NashBackslash
New member
I love how this thread is starting to turn into a piss war. 
yep pro-tools still sucks
- Thread starter sweetnubs
- Start date
Golden
New member
ah go fuck yourself sweet "25 years" nubs. I hardly think I need to be quizzed by you on basic tape machine operations. What, am I in school here? Is this a pop quiz? I forgot my no. 2 pencil at home. Oh look how he tries to mystify me by using abreviations of commonly known measurements and tape speeds. I feel my mind melting right now. I know I should have paid attention to his fountain of knowledge.. WHY WHY am I so stupid?? You said yourself you don't use digital, and that it is only possible to make a "record" with high end analogue gear... only touching the pro-tools because the tape machine was down. By the way, working with those old systems that you mention don't even resemble in the slightest the workflow, sound quality, or really anything other than that fact it's on a computer the way things are done in modern digital setups. Hell, pro tools is even starting to become the old school in digital now...even with the new pro tools, it's far behind everything else and 10 times the price. If you're so well versed in the world of digital why... 1. do you fall along with the typical analogue guy mindset of "all digital=pro tools".. like the hillarious thing you hear from people who don't have a clue.. "we can pro tools that and fix it in the mix, right?" 2. Do you not understand the differences of working with digital audio in a mix vs analogue tape/console/outboard gear style mixing, and just asume to get the same result on both mediums right from the start. 3. do you have such a moronic, egocentric viewpoint of the way audio is recorded and mixed that you actually think that unless it's recorded on a bloody tape, it's not "truely" great.
You get good results? Wow, you surely must be a victim of multiple personality disorder. This is the same person who basically said that you can't make real records with digital plugins such as "PSP Vintage Warmer", Oh yeah..btw...ever hear of a day off? Oh no, I forgot, your too busy maintaining all your high end analogue gear to have a day off. Ah well, I'll drink a beer for you tonight. You see, when you work efficiently, you tend to discover this wonderful thing called free time, which you can spend on things such as other hobbies, or purely relaxing. It appears from your user photo that you enjoy cross-dressing... imagine how much time you could spent at the drag bar, taking home post-op trannies with this newfound leisure time.
Get off your self appointed high horse oh mighty one. Your gear will not make you good at anything, and will only impress other faggots at the AES cruise. I know, you should all dress in drag and practice inserting your "patch cables" into each other's "patch point"... I wonder..would it more likely be the result of patching an "output" into another "output". Take your oh so impressive studio and shove it right up your ass, as that's no doubt where you form most of your thoughts and ideas anyway (hey, if it's closer to the source...it might make you actually use that expensive gear of yours).
Now that I've had my fun. . .
boingoman..yeah I agree..what my point is, all the gear does REALLY is make it easier and quicker...how much money is that worth. Sometimes it's worth it, sometimes not. I always weigh the cost vs. benefit. The ammount of time that it saves me is often not that much when you count the enormous price tag. When you look at something like an SSL console or something.. how much time or energy will it really save vs. the cost. And really, I'm finding as time progresses that the ammount of effort to get a great result (due to new and better software and plugins) is lessened. There are some people who have this rediculous idea that they have to get whatever is considered the best most expensive shit out there to get great sounding mixes... not true.. I find that the difference between really bottom of the barrel and mid priced gear is huge, but the difference between the middle of the road gear and the ultra high end gear is very small.. The way the high end gear sounds can usually be replicated in fairly convincing ways with enough know how. And, even if it can't... the chances are that you REALLY actually need that Avalon, vs. just love the way it sounds are small. Anyone with real engineering chops can make a multi million dollar studio sound great, and work equally as well in a home studio environment.
SonicAlbert is absolutely correct. I did say a-d thoMy way of thinking is that as long as you have it really nice going in, and you can hear properly and accurately what's going on.. you can have a relatively easy time sculpting it into something just as good as an analogue mix...with all of the added, impossible to achieve, digital exclusive, techniques. Hell, if you want the analogue sound for a track you could even at that point send it out to a tape track, or through a console channel.
that made my day...
TerraMortim
New member
I love how this thread is starting to turn into a piss war.
