# Pro Tools 11 has 64-bit processing and offline bouncing



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 7, 2013)

http://voxcaliber.com/

(I'm not the developer, but I am a partner in Voxcaliber.com - and hope everyone visits every day - so this is in the Commercial Announcements section.)


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Apr 7, 2013)

OK now this is interesting...

Does anyone here compose in ProTools? 

64 bit and fast bounce is a deal MAKER for me. 

How well does the score/midi work? Does it transition to full Sibelius easily?


----------



## dcoscina (Apr 7, 2013)

I used it solely for over a year. I recently went back to DP as I've been working with film more and more. I did like PT 10 and only really left because of the lack of 64 bit.

Mile Verta uses Pro Tools 8HD if I'm not mistaken. The work flow is pretty quick and I love plug ins like Strike and Hybrid. I could see upgrading.


----------



## Arbee (Apr 7, 2013)

I use PT10 exclusively and really like it. I also use VE Pro so the 64 bit issue is not such a big issue for me, but it will allow me to set things out a little more to my liking.

I will probably wait though for the first round of bugs to be fixed and ensure my tools can live without RTAS before I jump.

.


----------



## mverta (Apr 7, 2013)

I use PT8, with a very large template. I use VE Pro locally, and across my network to a second Mac tower, and a Mac laptop. I've never had a hitch, which is why I stick to it.

_Mike


----------



## Greg (Apr 7, 2013)

Catching up to Logic! Almost.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson (Apr 7, 2013)

I was with Pro Tools since 6.x but started sleeping around with Cubase 5 a few years back. Now I can only roll my eyes at how long it took them.

I bet you they still stifle track counts.

However I still love Pro Tools.


----------



## benmrx (Apr 7, 2013)

This is good news! I'm wondering if there's much (if any) enhancements to the MIDI side? Either way, between this and the recent Adobe announcements for After Effects has me STOKED!


----------



## antoniopandrade (Apr 7, 2013)

I saw an overview video and one thing that really intrigued me was that PT11 has different input and output buffering. So essentially you can have an ultra-low latency for monitoring, whilst your plug-ins are being processed in an entirely different latency! I wonder if this means we can now run samplers in super low latency and stuff like reverbs, delays, etc in a higher latency, saving CPU power? Very interesting development.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 8, 2013)

A little more info here:

http://www.sonicscoop.com/2013/04/07/av ... -metering/

and

http://apps.avid.com/protools11/

The cynic in me is bound to say that yet again nearly every feature folks are excited about has been in other daws for years. But the significance is that while Avid have been doing little more than playing catch up now for 5 years, they were already a colossus in the first place. Basically, with each release, there's less and less reasons to NOT use Pro Tools. It'll be great for my post work.

But - from the announced features at any rate, it certainly won't switch me over from Cubase for composing work. First (and this, like many things with PT, is so mundane) are the track display options. Operating at small track heights is virtually impossible, as the names collapse to five characters and I can't see where the hell I am. Second - I rely on EuCon for all midi CC controls, which is a Cubase-only feature. Third - and this applies to post very much as well - better audio editing tools using the mouse would still be very welcome, I still find audio editing clunky as hell really, and next to Pyramix still feels stone age in this area.

No doubt the preview video for PT12 will be full of audio pros orgasming over these exciting new features though.... at which point resistance will be futile and all other DAWs can pack up and go home.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 8, 2013)

Oh CRAP - they discontinued CPTK and it's a $1k upgrade to keep these features in PT11 by switching to PTHD. And yet again, Avid shaft their customer base.

There's a long video about PT11 here, but I've linked the CPTK info on the tmeline here http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 48#t=2473s


----------



## hotsizzlemusic (Apr 8, 2013)

I use PTHD Native exclusively for composing and mixing....I couldnt be more excited. Mostly for the new audio engine and video engine.

As they claim, more power - less errors on all fronts.

Typically I would have to convert all pix to photo-Jpeg for smooth HD (or even SD) playback...but it seems as if you can/alter settings from within your session now using the same engine as avid's media composer...we'll see.

