Pro Tools - I found the fatal flaw
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Yes, yes we do.
-
- KVRAF
- 9600 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
I have this weird preconception that your host take care of the routing and making as many mixer channels as there is outs on the VSTi automatically.
Maybe that's just me.
Seriously i've tried Tracktion and it just did'nt suit me.Old kind of fella can't take the mixing board being the wrong way around.
Maybe that's just me.
Seriously i've tried Tracktion and it just did'nt suit me.Old kind of fella can't take the mixing board being the wrong way around.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Tracktion DOES take care of its routing automatically. Just in a different way.
Since multi-outs aren't on every track, anyhow, even if the argument could be made that Cubase deals with multi-out more easily (heck, I'll buy it, just for the sake of argument) I'd ultimately rather the "drop in place then drag around" system of insert effects (in Tracktion, taking racks out of the picture entirely) that 95% of other tracks use, as opposed to Cubase's very limited and archaic system.
Racks are just an option, and if it's not one you prefer, there are other ways to skin the cat. Including using Cubase instead.
Greg
Just in a different way.Since multi-outs aren't on every track, anyhow, even if the argument could be made that Cubase deals with multi-out more easily (heck, I'll buy it, just for the sake of argument) I'd ultimately rather the "drop in place then drag around" system of insert effects (in Tracktion, taking racks out of the picture entirely) that 95% of other tracks use, as opposed to Cubase's very limited and archaic system.
Racks are just an option, and if it's not one you prefer, there are other ways to skin the cat. Including using Cubase instead.
Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
And gives you little choice in the matter..jupiter8 wrote:I have this weird preconception that your host take care of the routing and making as many mixer channels as there is outs on the VSTi automatically.
.. doing it my way I get my host to set up all the routing and all the "mixer channels", with exactly my choice of processing ready loaded up with with suitable presets, AND I can adjust the levels of the whole kit within a mix without even having to bother to sub-group them first.. all I have to do is load up a rack preset.
-
- Tunesmith
- 2889 posts since 12 Mar, 2002 from Toronto
Right well Ableton is totally different than Pro Tools. There's not even any video support in Live is there? Anyways about your CPU problems you might want to try the version 7 upgrade. I've found it runs much smoother but you might have some issues doing the upgrade though(stuff i've read around the interweb).RawTheory wrote:All hail Abelton!:party: ....ProTools is over rated.
-
- KVRAF
- 26989 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
hoffy wrote:Ok, obviously i meant realtime as opposed to offline... excuse the typing error.
In any case, my statement wasn't an "argument", it was an opinion. I like that there is no offline rendering when it's time for the final mix. For bouncing tracks, it is a pain in the ass, but what the f**k, if you've got a decent computer you shouldn't need to be bouncing all that much during composition. And if you're using a mixer, and processing hardware in real-time, you couldn't use it anyway. So for all the poor sods writing sub-standard glitch-ambient-bullshit with their freeware SE garbage, i'm sure there's other hosts to cater for your needs
As for the rest of the logic being "iffy"... the main point is that offline rendering may compromise the quality of the outputed file.
"Iffy"..? What's "iffy" is that anyone could question Digidesign's logic, given they have created the most succesful music application anyone has ever seen, which is responsible for godknows how many amazing albums we've all listened to.
That does not make it the best tool for the casual or home user. It is okay to set certain standards for the studio. For example, get better equipment if you run into cpu issues is reasonable to demand of a studio, but not all users. Being unwilling to put in a feature that helps people on a budget and or who may not care about that .00001% means that it might well be a fatal flaw for those potential users.
If making sure there are not tools that users could apply which degrade the audio is of primary importance, then many tools would not be there. Time stretch definately degrades audio. Take it out and just tell studios to rerecord at the correct pitch or tempo. Afterall, it degrades the sound far more than .00001%
Digidesign can do what it wants with its software, and users will respond with whether they like it or not. The original poster said it was a fatal flaw for him, and so it is and all the rationalization doesn't change that for him, nor make it so for everyone else.
-
- KVRAF
- 10815 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from UK
dont you just love that afro on earl's.. umm i mean crabman's sonmultree wrote: "hey crabman" "hey earl"
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Heh, yeah. The whole show is great. Only occasionally do I think it could be better.djsubject wrote:dont you just love that afro on earl's.. umm i mean crabman's sonmultree wrote: "hey crabman" "hey earl"
Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 8730 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
Yeah, that's a definite advantage Tracktion has. A feature that Cubase sorely misses IMO...who knows..maybe in SX v4(in Tracktion, taking racks out of the picture entirely) that 95% of other tracks use, as opposed to Cubase's very limited and archaic system.