I pissed about 10 feet further, so I win... It pays to drink a lot of alchohol so as to build up a lot of excess waste liquid, with some real deep colour and odour to it, (hey these things are just as much about show value than sportsmanship, you know?) in the bladder and then have sex very shortly before the piss war is to begin, ideally climaxing less than 10 minutes before the urination is due to comence, in order to build up enough resistance through the eurethra, thus causing a much longer and powerful stream. It's a bit like a volcano, once it blows it'll blow big the more resistance is applied to the stream... oh yeah.. uhh I also eat my wheaties..
TerraMortim
New member
oh yeah, the PT dudes...don't take it so personally. Of course you could churn out awesome results with PT..it still is an excellent program... besides..read what I was saying earlier about how really it's pretty much up to the engineer themselves to make something sound great, not hardly the gear used at all. The thing with pro tools which makes it a bit archaic are the fact that they haven't REALLY modernized it all that much compared to other software lately..there's been no real innovations introduced, just attempts to make it up to date with the competing software. Then you are absolutely locked into only using their hardware. PT LE, one of the big things that gets me... 24 tracks only? whaa? The thing that really pisses me off about digidesign, is that they make you pay for certain funcitionality that comes FREE with other software. So you want to work with OMF's do ya? We'll that'll be a huge fee.. Even though it was Avid (the parent company of Digidesign) that invented fucking OMFs.. All other software at a competing level gives you full access to that for free.
PT's audio engine is starting to, in the last year or two, become a bit in need of revamping..it's inheritly queter and quicker to audibly clip, due to the lack of significant soft clipping (sorry, but sterile isn't really musical.. isn't that always the beef with digital anyway?). The editing is wicked, which remains in my opinion one of the only things PT has above any single piece of software that has been released in the recent past.
I have no idea why, but when I was doing some 5.1 mixes in PT, cause the studio I was working in didn't have Logic, it just couldn't keep up with the 5.1 mixes in Logic at my home studio... It was a full on HD3, and it had trouble following all the automation, sometimes just didn't follow it at all. The audio engine, even at a 1024 buffer setting was giving the typical low buffer grainy weirdness. The fact that the faders cliped audibly at the drop of a hat drove me absolutely insane.. Even with the HD3, I had to downmix to stems from what I was running in real time on Logic at home, kept running out of voices. Granted, I was asking a lot more than is usual from it (there is so much automation and effects...where pretty much every parameter that can be automated is through the entire song..hey it's ambient.. that it ends up taking up to about an hour to do an offline bounce) And yes, it was the last version before PT 7.. but, from my PT buddies, I hear that there is very little difference other than cosmetic in PT 7. Then they have the archaic DAE, which from what I've seen, and have experienced, often fights with CoreAudio on OS X for control, and disconnects for no reason at random. Hell Logic can use TDM/RTAS AND Au's (would love native vst support again in Logic tho.. like in Ableton)
I've wondered why PT on mac doesn't allow for AU support. If they went with CoreAudio you'd see huge performance increases, as it works at the very core of the system instead of just on top of it.
What I mean is..PT is a very good piece of software, with great features and an efficient work flow... however, if they don't start updating it more significantly than they have it will become more and more behind the technology curve. The hardware isn't that bad, but if I'm going to pay $1,000 for a 003r and PT, I'd expect it to be able to do more than 24 damn tracks...OMF support, should be included..what about nicer bundled plugs, less bugs (WOAAAH there are a lot). Maybe allowing for it to work with something else other than Digi or m-audio interfaces. They should improve the audio engine to keep up with everyone else, soft clipping would be nice, 32 bit, or 32bit floating point on the channel faders would be a big improvement. They should take advantage of the full power of their damn hardware for god sakes..there are some features of Digi hardware that LOGIC can take advantage of that PT doesn't even include implimentation of. Logic ALMOST started going the same way as PT as they hadn't updated in forever... but Logic 8 is astounding so they're back in the cutting edge game again.
But yeah, nothing wrong with using PT, it works, but it's starting to become too behind to charge the price they want for it, compared to other equivilant packages. It's not as much the industry standard (except in film and post work) that it used to be.. it's becoming much more common to see DP, Logic, Cubase and others in pro studios.
PT's audio engine is starting to, in the last year or two, become a bit in need of revamping..it's inheritly queter and quicker to audibly clip, due to the lack of significant soft clipping (sorry, but sterile isn't really musical.. isn't that always the beef with digital anyway?). The editing is wicked, which remains in my opinion one of the only things PT has above any single piece of software that has been released in the recent past.
