ProTools24 MIX

[pandamonk]

Hi,
Ok, I'm going to start up a studio and i wish to use Pro tools. I looked about and discovered you need digidesign's hardware in order to use TDM, and found the Pro Tools|HD systems. Unfortunately I do not have a spare £8000, lol. So, instead of giving up, I've been looking around for an alternative, and have found the ProTool24 MIX bunch. All i need is 2 ADAT I/O slots so am thinking of the "24-Bit ADAT Bridge I/O". Now to connect this to a computer do you need a special PCI card. I have found this Does it do the job or will i need to fork out a lot more for something else?

 

[Joseph Hanna]

No...that's an old SCSI accelarator card. Nothing to do with a Pro Tools rig except for it's ability to allow you to run SCSI drives if you had a proper system

I'm not at all sure what you are describing when you say Pro Tools 24/Mix "bunch".

Having said that the older Pro Tools solutions which included "Mix" as well as "Pro Tools/24" (two different systems) had a finite number of I/O based on the PCI cards involved. In other words the PCI card itself dictated how many interfaces and in turn how many channels a particular system could support.

Two ADAT/24 bridges is 32 channels of I/O and that would require a certain combination of Pro Tools PCI cards (again I don't know exactly what your describing here) in order to support that many channels.

If memory serves you'd need at least a "Mix Plus" two card (Core and Farm card) system. Also beware the older PT/24 card (before Mix systems) only supported 8 i/o total so be careful there.

Finally...Digidesign has made an enormous push to rid the market of the older systems. Not so great for consumers but a good business move. Support and development is COMPLETELY gone for these solutions. The great fear here is you'd be investing in a painfully archaic rig with NO room to move ahead.

Better off with an 002 and new computer

 

[Chris Shaeffer]

Better off with an 002 and new computer

This may well be true. At work we have a Mix 24 system and its good.... but the 002 I have at come keeps right up with it in terms of sound quality. Not plugin count, of course.

The last version of Pro Tools that supports mix hardware is 6.4.1 and they aren't updating it any more. Mix is officially dead.

It DOES still work, though, and you can sometimes find complete systems for sale around $2500US.

Even at that price I'm not even tempted. There is a good reason Digi is doing its best to get Mix systems off the market. They really don't sound all that hot unless you have a great analog front end.

Take care,
Chris

 

[bennychico11]

i agree...don't go with the Mix systems.
I use them at work as well and it's plugin processing capability for the newer plugins just really isn't that great. You get a reverb or two and a couple EQs and you've maxed out your Core card already.
If you have the need for that many inputs, invest in the HDs...otherwise just go with a 002. Besides, like Chris said, 6.4.1 is the last version that works with it and Digi has just rolled out 7.0.

 

[pandamonk]

Ok. i'll tell you what I'm planning. I am just starting up in the recording business, and want to jump in at the deep end. I don't have a huge budget but have found the Behringer DDX3216 mixing desk. I know Behringer don't have the best reputation, but for the price i think it's a good product. I will be wanting to record in 5.1 surround, as i see this is where the music industry might be heading. I have just started a college course in music technology and everything used is Pro Tools. To avoid confussion, i decided i would prefer to use Pro Tools as well(will choose another if Pro Tools isn't suitable). I'm only 17 and have a very limited budget, so I'm looking for the cheapest option. I have read a lot about it but still don't know exactly what I'm looking for.
Help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Pandamonk

 

[bennychico11]

don't invest in a Pro Tools TDM setup for now then. you'll probably find you regretted diving in and getting it. Buy Logic, Nuendo, or Cubase and get something that has at least 8 inputs.

