Simple question - does Uniwire work under ProTools?
-
- KVRian
- 691 posts since 13 May, 2004 from Silicon Valley
Hi Todd,
The simple answer is 'not yet for UniWire 1.1'.
UniWire 1.1 supports VST and AU. FXPansion VST2RTAS wrapper over UniWire-VST does not work.
Regards,
Kevin L
The simple answer is 'not yet for UniWire 1.1'.
UniWire 1.1 supports VST and AU. FXPansion VST2RTAS wrapper over UniWire-VST does not work.
Regards,
Kevin L
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 64 posts since 31 Dec, 2006 from California
Thanks, Kevin. Okay so here is the follow-up question. I want to start getting into audio recording. I know Pro-Tools is a standard. I also own Home Studio and have the option of upgrading to Sonar for a pretty good price.
I can hold out a bit for Uniwire with RTAS but I can't wait forever. On the other hand, I don't want to go ahead with Sonar today and find out that Pro-Tools will work in the near future.
What would you do?
I can hold out a bit for Uniwire with RTAS but I can't wait forever. On the other hand, I don't want to go ahead with Sonar today and find out that Pro-Tools will work in the near future.
What would you do?
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world then the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - N. Peart
-
- KVRian
- 691 posts since 13 May, 2004 from Silicon Valley
Hi Todd,
Let's see, W.W.K.D? (What would Kevin do
). Tough to say, and mostly depends on what is important to you.
If I had no other investment in ProTools, I might consider other options.
If I planned to be doing development in a Home Studio, with the intention of transferring ProTools files to a studio for further development, I'd stick with PT at home (and keep everything in the same format).
If all I ever did were MIDI tracks at home, and budget mattered, I'd probably choose something other than PT.
If I were intending to do mostly Audio recording, and my point of reference was that I was familiar with a mixing desk - I'd choose ProTools.
I have never touched Home-Studio nor Sonar, so I don't really know how they compare. In general though, there are better and more productive environments for developing MIDI tracks than PT -- however PT is getting much better at this.
Budget can play into this decision to. If you intend to work with a PT TDM system, this is an investment that keeps getting more expensive as you upgrade. However, if you don't need TDM.
At a basic level, most of the DAW systems do a good job. There are some differences in the workflow, but you probably can find workarounds for the same task in other DAWs.
An investment in plugins is probably more crucial, and those may determine the platform you work on. Of course, if you've invested in RTAS/TDM, there is nowhere else to go. If you are using VSTi (and AudioUnit on the Mac) you have more options for a DAW - since you can use them in any DAW (or wrap them to be used).
Bottom line - I'd say check-out ProTools Free (I think that's what they call it) - and see if you like the interface before you invest in anything. If you don't like it, then your decision is easier. If you do, and file-compatibility is important to you, go with ProTools.
BTW - I got hooked into PT because I was an engineer at Digi. I've just continued my investment in PT since I left them. I mostly do MIDI work, and I use Digital Performer as a front-end to PT - as well as staying totally in PT.
Hope this mish-mash is of some help. Regards,
Kevin L
Let's see, W.W.K.D? (What would Kevin do
). Tough to say, and mostly depends on what is important to you. If I had no other investment in ProTools, I might consider other options.
If I planned to be doing development in a Home Studio, with the intention of transferring ProTools files to a studio for further development, I'd stick with PT at home (and keep everything in the same format).
If all I ever did were MIDI tracks at home, and budget mattered, I'd probably choose something other than PT.
If I were intending to do mostly Audio recording, and my point of reference was that I was familiar with a mixing desk - I'd choose ProTools.
I have never touched Home-Studio nor Sonar, so I don't really know how they compare. In general though, there are better and more productive environments for developing MIDI tracks than PT -- however PT is getting much better at this.
Budget can play into this decision to. If you intend to work with a PT TDM system, this is an investment that keeps getting more expensive as you upgrade. However, if you don't need TDM.
At a basic level, most of the DAW systems do a good job. There are some differences in the workflow, but you probably can find workarounds for the same task in other DAWs.
An investment in plugins is probably more crucial, and those may determine the platform you work on. Of course, if you've invested in RTAS/TDM, there is nowhere else to go. If you are using VSTi (and AudioUnit on the Mac) you have more options for a DAW - since you can use them in any DAW (or wrap them to be used).