I have no idea why, but when I was doing some 5.1 mixes in PT, cause the studio I was working in didn't have Logic, it just couldn't keep up with the 5.1 mixes in Logic at my home studio... It was a full on HD3, and it had trouble following all the automation, sometimes just didn't follow it at all. The audio engine, even at a 1024 buffer setting was giving the typical low buffer grainy weirdness. The fact that the faders cliped audibly at the drop of a hat drove me absolutely insane.. Even with the HD3, I had to downmix to stems from what I was running in real time on Logic at home, kept running out of voices. Granted, I was asking a lot more than is usual from it (there is so much automation and effects...where pretty much every parameter that can be automated is through the entire song..hey it's ambient.. that it ends up taking up to about an hour to do an offline bounce) And yes, it was the last version before PT 7.. but, from my PT buddies, I hear that there is very little difference other than cosmetic in PT 7. Then they have the archaic DAE, which from what I've seen, and have experienced, often fights with CoreAudio on OS X for control, and disconnects for no reason at random. Hell Logic can use TDM/RTAS AND Au's (would love native vst support again in Logic tho.. like in Ableton)
I've wondered why PT on mac doesn't allow for AU support. If they went with CoreAudio you'd see huge performance increases, as it works at the very core of the system instead of just on top of it.
What I mean is..PT is a very good piece of software, with great features and an efficient work flow... however, if they don't start updating it more significantly than they have it will become more and more behind the technology curve. The hardware isn't that bad, but if I'm going to pay $1,000 for a 003r and PT, I'd expect it to be able to do more than 24 damn tracks...OMF support, should be included..what about nicer bundled plugs, less bugs (WOAAAH there are a lot). Maybe allowing for it to work with something else other than Digi or m-audio interfaces. They should improve the audio engine to keep up with everyone else, soft clipping would be nice, 32 bit, or 32bit floating point on the channel faders would be a big improvement. They should take advantage of the full power of their damn hardware for god sakes..there are some features of Digi hardware that LOGIC can take advantage of that PT doesn't even include implimentation of. Logic ALMOST started going the same way as PT as they hadn't updated in forever... but Logic 8 is astounding so they're back in the cutting edge game again.
But yeah, nothing wrong with using PT, it works, but it's starting to become too behind to charge the price they want for it, compared to other equivilant packages. It's not as much the industry standard (except in film and post work) that it used to be.. it's becoming much more common to see DP, Logic, Cubase and others in pro studios.
GOODLAND
New member
Pro Tools (HD and LE) like ALL OTHER similar audio programs has flaws and aspects that need improvement. But they are not nearly bad enough for me to drop my whole PT rig and move on to logic, or anything similar. Once you've been working with Pro Tools and have become efficient and fluent with it, there is NO reason to change DAWs.
All the issues that TerraMortim was pointing out in Pro Tools HD3 are non-existent with PT 7.x on Intel Macs (Which kick major ass by the way).
I do see where your coming from when you were talking about PTLE lacking some features that many others do have right from the start (but to be fair to digidesign, PTLE allows 32 audio tracks, not 24). But I hear there are Major additions to come in Digidesigns next update/release of Pro Tools.
Just for the record, the last 10+ Commercial/Pro studios I've seen and been in contact with, do have PT HD systems, most using the Icon D-Control interface as well. Pro Tools is still very much the industry standard, and I imagine it will stay that way for some time.
All the issues that TerraMortim was pointing out in Pro Tools HD3 are non-existent with PT 7.x on Intel Macs (Which kick major ass by the way).
I do see where your coming from when you were talking about PTLE lacking some features that many others do have right from the start (but to be fair to digidesign, PTLE allows 32 audio tracks, not 24). But I hear there are Major additions to come in Digidesigns next update/release of Pro Tools.
Just for the record, the last 10+ Commercial/Pro studios I've seen and been in contact with, do have PT HD systems, most using the Icon D-Control interface as well. Pro Tools is still very much the industry standard, and I imagine it will stay that way for some time.
pipelineaudio
Well-known member
Just a minor quibble, PT may be the Mix Magazine/Conservatory of Recording Arts and Sciences standard, but no recording industry standards organization has defined PT or any other DAW as a standard
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
By standard I'm sure he meant that it is the most commonly used, as in a de facto standard.
pipelineaudio
Well-known member
Im pretty sure soundblaster or behringer is more commonly used
GOODLAND
New member
I stand corrected.
