I haven't heard those new interfaces, but I'll bet my left testicle that they don't sound that great. Look at the ridiculous cheap price for them. Who are they selling to? Pros, or amateurs with no money?
You think so? Really? I was sure these sub $300 interfaces were meant to compete with $4,000 worth of mic pres and converters in a high end pro rack.
Thanks for clearing that up. The nerve of anyone making products for that market.
ProTools is still the industry standard, and with good reason. Nothing comes close, and Avid's business model has been great - making Protools run on non-Avid hardware was a fantastic move (previously you had to have Avid hardware plugged in to run it).
This update is really all about 64-bit support and integrating video a lot better, finally. I hoped that Avid's purchase of Sibelius and Digidesign would have created an Adobe CS-style video/recording/notation suite by now, but this is a step in the right direction.
I don't have giant track counts, so 64-bit support is not so important for me, so i'll probably wait until ProTools 12, but i'm sure there are a lot of studios that will be making the upgrade. I just hope they keep supporting 11 for a couple more OSX upgrades.
M-Audio is no longer owned by Avid it was sold in mid 2012 to inMusic who also own Akai, Alesis and Numark.
I must have missed that news, but thanks for the correction, as accuracy and facts are what is important.
In that case, I think that Avid made a smart move by dumping the M-Audio brand. I basically associate M-Audio with cheap crap, and I don't think that I'm the only one.
I don't have giant track counts, so 64-bit support is not so important for me, so i'll probably wait until ProTools 12, but i'm sure there are a lot of studios that will be making the upgrade. I just hope they keep supporting 11 for a couple more OSX upgrades.
64 bit support is not just about the track count. It also has to do with RAM implementation.
Even if you're only using 2 tracks and running a heavy duty plugin that eats up many GBs of RAM, 64 bit support is quite helpful.
I used to use Logic 32 bit, and heavy duty plugins would sometimes crash it, because there was only so much RAM that Logic could access, but after going to 64 bit, I'm able to run a lot more of those heavy duty plugins without worries.
Speaking of amateurish, your quoting system is quite amateurish and difficult to respond to.
That's because I don't spend much time in forums to be familiar with each and every BS quoting system, just drop in once in a while (In this case, I had to respond to the enormous stupidity). I expected whitespace to be preserved, but AI's webpage doesn't preserve whitespace from the reply box under each post --- you need to be in the forum thread for the post for it to work properly.
All of which are beside the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
You may believe what you like, but how many plaques do you have hanging on your wall? My opinions are rarely wrong.
You could have 200 plaques hanging on your wall and be a batshit crazy (like Phil Spector) or totally ignorant of modern DAWs (like Jack White).
Heck, even Justin Bieber has lots of 'plaques hanging on his wall" and I wouldn't listen to his opinions on singing (much less on DAWs).
I must have missed that news, but thanks for the correction, as accuracy and facts are what is important.
Yes, "accuracy and facts" are very important...
That's why we should just trust your BS opinion (which is "rarely wrong") that PT is not for professionals anymore (...) and that M-Audio keyboards are crap.
And PT are crap because not because of any coherent argument you could articulate, but because "lots of amateurs are using them nowadays".
But then again, you are the idiot who bought a keyboard who you don't like, so what do you know.
Wait, wtf? You have posted 4500+ comments on AI? Yes, a real professional...
That's why we should just trust your BS opinion (which is "rarely wrong") that PT is not for professionals anymore (...) and that M-Audio keyboards are crap.
Those interfaces in the article are not pro and having the Pro Tools moniker given to them is quite ironic, considering who is going to be using them.
And yes, M-Audio keyboards are crap. If you can't handle somebody's opinion without resorting to childish ad-hominems, then it is clearly you that is the moron.
There are a lot of choices for iOS audio interfaces so it will be interesting to see how they compare to others on the market (like Apogee, Focusrite and so on).
As to their quality, I'm sure they will be good enough for what they're intended for. Nobody is going to build a studio around them, but they're good for people who like to play around and lay down a few tracks.
I've worked on the side as an engineer for almost 30 years now (found out I has a knack for it when I was young and always had people request me to work with them). I'm definitely not an "equipment snob" and kind of laugh at people who are. I've seen people use basic equipment and produce excellent results while seeing others with "all the latest & greatest" gear produce crap. People really need to learn the basics so they can get the best out of whatever they're using, not buy the most expensive gear and expect the results will always be great.