Also, I use VEP so 64 bit isnt the biggest thing in the world for me...but it will help to streamline my workflow, which Im all for. In time, once more VI's catch up to AAX...it would be nice to host everything under PT

the bounce to disk feature is welcomed for QT bounces, but also not a major feature for me. I print my tracks and export the consolidated audio anyway (ext hardware, etc.)

I use and rely on PT everyday for my livelihood and Im extremely happy and excited by these changes. FINALLY looks like a 'current' gen DAW and not a glossy coat of paint over old and dated DAE technology


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Apr 8, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Sun Apr 07 said:


> Oh CRAP - they discontinued CPTK and it's a $1k upgrade to keep these features in PT11 by switching to PTHD. And yet again, Avid shaft their customer base.
> 
> There's a long video about PT11 here, but I've linked the CPTK info on the tmeline here http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 48#t=2473s



What is CPTK,Guy?

EDIT: Ah, complete production toolkit.


----------



## MikeH (Apr 8, 2013)

The EPIC official video 


http://bcove.me/2qvs3t1f


----------



## Dan Mott (Apr 8, 2013)

MikeH @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> The EPIC official video
> 
> 
> http://bcove.me/2qvs3t1f




That video makes me feel incredibly stupid. 

Luckily I'm not that stupid to buy into that fake ass hype.


----------



## passenger57 (Apr 8, 2013)

Wow it's 2009 and PT finally has 64bit and fast bounce! Imagine how awesome it will be in the year 2013!!... Oh nevermind, I can't think that far ahead right now.


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Apr 8, 2013)

Does anyone have experience with PTools on Windows?


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 8, 2013)

Jimbo 88 @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> Does anyone have experience with PTools on Windows?



PT10 has been very stable for me on 64bit win 7. Will probably continue to do so unless they rethink their pricing strategy, which is unlikely. Such a shame Merging never got their act together with Pyramix...


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 8, 2013)

http://duc.avid.com/showpost.php?p=2025585&postcount=3

There are a LOT of caveats as to what system (MLion only) and computers it will run on. Shall wait and see what interfaces are supported in webinar tonight. If you are running big mixes and picture work this may be a real time saver. Offline bounce for me is the big thing but at what cost, as it is $599. That is without a new interface, maybe ?

I doubt any of the inconsistencies with VI's have been addressed or I assume they would have trumpeted that I am sure.

PT has always been the best in class audio editing and mixing platform bar none, only to be let down by other issues.


----------



## The Darris (Apr 8, 2013)

Jimbo 88 @ Sun Apr 07 said:


> OK now this is interesting...
> 
> Does anyone here compose in ProTools?
> 
> ...



I work in Pro Tools 8 LE, if 11 is anything like the rest of them then the midi side will lack deeply. I haven't seen the detailed specs but I will assume they have track limitations which would suck, I am certain the 64-bit frame work will be buggy, and since it is on Windows 8, well that is just a huge deal breaker for me. With $399 being my upgrade path when I can crossgrade to Cubase 7 for $350, have 64 bit, and unlimited track count with amazing midi/composing functionality...no brainer for me. The problem I have with Avid Pro Tools is they come out with a new version often, their support sucks (you have to pay per ticket), and the software is buggy. I mean, once you get your system to a stable workflow and bug fixes out of it, they release a new version, charge you for it, and then you spend the next year getting that new setup to work flawlessly. There is a reason Avid is having so much trouble trying to stay alive.

Pro Tools is great for audio and I will most likely mix my compositions with it but for the creative/writing process, there are much better DAWs to handle this.


----------



## mgtube (Apr 8, 2013)

The Darris @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> Jimbo 88 @ Sun Apr 07 said:
> 
> 
> > OK now this is interesting...
> ...



Totally agree with you. I'm currently using Pro Tools 9.0.3 in conjunction with VEPro and it works ok, but that's because I've had the time to get used to it. It's great when it comes to mixing but really lacks certain features in the midi front. 

I hope they'll announce some nice new things for midi composers but I highly doubt it...


----------



## The Darris (Apr 8, 2013)

mgtube @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> Totally agree with you. I'm currently using Pro Tools 9.0.3 in conjunction with VEPro and it works ok, but that's because I've had the time to get used to it. It's great when it comes to mixing but really lacks certain features in the midi front.
> 
> I hope they'll announce some nice new things for midi composers but I highly doubt it...