Bottom line - I'd say check-out ProTools Free (I think that's what they call it) - and see if you like the interface before you invest in anything. If you don't like it, then your decision is easier. If you do, and file-compatibility is important to you, go with ProTools.
BTW - I got hooked into PT because I was an engineer at Digi. I've just continued my investment in PT since I left them. I mostly do MIDI work, and I use Digital Performer as a front-end to PT - as well as staying totally in PT.
Hope this mish-mash is of some help. Regards,
Kevin L
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 64 posts since 31 Dec, 2006 from California
Hmmm. All good thoughts but it doesn't make my decision any easier. I am a hobbiest. I will never be a pro. The extent of my recording will be myself in my home studio (audio and MIDI) and possibly my band. I have Home Studio 2004 and can upgrade to Sonar 6 Studio for $149.00 if I do it before June 30. This is a great deal. PT M-powered is $249.00.
The only reason I consider PT is that I know it's a standard and if I go to someone's house or my band potentially rents a studio to record some stuff for fun, I think I am more likely to run into PT.
Craig Anderton is a big endorser of Sonar and based upon my reading of a lot of his stuff, I think he knows what he's talking about.
So....where does this leave me? Don't know.
Uh Boy....
The only reason I consider PT is that I know it's a standard and if I go to someone's house or my band potentially rents a studio to record some stuff for fun, I think I am more likely to run into PT.
Craig Anderton is a big endorser of Sonar and based upon my reading of a lot of his stuff, I think he knows what he's talking about.
So....where does this leave me? Don't know.
Uh Boy....
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world then the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - N. Peart
-
- KVRian
- 691 posts since 13 May, 2004 from Silicon Valley
Hi again,
Given what you said, if Sonar supports VSTi (it should), and you don't have a need for file compatibility, then Sonar might look like a better option. Again, I would recommend trying out PTFree (if it is still around) to see if you like that interface.
If Sonar has VSTi ability, you have a Uniwire solution that works today. That's pretty compelling.
I would recommend you make your choice based on the interface you feel you could be the most productive in.
Hope that helps a little,
Regards,
Kevin L
Given what you said, if Sonar supports VSTi (it should), and you don't have a need for file compatibility, then Sonar might look like a better option. Again, I would recommend trying out PTFree (if it is still around) to see if you like that interface.
If Sonar has VSTi ability, you have a Uniwire solution that works today. That's pretty compelling.
I would recommend you make your choice based on the interface you feel you could be the most productive in.
Hope that helps a little,
Regards,
Kevin L
-
- KVRist
- 106 posts since 1 Jun, 2004
From my experience, holding off doing anything because you're waiting around for something to get released has never panned out .. especially software. I waited YEARS for native instruments to release OSX RTAS versions of B4 and absynth. Everytime the release date came up, it was pushed out 3 months. End result? I traded my digi002 for a pair of studio monitors and went with Digital Performer .. because it did everything I needed and the stuff I bought already WORKED (well, the AU versions)! I *thought* that because my recording buddy has a full TDM, I could work on files at home, bring them in, etc. etc., and it was never as seemless as I envisioned.
As a hobbiest/semi-pro, I tried the PT road, and had to back track. Haven't looked back since, and it hasn't prevented me from doing anything.
And btw, what a PITA to contact all those companies I bought RTAS versions from and ask/beg/plead/buy VSTi/AU versions. Some were no problem, others ...
As a hobbiest/semi-pro, I tried the PT road, and had to back track. Haven't looked back since, and it hasn't prevented me from doing anything.
And btw, what a PITA to contact all those companies I bought RTAS versions from and ask/beg/plead/buy VSTi/AU versions. Some were no problem, others ...
-
- KVRian
- 1116 posts since 22 Apr, 2005 from Nashville, TN USA
I'll chime in there because I am a LONG TIME Sonar use (since Cakewalk for Windows 1.0 in the 80's!) and an avid receptorite.
On Dual-core machines there are issues (and not JUST with Sonar) that force you to use only once instance of Uniwire, instead of an instance per track. In practice, this is not really a problem.
However, my experiences with Uniwire have left me ALWAYS reverting to using the MIDI in's on Receptor and the Digital Outs to get things back in. The reason is simple: LATENCY. With Uniwire, the latency when playing/composing will ALWAYS be double what that same plug would be hosted in Sonar (or whatever DAW). I keep my latency at about 6ms, which is plenty fine for everything to me, even drums. However, put Uniwire in the picture and 12ms is NOT fine for me for Piano and Drums, acceptable for synth pads perhaps where tight timing not crucial.