You're really young right now and surround sound is a big task to take on. Do you have any projects in mind for surround sound? Surround is still fairly new in the music industry and I honestly don't see it catching on anytime soon. First of all, look at the invention of the MP3 players and iTunes...all stereo files. The average joe prefers to listen with headphones. I don't know own a surround setup and probably would only get one to watch movies with. If you're interested in doing suround sound for movies, that's another game all together. Mixing in 5.1 is fun, but really for music it's not all that great. I personally don't like hearing the drums in front of me, a guitarist behind me, the vocalist off to the left, etc. etc. I have two ears, give me a stereo image and I'm fine

If you are really serious about it and have Pro Tools hardware specific questions, wander over to the Pro Tools forum and people there will be able to guide you to what might work. Unfortunately, the expensive units are the only ones that do surround in Pro Tools (there's a work around with the 002...but it's an old school work around).

 

[pandamonk]

I actually have 2 sets of 5.1 surround speakers, and know a few others who have them too. I've heard that you can record in surround but when played in stereo it works fine as stereo. I know that mp3 is really catching on at the moment, and i am planning on accomodating them, possibly offering bands an online mp3 shop to sell their songs(just a thought). Ok, if i was to go for a 5.1 setup, what would you consider the best option would be for me to take? I've used Cubase before, and i'm not too keen on it. I'm thinking of getting the Behringer DDX3216 and connect it by 4 ADATs, 2 I/Os. I have found PCI cards such as this to connect to the computer. I'm thinking on the M-AUDIO Studiophile LX4 5.1 setup as my speaker system. Are these good choices for a low budget studio, or should i change my plan?

 

[Chris Shaeffer]

Wow. 5.1 and "budget" are really difficult to get into the same sentance.

I think you're on the right track with going into surround, though. Its a very interesting technology and a lot of fun to play with... but its pricey no matter how you do it.

I don't have a full surround system or enough experience to really help you get one set up, but I've also been doing my research and have a few observations I can share with certainty:

That mixer probably won't cut it. Its looks like a good budget *stereo* digital mixer, but it would be a challenge to mix in surround on it. Surround panning is very different than stereo panning.

Software-wise Pro Tools LE won't do what you want with surround BUT you could get a 002 Rack and use Pro Tools for stereo work and Cubase SX for surround work. That's not exactly the lowest budget path, but it gets your hands on light versions of the industry standards: PT for audio and video, and its main competitor in video work, Nuendo. Cubase SX is similar enough to Nuendo that shifting up wouldn't be too hard. (I mention video because that's the main playground of surround at the moment and its likely to stay that way for a while.)

You'll save a LOT of money if you mix on the computer instead of a mixing board. You'll need at least 8 preamps to get 8 mics into the computer (the 002r has 4 already, so you'd need at least 4 more to use its 8 analog inputs.) Mixers usually are the cheapest way to get a bunch of preamps, but then you use the computer to mix and not the mixer. That way you don't have to spend tons of money on all the outputs you'd need on your audio interface to mix on hardware- you just need enough outputs to feed your 5.1 system.

Take care,
Chris

 

[EleKtriKaz]

i just switched over to the Digi 002 rack and Protools, from using an Aardvark Q10 and Cubase SX. So far I'm really enjoying Protools, but the LE version is a little annoying in that it has limited track count. Is it possible to use the full version of Protools with the Digi 002? Or doesn anyone know of a way to get the track count above 32? Thanks.

 

[bennychico11]

Is it possible to use the full version of Protools with the Digi 002? Or doesn anyone know of a way to get the track count above 32? Thanks.

no.
you can bounce tracks down to stereo tracks, or use your 002 with another program when you find yourself running into the 32 track limit. How often does that happen? If quite frequently, then perhaps you should think about selling the 002 or investing in something else.

 

[EleKtriKaz]

Thanks for the info. It doesn't happen too often, and the playlist function in Protools will help somewhat as I like to keep multiple takes for mixing. I ran into the problem when I tried to open a session that was recorded elsewhere on a Mix|24 system, and it wouldn't play correctly because of the limited number of voices in LE.

Also, does anyone know of some free plugins for Protools? I really liked all the weird little plugins that came stock with Cubase.

 

[guido #2]

Buy a 001 off eBay and get an ADAT converter for an additional 8 i/o.

Who cares if there is no support. The system still rocks, and its cheap.

Tascam doesn't support or manufacture half of the gear in my studio, but I aint tossing it out!