Yeah, I am hoping for Avid's sake, that they introduce some better functionality to the midi side. I have been using PT8 without VEpro or any way to host outside of PT. So frustrating. I honestly would prefer to use everything inside my DAW but I am getting closer and closer to getting VEpro to fix this. I made this how-to a while back when I had just gotten Orchestral Essentials. I thought I would make a template using it and show how I cut down my ram usage and such with kontakt. Hopefully, with PT 11, no one will have to go through this process. http://youtu.be/Zv0zizoogvo


----------



## dcoscina (Apr 8, 2013)

As far as MIDI goes, what do you guys want that it doesn't provide? It seems clear that Mike Verta isn't hampered by its GUI or functions and his music demos are incredibly fluid and developed.


----------



## The Darris (Apr 8, 2013)

dcoscina @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> As far as MIDI goes, what do you guys want that it doesn't provide? It seems clear that Mike Verta isn't hampered by its GUI or functions and his music demos are incredibly fluid and developed.



I don't know what all 11 has but in my version, there is no freeze function, the actual programming side is not very streamlined or user friendly. I am getting a great sound myself but there are other DAWs that would do a better job of creating the music. Pro Tools works against me in the creative process. That's great if it works for Mike Verta, PT works for him but it doesn't for me. I used the demo for Sonar X2 a while back and I was able to build a full template, orchestrate a quick mock-up, and sync it to picture all within the Sonar app. If I wanted to do that with PT, I would need to spend $2000 on a production suite by AVID. Seems kinda stupid when I can get 5.1 surround and smpte time code with Sonar or Cubase. Other than that, PT crashes on me constantly which it just frustrating. I have no other issues with my computer freezing up, ever, except when PT is open. Since it is an older PT, that means I get zero tech support for it. So, all of that pain and I can still produce quality music but I rather not deal with the pain. Pt 11 could be amazing but I will never buy it because of my experiences with 8.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Apr 8, 2013)

It's the guy, not the gear. Mike Verta would make a good composition in any DAW.


----------



## germancomponist (Apr 8, 2013)

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> It's the guy, not the gear. Mike Verta would make a good composition in any DAW.



So true!


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 8, 2013)

dcoscina @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> As far as MIDI goes, what do you guys want that it doesn't provide? It seems clear that Mike Verta isn't hampered by its GUI or functions and his music demos are incredibly fluid and developed.



There is a serious flaw with midi timing in Protools which was introduced in PT 8. Previously an instrument track in record would suspend delay comp when record enabled but NOT recording, A PITA, but if you knew about it you could work around it, since then (PT8 onwards) a more serious flaw was introduced which throws off midi timing with high delay compensation values. If midi was quantized it fixed it, but if not it was all over the place.

Search for midi timing bug on the DUC it was pages long, AFAIK this was not fixed in 10 and AFAIK there has been no mention of any midi improvements in 11.

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=253266

Here it is, not funny.

Edit,to be fair according to AVID this was fixed in 9xxx, however midi timing is not a PT strong point and there still seems to be issues with it and users still complaining about it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 8, 2013)

Mike Verta has said that he plays his parts in without cheating.

I can only sound great for a beat or two at a time, so I rely on cheating. Pro Tools' MIDI is quite usable nowadays, but sequencing in it takes me a lot longer than in Logic.

But it's a great production program, no question, but I don't find it as fluid as other sequencers for composing.


----------



## The Darris (Apr 8, 2013)

woodsdenis @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> There is a serious flaw with midi timing in Protools which was introduced in PT 8. Previously an instrument track in record would suspend delay comp when record enabled but NOT recording, A PITA, but if you knew about it you could work around it, since then (PT8 onwards) a more serious flaw was introduced which throws off midi timing with high delay compensation values. If midi was quantized it fixed it, but if not it was all over the place.
> 
> Search for midi timing bug on the DUC it was pages long, this was not fixed in 10 and AFAIK there has been no mention of any midi improvements in 11.
> 
> ...



