pretty slick.

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/vegaspro

[dgkenney]

PT 10 looks pretty cool. I think the post crowd will have small boners.

That's cause they sit in the dark by themselves too much. They should get out more and meet girls

Dan

[Fixed Error]

It's not the most cutting edge host around, but it IS a good host, and that's not just marketing. As for development lacking lately, I disagree partially. The version 8 update, for instance, was a HUGE one that added tons of great things to it. 9 was all about setting it free. 10 is about the post crowd. 11 is about getting "current". So it seems to be a focus cycle, and each group of people has to wait for "their turn", it seems.

Brent

How do you know what Pro Tools 11 is about when 10 has just been released?? I disagree, Pro Tools keeps incrementally adding features that other DAWs have already implemented well in advance. It is constantly playing cathcup. Certainly, it is great for post, but a big part of that is because its already entrenched in the studios and it makes things collaborating more compatible. I have worked on Pro Tools and Nuendo in the Post environment and I must say, personally, Nuendo was a much more intuitive and powerful prgram to use.

Jim

[kelldammit]

I do this almost every day at work with Cubase and a UAD system.

That is IMPRESSIVE! The monitoring send effects are coming from within cubase? If so, amazing. But...you're still using external dsp (UAD). Just give up now and buy HD. From what I hear, you can probably pick up a used one on the cheap pretty soon

Pro Tools TDM was a good system in the past but we now have better alternatives. Outside of the TDM system, Pro Tools does not offer any particular routing configurations or streamlining of resources that puts it ahead of the others. The reason that Pro Tools in "industry standard" is because it was one of the first out there in hard-disk recording to offer something useable.<snip>

The tdm systems are precisely what i was referring to. Until VERY recently, the dsp mixer in tdm was what made PT the ONLY "useable" system for larger-scale users. Hence, its adoption. These days, there are other systems that offer similar dsp for monitoring w/effects (metric halo and motu come to mind), and at significantly lower cost. In either case, though, that capability comes from 3rd party dsp. If you throw a lookahead compressor on a channel in a native system, you throw a curveball into "unnoticeable" latency for monitoring effects because of the way the latency compensation schemes work. Some players are REALLY picky about that.

But its development has been lacking in recent years and it relies too much on its heritage to get it over the line.
People are starting to take it to account, especially given the absurd costs of their hardware. Still, I'll always get idiot bands in who in who ask "Whats a Cubase?". I think it is more clever marketing than anything that has put Pro Tools where it is today.
Jim

That, I'll buy, especially for someone just starting out now. I'd say "...has KEPT PT where it is today.", rather than "...has put..."
Largely (and ironically enough), the need for compatibility with their hardware has really ended up hobbling them for at least some things (like automatic latency compensation), but they've been playing catch-up since virtually day one. When I started out, most were front-ending their PT hardware with logic or dp, because they could both handle audio AND midi. The pt software was the domain of geeky audio editors. They've come a long way, but still have a ways to go to hit feature-per-dollar parity with a lot of the competition, imo. I think v10 will be a no-go for many, and I guess we'll see how v11 shakes out.

k

[koolkeys]

It's not the most cutting edge host around, but it IS a good host, and that's not just marketing. As for development lacking lately, I disagree partially. The version 8 update, for instance, was a HUGE one that added tons of great things to it. 9 was all about setting it free. 10 is about the post crowd. 11 is about getting "current". So it seems to be a focus cycle, and each group of people has to wait for "their turn", it seems.

Brent

How do you know what Pro Tools 11 is about when 10 has just been released?? I disagree, Pro Tools keeps incrementally adding features that other DAWs have already implemented well in advance. It is constantly playing cathcup. Certainly, it is great for post, but a big part of that is because its already entrenched in the studios and it makes things collaborating more compatible. I have worked on Pro Tools and Nuendo in the Post environment and I must say, personally, Nuendo was a much more intuitive and powerful prgram to use.

Jim

I don't know what 11 will bring, but was just giving an example of how the updates cycle. PT 11 is going to be 64-bit according to Avid, so I called it the "getting current" update.

You think PT is playing catch up, but you are leaving behind the perspective to realize that until fairly recently, the vast majority of PT users didn't NEED all the bells and whistles of other hosts. It was more about the hardware integration and other things. Then they jumped into the "non big studio" market, and they have made huge progress in the past few updates.

They are playing catchup merely because they joined a new segment of the market. Though I will say that PT had many things before anyone else did, such as inline MIDI, the advanced track list and region management, inline transient editing, etc. Then they added a huge amount of features in version 8 like much improved MIDI(which can rival most hosts out there), notation built from Sibelius, great comping, etc. Nothing I would call incremental. Then they spent an update taking away many restrictions and opening it up to all hardware, etc. That was a necessary step to take.

Nobody is saying it's perfect, or that it's better than whatever host you use. Nobody is saying that PT is revolutionizing the host industry. But it is a viable and powerful host that isn't just "catching up". I know it's hard to put the anti-PT bias aside to see the trees through the forest, but I think if you really LOOK at how much progress they have had jumping into a new market segment, it's been large. And many people would argue that it's editing speed is second to none(everyone is different).

With that being said, as I said above, I'm underwhelmed by this update. It's too little for too much. I hope that the next update has more to offer. Until then, PT9 is still great for what I use it for. It's not my main host, not even in the top two or three. But it's definitely capable, IMO.

Brent

[dgkenney]

I know it's hard to put the anti-PT bias aside

Why bother. It's only used in the commercial world cause it was there first. Everyone is moving to Cubase and UAD as a middle ground before jumping to Reaper.

I know that's true cause I read it on kvr.

Dan

[LawrenceF]

I know it's hard to put the anti-PT bias aside

Why bother. It's only used in the commercial world cause it was there first. Everyone is moving to Cubase and UAD as a middle ground before jumping to Reaper.

Dan

I think PTHD is pretty cool personally. I wouldn't choose it for myself for various reasons but that certainly doesn't mean others shouldn't love it.

It gets the work done, that's for sure.

[koolkeys]

I know it's hard to put the anti-PT bias aside

Why bother. It's only used in the commercial world cause it was there first. Everyone is moving to Cubase and UAD as a middle ground before jumping to Reaper.

Dan

Oh, I forgot. Silly me.

Brent

[jancivil]

...but seriously, how DO all those "pros" get around the ram limitations?...

Some either use Reaper rewired or Vienna Ensemble Pro for plugin hosting.

Some go so far as to use actual musicians

Dan

I'd love to be rich enough to pay people scale to f**k my music up!

[LawrenceF]

Some go so far as to use actual musicians

Heresy!

BTW... how much RAM does a drummer need?

[cryophonik]

BTW... how much RAM does a drummer need?

Rapid Arm Movement?

[cryophonik]

I wish PT was 64-bit, but I completely disagree about it not being for MIDI. The PT MIDI is actually extremely capable and is actually full-featured. Honestly, I look at it as one of the top three overall, both feature-wise and usability-wise. It's amazingly powerful.

I totally agree with all of this, Brent. As for PT10, I was underwhelmed at first, but *sorta* warming up to the idea. I would like to have the new audio editing features, particularly because I am used to using them in other hosts (yes, PT playing catchup, I know). And, the new channel strip looks nice. The only thing I'm not warming up to is the upgrade price. PT10 seems to me like it is stuck in no-man's land between an update and a new version. I'll probably just stick with PT9 for now and either hope for a better upgrade price or hold off for PT11.