However, I would have to say that PT HD is used more than any other in the Top Notch Digital Audio recording Studios. I'm not talking semi-pro or home studio (this is however homerecording.com) I'm referring to high end Professional Digital studios (Fox, Paramount, Warner Bros, SB Sound Design, etc.)
And it's not a bad idea to get yourself familiar with Pro Tools HD or LE, if anyone is planning on making a career out of some type of sound recording, mixing, or composing; knowing Pro Tools will benefit you greatly. Especially if your called upon to work in other studios.
pipelineaudio
Well-known member
Oh yeah, I think we should change this threads name to,
yep, digital still isn't analog.
Yeah tell sweetnubz: In other news, the world is round
NashBackslash
New member
sweetnubs said:
sweetnubs said:
So where are the samples?
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
Okay fine, but I'm talking about by professionals and pro recording studios. Here in LA, most if not all recording session dates are recorded to ProTools in commercial studios and sound stages. You just don't see anything else.
GOODLAND
New member
Yes, thank you. That's what I was trying to say as well.
Last edited:
pipelineaudio
Well-known member
then we get into trying to define "pro"
I am sure you guys realize, that most of the "pro's" back in the day wouldnt touch PT or any DAW with a ten foot pole. Closest they would get, was RADAR
If by "pro" you mean someone who makes money in music, then behringer is spanking everyone. I would also hazard a guess that there are 100 times more cubase licences out there than PT, ditto for sonar
Most of the good studios are gone now. So if we narrowly define "pro" to mean ADAT generation guys, or conservatory/full sail created engineers, making money making records that sound so piss poor that anyone with a soundblaster and a week's training could make them, then yes, there are more "pro's" using
PT than anything else. I guess in a commercial sense, you could very honestly and accurately say: Records that SELL are made with PT by the majority, between years xxxx - xxx?
That is very true and I think that was your point
But that double edged razor is in a vinegar pit, in the exact same way we can say: Records that SELL are made by Brittney Spears
does that make her the industry standard?
I am sure you guys realize, that most of the "pro's" back in the day wouldnt touch PT or any DAW with a ten foot pole. Closest they would get, was RADAR
If by "pro" you mean someone who makes money in music, then behringer is spanking everyone. I would also hazard a guess that there are 100 times more cubase licences out there than PT, ditto for sonar
Most of the good studios are gone now. So if we narrowly define "pro" to mean ADAT generation guys, or conservatory/full sail created engineers, making money making records that sound so piss poor that anyone with a soundblaster and a week's training could make them, then yes, there are more "pro's" using
PT than anything else. I guess in a commercial sense, you could very honestly and accurately say: Records that SELL are made with PT by the majority, between years xxxx - xxx?
That is very true and I think that was your point
But that double edged razor is in a vinegar pit, in the exact same way we can say: Records that SELL are made by Brittney Spears
does that make her the industry standard?
GOODLAND
New member
I believe I did state what I meant by "Pro"
Pro Tools alone like all other DAWs doesn't do much. You need good outboard gear, and MOST (not all) the "Pro" studios which have top notch outboard gear use Pro Tools HD for their DAW.
Behringer and soundblaster don't count as professional outboard gear, because it's not what the majority (if any) of the pro's use (and it's fairly shitty equipment in comparison) . Again, in this conversation "Pro" means studio's like Paramount, Warner Bros, Fox, SB Sound, and Many of the big wig LA studios.
Professional sounding music CAN and IS made on many different DAWs, but Pro Tools is used the MOST in the "PROFESSIONAL" environment.
That doesn't make PT the "best" or the "industry standard", but it does make it a type of standard; maybe we should label it as the "Professional Standard".
TerraMortim
New member
he has no samples.. from his own admition...every thing he's done is unreleaseed...maybe he makes records for his cats.
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
There's no need to parse the meaning of "pro" or to define it away into oblivion.
When I walk into a commercial recording studio here in LA, they are recording to a ProTools system. I don't see any other systems. That's what I mean by "industry standard" and "pro". It's really pretty simple.
Of course I realize that many people use Cubase and other programs to create music. I use Digital Performer myself, and I'm a "pro" in the sense that I make a living at music and work regularly.
But I also use PT, and really haven't seen anything else in a commercial studio for a long time. Some studios still have the multitrack tape machines. But along with those is a PT system. There's really no motivation to use anything else, as any studio or recording engineer wants to easily be compatible with whoever came before and after them in the process.
