Pro Tools 10

[stosostu]

It doesn't seem very long since PT9 came out and I was waiting to see if they'd sorted the bugs before buying, now here coes PT10.....

http://www.avid.com/US/products/family/Pro-Tools

[jkhuri44]

LOL....its true comedy....seriously...

have fun guys

[waitup]

It doesn't seem very long since PT9 came out and I was waiting to see if they'd sorted the bugs before buying, now here coes PT10.....

http://www.avid.com/US/products/family/Pro-Tools

What bugs have you been having? I've had nothing but smooth sailing on 9...

[audioio]

What bugs have you been having? I've had nothing but smooth sailing on 9...

Excuse me for butting in here. I've been enjoying 9 too and haven't even applied 9.0.x updates, but on Thursday night I had a showstopper.

I was playing multitrack for a show and it played two cues from different times in the playlist simultaneously. Took a reboot of my Mac to fix it.

I've seen a lot of weird PT stuff over the years, but I've never seen anything remotely like that.

[mylesgm]

I just upgraded to PTHD9 (yesterday) for 349 and now get a free upgrade to PTHD10 (saving me over 1k) and you can too if you buy today or tomorrow and register today or tomorrow. If you are going to do it now is the time to do it.

[ChrisW]

I'll stick with Logic.

[Aearth]

I'll stick with Logic.

Me too

[The Tasmanian]

I'll change to Logic

[ChrisW]

Yep.
It's the amateur tool of pros.

[Text_Edifice]

Just got an email with free upgrade to PT10 for existing users. S'allright. Still migrating to Logic though.

[Ben M]

I just upgraded to PTHD9 (yesterday) for 349 and now get a free upgrade to PTHD10 (saving me over 1k) and you can too if you buy today or tomorrow and register today or tomorrow. If you are going to do it now is the time to do it.

Myles what was your upgrade path for that. When is shutdown time for the free upgrade to PTHD10? I've got a spare PT HD license I could upgrade but I'd hate to do it and then find out that free upgrade to 10 has finished.

[Drumstruck]

Damn them - I bought PT9HD in late August. Lucky I kept PT8 licence so at least I can do an upgrade

[wez]

Nice to see PT10 now has some of the features of Sequoia 7 (released circa 2003).

Jokes aside... PT still has the simplest and best interface and workflow (for me) for multirack record/edit/mix (i use Sequoia for more advanced two track work), and like squillions of people i've invested thousands of hours of learning in it, so i'm not going anywhere in a hurry.

Not to mention the fact that I always hang back at least one or two versions before upgrading... I mean, PT8 doesn't really do anything for me that PT7 doesn't. I'll upgrade when I start to run into compatibility issues, and not before.

I started off using PT as a glorified tape machine and after 12 years I've still managed to maintain a healthy amount of that mindset and approach.

[mylesgm]

I bought on Friday and the email said the window was till the 23rd.

[mylesgm]

:D
Yep.
It's the amateur tool of pros.

not sure which way you're punning but I really cant stand logic and dont understand how people work with it. I do use it and I also teach so I'm not just slamming it because I dont know it. I find it incredibly complicated, unreliable, it tries to do too much for you and basic features like simple editing and fading are very time consuming and seemingly inaccurate. The only other program I've used other than 'tools that has a logical and quick workflow is digital performer. To me the most frustrating thing about all these programs is that they dont speak to each other at least at a basic level allowing simple cross software work. I don't want much, just correct file placement in the timeline with playlisting though I don't see how volume/pan automation couldn't be easily brought over and why plugins that are cross software cant be brought over too.

So what are the options (regardless of cost) that people use and are good for professional use? And will it be readily available whichever studio you go to?
And thats a serious question. One of the main reasons I use 'tools is that it is everywhere.

[Drumstruck]

...... One of the main reasons I use 'tools is that it is everywhere.

And that's the bind or benefit in one sentence.

[The Tasmanian]

I still cant believe they dump the old customers who bought HD - why cant they keep supporting the old customers - simple updates so that we can keep running our old hardware until we are ready to upgrade?
I'm so tired of throwing them my hard earned money -
I'll keep my PT 9 for now and look into running Logic
I've had enough!

[Sammas]

I still cant believe they dump the old customers who bought HD - why cant they keep supporting the old customers - simple updates so that we can keep running our old hardware until we are ready to upgrade?
I'm so tired of throwing them my hard earned money -
I'll keep my PT 9 for now and look into running Logic
I've had enough!