A perfect example is listening to some classic albums (Fleetwood Mac, Dire Straits, Donald Fagen/Steely Dan, Supertramp, Pink Floyd and a bunch I've missed). All made with equipment that was far behind what's available today and with a very limited ability to edit or "fix" things in post. Yet they sound incredible because they took the time to make sure it was recorded properly. I've said it before - so many people just record as quickly as possible knowing they can fix things later in software.
A perfect example is listening to some classic albums (Fleetwood Mac, Dire Straits, Donald Fagen/Steely Dan, Supertramp, Pink Floyd and a bunch I've missed). All made with equipment that was far behind what's available today and with a very limited ability to edit or "fix" things in post. Yet they sound incredible because they took the time to make sure it was recorded properly. I've said it before - so many people just record as quickly as possible knowing they can fix things later in software.
I agree with most of what you've said. Somebody who is good and has talent can make something sound decent, no matter which gear they are working with. And on the other hand, you can take somebody who is clueless and put them in a real expensive studio, and you will end up with crap.
I don't agree with your last paragraph though. Those classic albums and groups that you mention used some really good gear, gear that is much better than what most people use today, and gear that is still highly desired and extremely pricey. They didn't have Pro Tools back then of course, so nobody was able to cheat or disguise their lack of musicianship as many do today, but the basic gear that those groups used to record with was mostly top of the line, the pre amps, the compressors, the eqs, the mixers, the microphones, the tape machines etc.
I'll gladly take any of that old gear (like the preamps and mics), and I would choose it over any new gear, regardless of price.
[...] There are also Pro's with no money. But you don't have to but your balls (and risk losing them), there will be tests from several news outlets, with proper measuring equipment and all, instead of guesses from idiots, about how good or bad the interfaces are.
He's actually right about THAT part. Low-cost interfaces from Avid (nee Digidesign) actually are bat barf by pro standards. It amazes me that people buy them, but then people buy all kinds of crappy gear so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.
[...] I'm definitely not an "equipment snob" and kind of laugh at people who are.
View such attitudes with skepticism, but don't laugh.
Many (most?) people who poo-poo the value of high-quality gear do so without benefit of ever having USED it. It's hard to go back once you've used devices that sound better, interface better and "quirk" less. Some things that cost more provide only subtle benefits, but some, like high voltage rails, yield huge benefits. There are stupid reasons for being a gear snob, but in some cases, there are GOOD reasons.
I have several inexpensive devices that let me dial in a really nice sweet spot. I compare those to a precious few expensive units that have nothing BUT "sweet" at ANY control setting.
A device that doesn't require all kinds of tweaking is more enjoyable and FASTER to use, which means the talent spends less time standing around getting grumpy. Happy talent make more difference to the final result than any piece of gear ever could!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
I've seen people use basic equipment and produce excellent results while seeing others with "all the latest & greatest" gear produce crap.
Sure, given a choice between cheap gear in good hands or good gear in unskilled hand I'll take the former. There's another category though... good gear in skilled hands. That sounds even better than the first guy, and sounds good sooner!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
A perfect example is listening to some classic albums (Fleetwood Mac, Dire Straits, Donald Fagen/Steely Dan, Supertramp, Pink Floyd and a bunch I've missed). All made with equipment that was far behind what's available today and with a very limited ability to edit or "fix" things in post. Yet they sound incredible because they took the time to make sure it was recorded properly. I've said it before - so many people just record as quickly as possible knowing they can fix things later in software.
Two different arguments there. You're right that a "fix it in the mix" attitude is a quality killer, and you're right that taking care to do things properly is a big part of what makes those recordings great.
I do not agree that the gear those people used was "far behind what's available today" though. Today's digital gear has the advantage of lower noise, but in virtually every other respect you have to look to high-end "snob" gear like Manley et al to get anything similar today. In fact, boutique manufacturers are recreating gear from that era now and selling it through snob channels at snob prices! Trident, UA, Telefunken, Neve, etc.
I used to use Protools a long time ago, when it was still for Pros, but I don't use it anymore, as too many amateurs use it now. They should call it amateur tools instead.