Yes, Uniwire with Sonar give you full "delay compensation" if you turn it on. But this simply means your playback timing is DIFFERENT from your recording timing, and this can be bad.
the other thing about Uniwire is that there is no "fast freeze" (offline rendering) like when you host a plug in the DAW...so what does Uniwire REALLY buy you? ..just less cables. Ethernet takes the place of MIDI and Audio (digital audio in my case meaning 2 for SPDIF and 1 more for ADAT) cables. But without fast freeze, you end up having to record to digital audio in REAL TIME when you are in the mixing stage (assuming you want everything recorded to audio tracks eventually, which most people do), and you have to do this one stereo track at a time with one instance of Uniwire. Using the SPDIF and ADAT together with the appropriate soundcard/IF you can record 5 stereo tracks to the DAW from Receptor in one pass. And of course even prior to this you can process these digital ins in the DAW separately and use hosted effects sends. Bottom line, with Uniwire you get ONE stereo in and too much latency (for me) to PLAY the receptor in real time as you compose/record.
As always, your mileage may vary
oh, and to your protools question....Yes PT is getting BETTER for MIDI, but Sonar and Cubase are still far ahead. That sonar6 upgrade price is a STEAL; I would do it if I were you. I'm assuming you like Home Studio and are comfortable with the workflow.
I, too, and mostly a hobbyist so I don't worry too much that PT is the "standard" and Sonar/Cubase/Tracktion/Reaper/XT2 are not.
good luck and have fun!
On Dual-core machines there are issues (and not JUST with Sonar) that force you to use only once instance of Uniwire, instead of an instance per track. In practice, this is not really a problem.
However, my experiences with Uniwire have left me ALWAYS reverting to using the MIDI in's on Receptor and the Digital Outs to get things back in. The reason is simple: LATENCY. With Uniwire, the latency when playing/composing will ALWAYS be double what that same plug would be hosted in Sonar (or whatever DAW). I keep my latency at about 6ms, which is plenty fine for everything to me, even drums. However, put Uniwire in the picture and 12ms is NOT fine for me for Piano and Drums, acceptable for synth pads perhaps where tight timing not crucial.
Yes, Uniwire with Sonar give you full "delay compensation" if you turn it on. But this simply means your playback timing is DIFFERENT from your recording timing, and this can be bad.
the other thing about Uniwire is that there is no "fast freeze" (offline rendering) like when you host a plug in the DAW...so what does Uniwire REALLY buy you? ..just less cables. Ethernet takes the place of MIDI and Audio (digital audio in my case meaning 2 for SPDIF and 1 more for ADAT) cables. But without fast freeze, you end up having to record to digital audio in REAL TIME when you are in the mixing stage (assuming you want everything recorded to audio tracks eventually, which most people do), and you have to do this one stereo track at a time with one instance of Uniwire. Using the SPDIF and ADAT together with the appropriate soundcard/IF you can record 5 stereo tracks to the DAW from Receptor in one pass. And of course even prior to this you can process these digital ins in the DAW separately and use hosted effects sends. Bottom line, with Uniwire you get ONE stereo in and too much latency (for me) to PLAY the receptor in real time as you compose/record.
As always, your mileage may vary
oh, and to your protools question....Yes PT is getting BETTER for MIDI, but Sonar and Cubase are still far ahead. That sonar6 upgrade price is a STEAL; I would do it if I were you. I'm assuming you like Home Studio and are comfortable with the workflow.
I, too, and mostly a hobbyist so I don't worry too much that PT is the "standard" and Sonar/Cubase/Tracktion/Reaper/XT2 are not.
good luck and have fun!
Last edited by Hybernation on Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRian
- 538 posts since 7 Apr, 2007 from Melbourne, Australia
Of course, if your mainly going to be using Receptor as an instrument rather than as an FX unit then Uniwire support isnt really a big issue. Just use it like you would an external sampler and hook up the MIDI and audio outs to PT so that you can record both MIDI and/or audio depending on your preference. The added bonus is that you dont get the extra latency introduced by using Uniwire. I dont really see the point of running Receptor as a plugin (at least for my needs). I actually use Cubase 4 and i tried Uniwire and honestly i found it rather unreliable and slow. I get much better results using it in this way. Also if you do want to use the Receptor as an FX unit there's no reason why you couldnt just implement it in as an FX send the way you would with any other hardware FX unit.