Errr... They are? HD customers will continue to receive support and technical repairs for the next 5 years. Your systems WILL keep running.

Expecting it to morph into a HDx system? That isn't going to happen.

[ChrisW]

So what are the options (regardless of cost) that people use and are good for professional use? And will it be readily available whichever studio you go to?
And thats a serious question. One of the main reasons I use 'tools is that it is everywhere.

I'm not going to other studios really.
Of course Logic is far from perfect, but I'm working on my own with a mix of midi, electronics and live played synths.
For that Logic is easier to use and more accurate for me than PT.
I used Logic in the mid-90s, then through the late 90's and early 2000's I toiled with Pro Tools. After a few very expensive PT upgrades I finally thought - why?
With tight music budgets and less work around, the numerous PT upgrades (hard and soft) were a significant drain on my finances.
When I moved to Oz I went back to Logic and I've been much the better for it.
This is all before the native, any audio inter face changes of course.
Never had a single hiccup with Logic and reliability mind you.
I am a full time professional, but I'm not running a professional studio. My studio is where I work on my music, not an end in itself.

[Manning]

Re Logic v Pro Tools:

I'm chiefly a composer/arranger and I do all my work in Logic (and love it). IMO Logic trounces PT when it comes to in-the-box composing.

Conversely, my business partner Marc is an old school engineer and he adores Pro Tools, as its entire design is geared towards a traditional recording workflow . Even though I am very competent in Logic, I'd still hesitate to try and build a traditional recording studio around it. Logic was designed as a sequencing tool and audio-recording was shoe-horned into it at a later date, and it shows. (Ditto for the sequencing capabilities of PT).

We now have our method down to a fine art - I develop whatever foundation tracks we need in Logic at home, dump it out to wav files and take it to the studio where we add the rest plus mixdown in Pro Tools.

Flame away

[ChrisW]

No need for 'flames'.
Each to their own, and neither Avid or Apple needs our help with marketing.
.......
I must say I enjoy the audio side of Logic.
Yes, if I was recording other musicians, playing guitars and drums in real time PT would be preferable.
I also find Logic over complicates in certain aspects. When I gave up on Logic in the late 90's I found you had to embrace all the complications, but now I think you can bypass them to a large degree.
In the current music business environment, I find the generally higher cost of maintaining a 'current' PT system, and the higher cost of 3rd party plug-ins renders PT a bad investment (for me).
If Apple do to Logic what they did to Final Cut, I may have to rapidly reassess my views though.

[mylesgm]

I'm not flaming, my questions and observations are real and I appreciate your point of view, everybody has their own experience. For my own experience and from working from studio to studio, I can't see a credible replacement to the simplicity, flexibility, workflow and ubiquitousness of protools. I agree that the upgrade path sucks and mostly because there doesn't seem to be anyway to get around that as everywhere I go uses protools. And of course nobody is going to jump till everybody else does because thats how the industry works....

[The Tasmanian]

My problem is I worked out I have given over $120k to the format over 15 years - that's a hell of a lot of money to give to mainly one company (and plugins for the format)
I look at this and think - what the f@#$ am I doing?
Surely I can be a lot smarter than that.
And as posted here they will support HD for 5 years - BIG DEAL!
Why not 10 - 15 years?
Time for me to wise up and stop using any of their hardware ever again for a start.

[mylesgm]

And therein lies the problem with monopolies. They charge whatever they want regardless of its reasonability and then we pay because we have no choice. I don't like it at all and I don't think anyone would disagree that it is simply untrue that the product (especially the hardware) is actually worth those prices. Logic, Digital Performer etc are really fine pieces of software (regardless of whether I use them or not) and both are less than 1000 to buy outright not just for upgrades. There is a plethora of fine hardware for a variety of prices yet PT stuff is usually double the price for mid range quality. UAD dsp cards are amazingly powerful (I have a UAD quad and I can't max it out no matter what I do) and yet these are considerably less than the price of 1 HD-native card. We all know this the question is how do we respond to the inequality? I can't see how me not using protools will really affect them and it will really affect me, and I can't see how writing letters etc will affect change either. Maybe we need an "occupy Avid" campaign.

Please pay no attention to me I'm just rambling....

[ChrisW]

IFor my own experience and from working from studio to studio, I can't see a credible replacement to the simplicity, flexibility, workflow and ubiquitousness of protools.