I haven't heard those new interfaces, but I'll bet my left testicle that they don't sound that great. Look at the ridiculous cheap price for them. Who are they selling to? Pros, or amateurs with no money? I'm also not fond of M-audio, which is also owned by Avid now. I threw a perfectly good, functioning and working M-Audio keyboard in the trash a few weeks ago, because it just pissed me off. It wasn't even worth the cheap price that I paid for it.
Ok a Logic (and Cubase) user who mainly does MIDI at home. LOL. STFU and get back to the other forums and talk about Mac stuff. Adults are talking here.
I've got many plaques on my wall, and most of the plaques and trophies me and my coworkers have are due in part to working with Pro Tools.
ProTools is still the industry standard, and with good reason. Nothing comes close, and Avid's business model has been great - making Protools run on non-Avid hardware was a fantastic move (previously you had to have Avid hardware plugged in to run it).
This update is really all about 64-bit support and integrating video a lot better, finally. I hoped that Avid's purchase of Sibelius and Digidesign would have created an Adobe CS-style video/recording/notation suite by now, but this is a step in the right direction.
I don't have giant track counts, so 64-bit support is not so important for me, so i'll probably wait until ProTools 12, but i'm sure there are a lot of studios that will be making the upgrade. I just hope they keep supporting 11 for a couple more OSX upgrades.
A lot of what people who have valid complaints about ProTools are always pointing out (not great midi editing, terrible virtual instrument handling, dearth of cheap and free compatible plugins) are simply not part of the equation for most high end environments. It's not the standard in THESE arenas lo these many years later because the studio owners are ignorant sheep.
I have huge issues with a lot of the Avid customer experience, but the fact is it's pretty terrible or at best disappointing for every pro audio product I use across the board, with the notable exception of Metric Halo. Even pointing to how horrible Avid's site is for getting solutions (which I often do) as a reason they stink doesn't change the fact that it's around the middle of the pack in that respect, and most of the major DAW net presences are no better at all.
Sure, use Logic and watch bugs show up with new OS updates and read the reams of complaints in the Apple Logic user forum, met by crickets for MONTHS.
Lack of offline rendering has always been the biggest PITA for me. For years it's been sending over to Logic (and now Reaper instead) for final offline rendering with DSP of 16 hour projects. But neither of those two could take over the workflow, especially editing and file management, that we do up to that point in PT. Very excited to get offline rendering, finally, in PT11.
ProTools isn't perfect but it's the best workflow for audio for a certain world out there.
View such attitudes with skepticism, but don't laugh.
Many (most?) people who poo-poo the value of high-quality gear do so without benefit of ever having USED it.
I do not agree that the gear those people used was "far behind what's available today" though. Today's digital gear has the advantage of lower noise, but in virtually every other respect you have to look to high-end "snob" gear like Manley et al to get anything similar today. In fact, boutique manufacturers are recreating gear from that era now and selling it through snob channels at snob prices! Trident, UA, Telefunken, Neve, etc.
I did a quick calculation in my head and my collection of mics is worth more than my car (and I don't drive a clunker). Back in the early 80's I used to modify recording consoles. I'd pull out the channel strips and upgrade the electronic components with newer (better, quieter) components. I'm very familiar with high-end gear and equipment I've purchased for myself is always the best I can afford.
This is not what I'm getting at by referring to "snobs". Buying high-end gear doesn't make you a "snob". Looking down on people who buy low-end gear (or criticizing low-end gear) is. Not everyone can afford the best. And people who are just starting out and learning are not going to do so on the best equipment available. Low-end equipment has a very useful place in the market. It's asinine to criticize such gear or complain about it in comparison to high-end gear.
There's a saying: What's the difference between a Porcupine and a Porsche? The Porcupine has the pricks on the outside. I get sick of people who talk about the gear they use as if they're somehow better than people who use basic, entry-level stuff.
30-40 years ago there were great sounding mics and very quiet consoles. I'm talking more about what the final sound is recorded to. There are severe limitations to using tape (when compared to something like ProTools). This is the weak link in the chain, and one of the main reasons why engineers were so careful to make sure that what went to tape was the highest quality possible. It was the difficulty in fixing things later.
This is not what I'm getting at by referring to "snobs". Buying high-end gear doesn't make you a "snob". Looking down on people who buy low-end gear (or criticizing low-end gear) is. Not everyone can afford the best. And people who are just starting out and learning are not going to do so on the best equipment available. Low-end equipment has a very useful place in the market. It's asinine to criticize such gear or complain about it in comparison to high-end gear.