Nobody ever has asked me to deliver audio in "Cubase format" or "RADAR format", or anything else other than "ProTools session". The only other format I deliver in as simple WAV file. That's pretty common too, for delivering finished tracks.
TerraMortim
New member
That is a truth, but a truth that's starting to fade. In the movie world, PT is still the only choice...for good reason really.,..PT IS the nicest for fitting stuff to film and the film workflow.. but for music it's broadening much past what it used to be. Esp over in europe, They seem to be gung ho for Logic, Cubase, Sonar, all those much more than PT these days.. LA will probably be one of the last places to give up PT in my prediction. Hell, weren't they still using DA-88s for delivering soundtrack mixes commonly down there up until recently?
Also do remember, Albert that big studios don't nessisarily have the edge of technology and rarely have. They like to play it safe with things that are tried and tested for years before it's adopted. It's understandible why, since they're dealing with such big money and strict schedules...can't afford for bugs or glitches. Of course there are PT rigs everywhere in pretty much any commercial recording studio. It was up until recently (a few years ago) that PT still had the cutting edge. This allong with the, what we have works so we'll stick with it mentality will probably keep PT in most commercial studios for a long time. Bigger studios are somewhat on the wane. If you aren't recording that latest Brittany Spears record, there's not that much point in doing the whole thing in a big expensive studio. THe Chances are, the ammount of high end gear that you would actually use could be rented for so much cheaper than one day in a facility like that. It can be argued that a drum room is why a studio is needed..and that would be correct. But, if you really wanted to keep the budget low.. you could rent a Roland V-pro kit and record midi into your daw with something like BFD or something and get really convincing results (I've actually done half of one album with purely samples and half with live drums...the difference is not as big as you would think, once you perfect the drum programming)
But yeah, my whole original point wasn't that PT was horrible. I've used it many times, I'm pretty fluent in it, and it does do the job. My point was they charge insanely more for software that has less functionality than the competition, just because hey...we're digidesign, everyone uses pro-tools. It's kind of like wal-mart (except for the price thing)..no matter what they do, people will shop there...they could be impaling autistic children on red hot stakes outside of their store and killing kittens in the isles and people would still go there..just cause...it's wal-mart.
Oh man, don't get me started on RADAR hehehe. How did they convince anyone to pay that much money for those things?
Also do remember, Albert that big studios don't nessisarily have the edge of technology and rarely have. They like to play it safe with things that are tried and tested for years before it's adopted. It's understandible why, since they're dealing with such big money and strict schedules...can't afford for bugs or glitches. Of course there are PT rigs everywhere in pretty much any commercial recording studio. It was up until recently (a few years ago) that PT still had the cutting edge. This allong with the, what we have works so we'll stick with it mentality will probably keep PT in most commercial studios for a long time. Bigger studios are somewhat on the wane. If you aren't recording that latest Brittany Spears record, there's not that much point in doing the whole thing in a big expensive studio. THe Chances are, the ammount of high end gear that you would actually use could be rented for so much cheaper than one day in a facility like that. It can be argued that a drum room is why a studio is needed..and that would be correct. But, if you really wanted to keep the budget low.. you could rent a Roland V-pro kit and record midi into your daw with something like BFD or something and get really convincing results (I've actually done half of one album with purely samples and half with live drums...the difference is not as big as you would think, once you perfect the drum programming)
But yeah, my whole original point wasn't that PT was horrible. I've used it many times, I'm pretty fluent in it, and it does do the job. My point was they charge insanely more for software that has less functionality than the competition, just because hey...we're digidesign, everyone uses pro-tools. It's kind of like wal-mart (except for the price thing)..no matter what they do, people will shop there...they could be impaling autistic children on red hot stakes outside of their store and killing kittens in the isles and people would still go there..just cause...it's wal-mart.
Oh man, don't get me started on RADAR hehehe. How did they convince anyone to pay that much money for those things?
Last edited:
sweetnubs
New member
Ok now that I know terratard doesn't know how to calibrate a tape deck i can put him on "ignore" since obviously he has no professional experience with a tape deck. By the way a RADAR sounds infinitely better than your stupid MOTU box. You may be able to find a "RADAR" emulator plug-in that will make your MOTU box sound just as good, I mean a vintage warmer sounds just like a tape deck right? Don't forget to put your helmet on before you go outside!