Regards,
james
Regards,
james
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 64 posts since 31 Dec, 2006 from California
To me the elimination of wires wasn't enough to offset the fact that I would prefer to learn the standard and latency issues. I purchased PT M-Powered from an authorized online etailer for $225.
Thanks for all the feedback.
Thanks for all the feedback.
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world then the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - N. Peart
-
Bryan@MuseResearch Bryan@MuseResearch https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=9067
- MUSEician
- 618 posts since 18 Sep, 2003 from Silicon Valley
You'll all be pleased to know that we have a resource assigned to UniWire improvements this summer, including RTAS support as a prime goal.
The problem would be made much easier if Digi would provide us with some engineering support, but they have made it clear that they have no interest in having Receptor work with Pro Tools... I leave you to make your own conclusions about what that means!
An interesting observation is that a lot of Pro Tools / Receptor owners are preferring to use Receptor in its standalone mode since that provides the lowest latency when tracking. To be honest, if you can deal with the I/O of Receptor and don't need the 32 outputs that UniWire can provide, using Receptor as a MIDI module with your Pro Tools rig is still a fairly workable solution (I'm not a Pro Tools user though, so some of you may have differing opinions about the feasibility of this).
So... with fingers and toes crossed, there should be some good news in the Fall!
Cheers
Groovology
The problem would be made much easier if Digi would provide us with some engineering support, but they have made it clear that they have no interest in having Receptor work with Pro Tools... I leave you to make your own conclusions about what that means!
An interesting observation is that a lot of Pro Tools / Receptor owners are preferring to use Receptor in its standalone mode since that provides the lowest latency when tracking. To be honest, if you can deal with the I/O of Receptor and don't need the 32 outputs that UniWire can provide, using Receptor as a MIDI module with your Pro Tools rig is still a fairly workable solution (I'm not a Pro Tools user though, so some of you may have differing opinions about the feasibility of this).
So... with fingers and toes crossed, there should be some good news in the Fall!
Cheers
Groovology
-
- KVRian
- 691 posts since 13 May, 2004 from Silicon Valley
Glad to hear this Brian!
Thanks for the note,
Kevin L
Thanks for the note,
Kevin L
-
- KVRist
- 96 posts since 2 May, 2004 from USA
im using Receptor with the VST-2-RTAS adapter.
works the same as the VSt Au versions.
I have a work around that I posted on the FXpansion website to get it to work with the new Intel 10.4.x MACs
works the same as the VSt Au versions.
I have a work around that I posted on the FXpansion website to get it to work with the new Intel 10.4.x MACs
myspace.com/bekenone
-
- KVRian
- 691 posts since 13 May, 2004 from Silicon Valley
Interesting, bekenone.
I could not successfully wrap uniwire 1.1 - for me, this was on a G5 mac (possibly that is the difference).
Regards,
Kevin L
I could not successfully wrap uniwire 1.1 - for me, this was on a G5 mac (possibly that is the difference).
Regards,
Kevin L
-
- KVRist
- 96 posts since 2 May, 2004 from USA
[quote="looneytunes"]Interesting, bekenone.
I could not successfully wrap uniwire 1.1 - for me, this was on a G5 mac (possibly that is the difference).
Regards,
Kevin L[/quote]
its a permissions problem which I posted a while back on the FXpansion website...but I'm a im patiant UNIX a$$hole...so i found it.
change the permissions on the file:
/Library/Application\ Support/com.fxpansion.fxshared.bundle
dont "chmod" these, right click on the file "get info".
change to "read-write" on all four.
and click the button that says "apply to enclosed items".
then right click, "show package contents" and do the same to "contents".
your done.
now rerun the app.
BEKEN ONE
I could not successfully wrap uniwire 1.1 - for me, this was on a G5 mac (possibly that is the difference).
Regards,
Kevin L[/quote]
its a permissions problem which I posted a while back on the FXpansion website...but I'm a im patiant UNIX a$$hole...so i found it.
change the permissions on the file:
/Library/Application\ Support/com.fxpansion.fxshared.bundle
dont "chmod" these, right click on the file "get info".
change to "read-write" on all four.
and click the button that says "apply to enclosed items".
then right click, "show package contents" and do the same to "contents".
your done.
now rerun the app.
BEKEN ONE
Last edited by bekenone on Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
myspace.com/bekenone