Gotcha. I like your perspective on that. I'm sure the gear *I* use seems "low-end" to the guy with the D-Control and boutique outboard. There's more to it than just "good" gear and "cheap" gear -- there's a continuum.
Sometimes I see "reality checks" being confused with "snobbery" though. The guy that claims his amp-sim plug-in is "just as good" as a real amp in a good room with a good mic will often be met with jabs, but it's not because he uses a plug-in, it's because he's betraying his ignorance. If he said a real amp in a good room with a good mic is impractical for him, and he's satisfied with what he's getting with his plug-in, and said so after HEARING the difference, he'd get a more respectful response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
30-40 years ago there were great sounding mics and very quiet consoles. I'm talking more about what the final sound is recorded to. There are severe limitations to using tape (when compared to something like ProTools). This is the weak link in the chain, and one of the main reasons why engineers were so careful to make sure that what went to tape was the highest quality possible. It was the difficulty in fixing things later.
About ten years ago I took part in a comparison of dozens of recordings intended to evaluate the benefits of various devices, techniques and environments. We'd listen to the tracks, form our opinions, THEN read the session notes. I was shocked and amazed to discover that the vast majority of the tracks that made me feel warm and fuzzy sonically were recorded on 2" 24! Obviously a good deal of that comes down to 2" machines only being in the hands of people who know how to make good recordings and only being found in good sounding rooms with good equipment around them, but it really brought home the payoff that comes from keeping priorities straight.
I'm not giving up Pro Tools or buying a Studer anytime soon, but I am trying to remember the lessons we learned from working that way. Things like a flawed recording of an emotional delivery beats a perfect recording of a yawn every time; just make a freakin' decision and move on; and sometimes the fix is worse than the flaw.
As for console mods, if you ever see me write anything here that suggests I'm thinking about doing it again, shoot me quick! You are a much more patient man than am I! Wanna buy a 16 channel Delta?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
I haven't heard those new interfaces, but I'll bet my left testicle that they don't sound that great. Look at the ridiculous cheap price for them. Who are they selling to? Pros, or amateurs with no money?
You think so? Really? I was sure these sub $300 interfaces were meant to compete with $4,000 worth of mic pres and converters in a high end pro rack.
Thanks for clearing that up. The nerve of anyone making products for that market.
This update is really all about 64-bit support and integrating video a lot better, finally. I hoped that Avid's purchase of Sibelius and Digidesign would have created an Adobe CS-style video/recording/notation suite by now, but this is a step in the right direction.
I don't have giant track counts, so 64-bit support is not so important for me, so i'll probably wait until ProTools 12, but i'm sure there are a lot of studios that will be making the upgrade. I just hope they keep supporting 11 for a couple more OSX upgrades.
I'm also not fond of M-audio, which is also owned by Avid now.
M-Audio is no longer owned by Avid it was sold in mid 2012 to inMusic who also own Akai, Alesis and Numark.Quote:
Originally Posted by chelgrian
M-Audio is no longer owned by Avid it was sold in mid 2012 to inMusic who also own Akai, Alesis and Numark.I must have missed that news, but thanks for the correction, as accuracy and facts are what is important.
In that case, I think that Avid made a smart move by dumping the M-Audio brand. I basically associate M-Audio with cheap crap, and I don't think that I'm the only one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
I don't have giant track counts, so 64-bit support is not so important for me, so i'll probably wait until ProTools 12, but i'm sure there are a lot of studios that will be making the upgrade. I just hope they keep supporting 11 for a couple more OSX upgrades.
64 bit support is not just about the track count. It also has to do with RAM implementation.
Even if you're only using 2 tracks and running a heavy duty plugin that eats up many GBs of RAM, 64 bit support is quite helpful.
I used to use Logic 32 bit, and heavy duty plugins would sometimes crash it, because there was only so much RAM that Logic could access, but after going to 64 bit, I'm able to run a lot more of those heavy duty plugins without worries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Speaking of amateurish, your quoting system is quite amateurish and difficult to respond to.
That's because I don't spend much time in forums to be familiar with each and every BS quoting system, just drop in once in a while (In this case, I had to respond to the enormous stupidity). I expected whitespace to be preserved, but AI's webpage doesn't preserve whitespace from the reply box under each post --- you need to be in the forum thread for the post for it to work properly.