 

[EleKtriKaz]

The problem isn't the number of inputs, it's the playback track count within Protools. I'm fine with 8 inputs, but I want to be able to have 60 or 70 tracks of audio playback should the need arise.

 

[Chris Shaeffer]

Daaaaaammmmnnnn!!!!

What are you doing that might require 60-70 tracks?!

That's gonna be one helluva pricey rig no matter how cheap you get it.

C

 

[pandamonk]

That mixer probably won't cut it. Its looks like a good budget *stereo* digital mixer, but it would be a challenge to mix in surround on it. Surround panning is very different than stereo panning.

I'm sure I have read somewhere that the DDX3216 supports surround sound. Yes, here .

 

[Chris Shaeffer]

Daaaaaammmmnnnn!!!!

What are you doing that might require 60-70 tracks?!

That's gonna be one helluva pricey rig no matter how cheap you get it.

C

I just got my first negative rep for this comment. Unsigned, of course.

Whoever you are- relax. I'm not a pro tools freak or defending low tracks counts. I'm curious what what kind of project requires 60-70 tracks of playback. Did you think I was asking just to see my words on the screen?

Learn to read and show me a cheap computer that can handle 70 tracks of playback. Prove me wrong.

I pissed someone off without even trying. That was easy.

-C

 

[EleKtriKaz]

I just got my first negative rep for this comment. Unsigned, of course.

Whoever you are- relax. I'm not a pro tools freak or defending low tracks counts. I'm curious what what kind of project requires 60-70 tracks of playback. Did you think I was asking just to see my words on the screen?

Learn to read and show me a cheap computer that can handle 70 tracks of playback. Prove me wrong.

I pissed someone off without even trying. That was easy.

-C

I feel somewhat responsible for your negative rep point, since it was my post you were responding to, but it definitely wasn't me.

I don't need 60-70 inputs. Just maybe that many for playback. Part of it is that I like to keep everything on separate tracks. So every little sample, or snipet of something is on its own separate track. I should probably stop doing it that way.

 

[Chris Shaeffer]

Nah- do it however you like! No reason not to except that even empty sections of tracks eat some resources.

And feel no responsibility for the random neg. rep. Just keep us up to date in your mastering internship thread.

Its especially easy to keep things labeled and organized that way, BTW. I tend to start that way, then consolidate onto less tracks however its makes sense- usually because I want to use the same effects on those bits. When I don't consolidate the session usually starts to get out of hand for me. Where did I put that 'Whoosh!" sound? And where is the penny whistle toot again? Crap!!

I usually end up with an "Accents L" and 'Accents R" track with wicked automation to account for the varying levels, effects and what not when I do that. Then I make sure the clips are labled well.

There are probably at least twice as many ways of doing things as there are people doing it...

Take care,
Chris

 

[bennychico11]

I just got my first negative rep for this comment. Unsigned, of course.

Whoever you are- relax. I'm not a pro tools freak or defending low tracks counts.

shit, if anything I should be the one receiving negetive rep then!
whoever it was...give it to ME!!!!!!!! BRING IT ON!!!

Learn to read and show me a cheap computer that can handle 70 tracks of playback. Prove me wrong.

any major post production facility in CA. but they usually aren't your average home-recordist trying to lay down some beatz with a Dell!

 

[EleKtriKaz]

I usually end up with an "Accents L" and 'Accents R" track with wicked automation to account for the varying levels, effects and what not when I do that. Then I make sure the clips are labled well.

Yeah, that's what I've done in the past when the project starts trying to crash my computer. I just hate doing all that automation. It's so time consuming.

I just moved over to Pro tools though, and one of the things I love is that Show/Hide menu to the left of the Edit Window. I just deselect everything that I'm not working on at the time and it disappears, then I click it back when I want to see it again. Never knew I needed that feature, but now I feel like I can't work without it. The playlist feature is pretty handy as well.

I have dual 2ghz Mac G5 now too, so that should cut down on the overloading system resources problem as well.

BTW...can anyone recommend a good Pro tools forum? I've got some serious learning to do.