For a lot of people, probably not.
However, music making is moving more and more to the home.
Commercial studios and people who do a lot of real recording are using Pro Tools, as are many film and TV guys I know. A lot of other people I know have either switched away or never went PT in the first place.
For what I do I don't find PT easier to use.
I've also adapted due to looking at my income vs expenses situation. To be honest I don't regret for one moment abandoning PT.

[jkhuri44]

i heard cubase 6 is pretty sick...just a thought.

[mylesgm]

However, music making is moving more and more to the home.

This is so true and to me makes avid's decisions dumber. I wouldn't use PT if I didn't work out of studios because as you say the cost/income ratio is stupid. Its the most expensive DAW, the excessive prices are simply not reasonable in the market and yet with more and more home recording I would imagine the funds are less and less available to people to purchase avid products.

I can't really ignore other studios as I work from home and book studios to record in. I also record multiple takes and playlist the options so that I don't spend time in the studio cutting and editing what I could be doing at home.
No, Avid really has me in a bind and I guess I'm just not into S&M.

[audioio]

I'm in two minds about this.

On the one hand, I see the benefit of HD systems and appreciate the stability of the software (my recent experience with 9 written about elsewhere here and certain releases which really sucked notwithstanding).

On the other, one of the biggest complaints--associated with the price--is that HD is an old technology. So I suppose something had to change soon and I guess HDx is it.

Now those who've seen my recent posts know I have a cheap Magma chassis which I was hoping to fill with PCI cards, but since the original HD cards won't be supported past PT10, I'm not sure this is wise. (...unless 10 turns out to be everything I could ever want and would never want to upgrade again). So Avid just blew my plans out of the water.

A similar situation, and quite recent too, is the dropping of support for the PPC platform. What really sucked was Avid doing it on a point-point release with bugger-all notice. ("BTW, chaps, 8.0.3 will be the last PPC-compatible release". Hell, they could have waited until 9.) At work we went through that pain less than a year ago and now we'll have to look at completely replacing our hardware maybe a year from now. How hard would it have been to maintain PPC / HD support for 2 years longer and give people lots of notice of having to do it all in one fell swoop.

I just saw this:

Q: Is Pro Tools 10 a 64-bit application?
A: No. However, Pro Tools 10 supports 64-bit hardware drivers for Avid interfaces, enabling you to use your Avid audio interface with 64-bit Mac and Windows operating systems. We understand how important 64-bit is to many of you, but at this time, Pro Tools 10 is still a 32-bit application to support Pro Tools|HD TDM systems and older ("blue") Avid Pro Tools|HD interfaces. Because these older hardware systems will not support 64-bit, it was important for us to do one final Pro Tools release at 32-bit and deliver the highly requested features and performance enhancements to everyone.

So, there's a reason for not supporting original HD cards or interfaces (but I bet there'll be months of arguments on Gearslutz about whether the claim is valid). Now I reckon that could have been announced a long time ago (especially as many people have been talking about it), without giving away too much about HDx.

[The Tasmanian]

David - spot on
Its the sneaky "dont tell anyone-just drop some vague hints " on what they are doing pisses me off as a long time client.
What are we supposed to do - run an investment account for when we are forced to spend big money every few years when they suddenly tell us they wont support/put any effort into past products we have spent big on?
How hard would it be to keep the PCI/PCIE platform going with future releases of software.
Cubase has multiple different versions of the same software - why not write future versions that support the older stuff - as well as the new versions?
How hard is it to write some software for both platforms ????????
A wise producer mate Tim Whitton still runs 888's on PT5 with a G4 at home - and he does really amazing work - he's much smarter than most - bought the setup when they were dirt cheap, backward saves when he is in a big studio.
The only thing i will thank Avid for is PT9 native - at least they unblocked the (criminally) choked track count - and hopefully I can keep 9/10 and future releases running on my lappy - and backwards save to use my HD rig - and even if I have to, consolidate the audio so I can mix of my HD system.
I refuse to give them big sums of money anymore - its a mugs game and a trap - most of us think that all these features will make us better at our jobs - it wont.
Maybe we can work a touch faster -BIG DEAL!
Its all bullshit at the end of the day - only a fool thinks they are going to make a better album because they use PT10?
I aint getting sucked into this money spending vortex no more!
Amen

[Ben M]

I hear ya!
If avid really want to help their customers they should assist by telling them what's ahead in development and stop pulling the cloth off the table like magicians at trade shows and effectively claiming that they have solved everyone's problems.