All of which are beside the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
You may believe what you like, but how many plaques do you have hanging on your wall? My opinions are rarely wrong.
You could have 200 plaques hanging on your wall and be a batshit crazy (like Phil Spector) or totally ignorant of modern DAWs (like Jack White).
Heck, even Justin Bieber has lots of 'plaques hanging on his wall" and I wouldn't listen to his opinions on singing (much less on DAWs).
Your opinions are "rarely wrong"???
What are you, like 5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
I must have missed that news, but thanks for the correction, as accuracy and facts are what is important.
Yes, "accuracy and facts" are very important...
That's why we should just trust your BS opinion (which is "rarely wrong") that PT is not for professionals anymore (...) and that M-Audio keyboards are crap.
And PT are crap because not because of any coherent argument you could articulate, but because "lots of amateurs are using them nowadays".
But then again, you are the idiot who bought a keyboard who you don't like, so what do you know.
Wait, wtf? You have posted 4500+ comments on AI? Yes, a real professional...
Quote:
Originally Posted by foljs
That's why we should just trust your BS opinion (which is "rarely wrong") that PT is not for professionals anymore (...) and that M-Audio keyboards are crap.
Those interfaces in the article are not pro and having the Pro Tools moniker given to them is quite ironic, considering who is going to be using them.
And yes, M-Audio keyboards are crap. If you can't handle somebody's opinion without resorting to childish ad-hominems, then it is clearly you that is the moron.
There are a lot of choices for iOS audio interfaces so it will be interesting to see how they compare to others on the market (like Apogee, Focusrite and so on).
As to their quality, I'm sure they will be good enough for what they're intended for. Nobody is going to build a studio around them, but they're good for people who like to play around and lay down a few tracks.
I've worked on the side as an engineer for almost 30 years now (found out I has a knack for it when I was young and always had people request me to work with them). I'm definitely not an "equipment snob" and kind of laugh at people who are. I've seen people use basic equipment and produce excellent results while seeing others with "all the latest & greatest" gear produce crap. People really need to learn the basics so they can get the best out of whatever they're using, not buy the most expensive gear and expect the results will always be great.
A perfect example is listening to some classic albums (Fleetwood Mac, Dire Straits, Donald Fagen/Steely Dan, Supertramp, Pink Floyd and a bunch I've missed). All made with equipment that was far behind what's available today and with a very limited ability to edit or "fix" things in post. Yet they sound incredible because they took the time to make sure it was recorded properly. I've said it before - so many people just record as quickly as possible knowing they can fix things later in software.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
A perfect example is listening to some classic albums (Fleetwood Mac, Dire Straits, Donald Fagen/Steely Dan, Supertramp, Pink Floyd and a bunch I've missed). All made with equipment that was far behind what's available today and with a very limited ability to edit or "fix" things in post. Yet they sound incredible because they took the time to make sure it was recorded properly. I've said it before - so many people just record as quickly as possible knowing they can fix things later in software.
I agree with most of what you've said. Somebody who is good and has talent can make something sound decent, no matter which gear they are working with. And on the other hand, you can take somebody who is clueless and put them in a real expensive studio, and you will end up with crap.
I don't agree with your last paragraph though. Those classic albums and groups that you mention used some really good gear, gear that is much better than what most people use today, and gear that is still highly desired and extremely pricey. They didn't have Pro Tools back then of course, so nobody was able to cheat or disguise their lack of musicianship as many do today, but the basic gear that those groups used to record with was mostly top of the line, the pre amps, the compressors, the eqs, the mixers, the microphones, the tape machines etc.
I'll gladly take any of that old gear (like the preamps and mics), and I would choose it over any new gear, regardless of price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foljs
[...] There are also Pro's with no money. But you don't have to but your balls (and risk losing them), there will be tests from several news outlets, with proper measuring equipment and all, instead of guesses from idiots, about how good or bad the interfaces are.
He's actually right about THAT part. Low-cost interfaces from Avid (nee Digidesign) actually are bat barf by pro standards. It amazes me that people buy them, but then people buy all kinds of crappy gear so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
[...] Avid owns several smaller entities to cover the lower end market.
Avid didn't even buy M-audio, Digidesign did. When Avid bought Digi they got M-audio too. They've been trying to sell itfor months with no takers.
Edit: I see they DID sell it. Same owner as Akai and Numark, huh? Sounds about right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
[...] I'm definitely not an "equipment snob" and kind of laugh at people who are.
View such attitudes with skepticism, but don't laugh.
Many (most?) people who poo-poo the value of high-quality gear do so without benefit of ever having USED it. It's hard to go back once you've used devices that sound better, interface better and "quirk" less. Some things that cost more provide only subtle benefits, but some, like high voltage rails, yield huge benefits. There are stupid reasons for being a gear snob, but in some cases, there are GOOD reasons.
I have several inexpensive devices that let me dial in a really nice sweet spot. I compare those to a precious few expensive units that have nothing BUT "sweet" at ANY control setting.
A device that doesn't require all kinds of tweaking is more enjoyable and FASTER to use, which means the talent spends less time standing around getting grumpy. Happy talent make more difference to the final result than any piece of gear ever could!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
I've seen people use basic equipment and produce excellent results while seeing others with "all the latest & greatest" gear produce crap.
Sure, given a choice between cheap gear in good hands or good gear in unskilled hand I'll take the former. There's another category though... good gear in skilled hands. That sounds even better than the first guy, and sounds good sooner!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
A perfect example is listening to some classic albums (Fleetwood Mac, Dire Straits, Donald Fagen/Steely Dan, Supertramp, Pink Floyd and a bunch I've missed). All made with equipment that was far behind what's available today and with a very limited ability to edit or "fix" things in post. Yet they sound incredible because they took the time to make sure it was recorded properly. I've said it before - so many people just record as quickly as possible knowing they can fix things later in software.
Two different arguments there. You're right that a "fix it in the mix" attitude is a quality killer, and you're right that taking care to do things properly is a big part of what makes those recordings great.
I do not agree that the gear those people used was "far behind what's available today" though. Today's digital gear has the advantage of lower noise, but in virtually every other respect you have to look to high-end "snob" gear like Manley et al to get anything similar today. In fact, boutique manufacturers are recreating gear from that era now and selling it through snob channels at snob prices! Trident, UA, Telefunken, Neve, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
I used to use Protools a long time ago, when it was still for Pros, but I don't use it anymore, as too many amateurs use it now. They should call it amateur tools instead.
I haven't heard those new interfaces, but I'll bet my left testicle that they don't sound that great. Look at the ridiculous cheap price for them. Who are they selling to? Pros, or amateurs with no money? I'm also not fond of M-audio, which is also owned by Avid now. I threw a perfectly good, functioning and working M-Audio keyboard in the trash a few weeks ago, because it just pissed me off. It wasn't even worth the cheap price that I paid for it.
Ok a Logic (and Cubase) user who mainly does MIDI at home. LOL. STFU and get back to the other forums and talk about Mac stuff. Adults are talking here.
I've got many plaques on my wall, and most of the plaques and trophies me and my coworkers have are due in part to working with Pro Tools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
ProTools is still the industry standard, and with good reason. Nothing comes close, and Avid's business model has been great - making Protools run on non-Avid hardware was a fantastic move (previously you had to have Avid hardware plugged in to run it).
This update is really all about 64-bit support and integrating video a lot better, finally. I hoped that Avid's purchase of Sibelius and Digidesign would have created an Adobe CS-style video/recording/notation suite by now, but this is a step in the right direction.
I don't have giant track counts, so 64-bit support is not so important for me, so i'll probably wait until ProTools 12, but i'm sure there are a lot of studios that will be making the upgrade. I just hope they keep supporting 11 for a couple more OSX upgrades.
A lot of what people who have valid complaints about ProTools are always pointing out (not great midi editing, terrible virtual instrument handling, dearth of cheap and free compatible plugins) are simply not part of the equation for most high end environments. It's not the standard in THESE arenas lo these many years later because the studio owners are ignorant sheep.
I have huge issues with a lot of the Avid customer experience, but the fact is it's pretty terrible or at best disappointing for every pro audio product I use across the board, with the notable exception of Metric Halo. Even pointing to how horrible Avid's site is for getting solutions (which I often do) as a reason they stink doesn't change the fact that it's around the middle of the pack in that respect, and most of the major DAW net presences are no better at all.
Sure, use Logic and watch bugs show up with new OS updates and read the reams of complaints in the Apple Logic user forum, met by crickets for MONTHS.
Lack of offline rendering has always been the biggest PITA for me. For years it's been sending over to Logic (and now Reaper instead) for final offline rendering with DSP of 16 hour projects. But neither of those two could take over the workflow, especially editing and file management, that we do up to that point in PT. Very excited to get offline rendering, finally, in PT11.
ProTools isn't perfect but it's the best workflow for audio for a certain world out there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
View such attitudes with skepticism, but don't laugh.
Many (most?) people who poo-poo the value of high-quality gear do so without benefit of ever having USED it.
I do not agree that the gear those people used was "far behind what's available today" though. Today's digital gear has the advantage of lower noise, but in virtually every other respect you have to look to high-end "snob" gear like Manley et al to get anything similar today. In fact, boutique manufacturers are recreating gear from that era now and selling it through snob channels at snob prices! Trident, UA, Telefunken, Neve, etc.
I did a quick calculation in my head and my collection of mics is worth more than my car (and I don't drive a clunker). Back in the early 80's I used to modify recording consoles. I'd pull out the channel strips and upgrade the electronic components with newer (better, quieter) components. I'm very familiar with high-end gear and equipment I've purchased for myself is always the best I can afford.
This is not what I'm getting at by referring to "snobs". Buying high-end gear doesn't make you a "snob". Looking down on people who buy low-end gear (or criticizing low-end gear) is. Not everyone can afford the best. And people who are just starting out and learning are not going to do so on the best equipment available. Low-end equipment has a very useful place in the market. It's asinine to criticize such gear or complain about it in comparison to high-end gear.
There's a saying: What's the difference between a Porcupine and a Porsche? The Porcupine has the pricks on the outside. I get sick of people who talk about the gear they use as if they're somehow better than people who use basic, entry-level stuff.
30-40 years ago there were great sounding mics and very quiet consoles. I'm talking more about what the final sound is recorded to. There are severe limitations to using tape (when compared to something like ProTools). This is the weak link in the chain, and one of the main reasons why engineers were so careful to make sure that what went to tape was the highest quality possible. It was the difficulty in fixing things later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
This is not what I'm getting at by referring to "snobs". Buying high-end gear doesn't make you a "snob". Looking down on people who buy low-end gear (or criticizing low-end gear) is. Not everyone can afford the best. And people who are just starting out and learning are not going to do so on the best equipment available. Low-end equipment has a very useful place in the market. It's asinine to criticize such gear or complain about it in comparison to high-end gear.
Gotcha. I like your perspective on that. I'm sure the gear *I* use seems "low-end" to the guy with the D-Control and boutique outboard. There's more to it than just "good" gear and "cheap" gear -- there's a continuum.
Sometimes I see "reality checks" being confused with "snobbery" though. The guy that claims his amp-sim plug-in is "just as good" as a real amp in a good room with a good mic will often be met with jabs, but it's not because he uses a plug-in, it's because he's betraying his ignorance. If he said a real amp in a good room with a good mic is impractical for him, and he's satisfied with what he's getting with his plug-in, and said so after HEARING the difference, he'd get a more respectful response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
30-40 years ago there were great sounding mics and very quiet consoles. I'm talking more about what the final sound is recorded to. There are severe limitations to using tape (when compared to something like ProTools). This is the weak link in the chain, and one of the main reasons why engineers were so careful to make sure that what went to tape was the highest quality possible. It was the difficulty in fixing things later.
About ten years ago I took part in a comparison of dozens of recordings intended to evaluate the benefits of various devices, techniques and environments. We'd listen to the tracks, form our opinions, THEN read the session notes. I was shocked and amazed to discover that the vast majority of the tracks that made me feel warm and fuzzy sonically were recorded on 2" 24! Obviously a good deal of that comes down to 2" machines only being in the hands of people who know how to make good recordings and only being found in good sounding rooms with good equipment around them, but it really brought home the payoff that comes from keeping priorities straight.
I'm not giving up Pro Tools or buying a Studer anytime soon, but I am trying to remember the lessons we learned from working that way. Things like a flawed recording of an emotional delivery beats a perfect recording of a yawn every time; just make a freakin' decision and move on; and sometimes the fix is worse than the flaw.
As for console mods, if you ever see me write anything here that suggests I'm thinking about doing it again, shoot me quick! You are a much more patient man than am I! Wanna buy a 16 channel Delta?