Yeah, it is really hard to get those played passages to sound in time, I usually have to select the whole passage and very carefully slide it around to get it to sound played and not quantized. As a pianist for 20 years, I know how to play in time and I know when I test out other DAWs, I never had that problem.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 8, 2013)

Given that they now have per-track delay compensation, odds are that this has been fixed.


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 8, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> Given that they now have per-track delay compensation, odds are that this has been fixed.



Thats been there since V6, I am a fan of PT and have used it for years, one fact is indisputable though, its midi side is its weak point. Its functions are all there no question, its when every thing starts to fall apart midi timing wise with big sessions that is a real PITA. There main focus is audio which is superb and where their big money is earned. Midi was only added to PT in V6 I think.

If you look at all the info on 11 its all audio/video related.


----------



## The Darris (Apr 8, 2013)

^yep.


----------



## zacnelson (Apr 8, 2013)

Hi Denis, Pro tools had midi long before PT6.

Dcoscina, I noticed you mentioned you love Hybrid, I must say I'm encouraged to hear this. I personally use Hybrid a lot and I suppose I thought I was the only one, I feel like I shouldn't like it because everybody talks so much about various expensive synths, but Hybrid sounds fine to me and it is so easy to understand and view.

I am personally thrilled about PT11, I have been using PT9 for years and didn't bother upgrading to PT10 since the features introduced were insignificant for the price. 

I use PT exclusively, and I am so excited about non-realtime bouncing, that will be an enormous time saver and will also encourage me to try more things creatively as a result, sometimes I don't bother with certain experiments because I know it will involve the time consuming stem-creation process. 

I find it funny that people make negative generalisations about PT and then you find out that they either don't use it or that they only have version 7 or something.

I imagine there will be minor improvements to PT in midi and miscellaneous points, as they do with each release. However the new Avid Audio Engine, Offilne bouncing and other headline features are so important that they no doubt wish to focus attention on these things only for now; the rest will be in the fine print


----------



## The Darris (Apr 8, 2013)

When I was getting started as a computer composer, I had only really used Finale up to that point. I new that Pro Tools was the flag ship DAW of the industry but I had no idea that the midi side of it was so weak or lacking. Yes, I use PT 8 LE. It is not a generalization that it's midi functionality is crap compared to the DAWs released at the same time. When I realized all this after I had purchased it, there was really no turning back because 9 was released just after I got it and the upgrade cost was way too much to turn around and get after buying 8. I could have gotten 10 but the problem with that would be that I was spending so much more on something that I would still be facing the same issues with (32bit app, poor midi functionality, etc. ) I have friends who use 10 professionally and they ask me, "Why are you using PT at all for midi??" Again, this is not just a generalization, if you don't max out the track count of midi channels and ram/cpu limits with PT then you won't understand the frustration. There are better DAWs for what I want do versus what PT will offer. If I had a big studio to record all of my pieces with a full orchestra, I would most likely have PT 11 HD, well worth the price for the new functionality.


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 8, 2013)

zacnelson @ Mon Apr 08 said:


> Hi Denis, Pro tools had midi long before PT6.



Sorry correction, PT5 in 1999 was the introduction of midi, point being that midi sequencing had been around on a MAC since 1986 with Performer. It took a while for Digi to integrate it into their system.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 8, 2013)

MasterTracks Pro was also around in 1986.  It took me a long time to wean myself off it and switch to Logic when Passport Designs went away.

And of course PT has always had basic MIDI recording, just not modern sequencer features.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 9, 2013)

To confirm: PT11 will have a maximum track count of 96 voices (from their webinar yesterday). The only way to get more is to either buy an HD system with hardware, or upgrade a CPTK for $999. Ditto VCA faders. 

Avid always find a way to cripple their stuff.

EDIT - also just noticed that iLok v1 is no longer supported in PT11, so that's another $50 to add to the CPTK tax - $750 to keep the features I already paid for.


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 9, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> To confirm: PT11 will have a maximum track count of 96 voices (from their webinar yesterday). The only way to get more is to either buy an HD system with hardware, or upgrade a CPTK for $999. Ditto VCA faders.
> 
> Avid always find a way to cripple their stuff.
> 
> EDIT - also just noticed that iLok v1 is no longer supported in PT11, so that's another $50 to add to the CPTK tax - $750 to keep the features I already paid for.



For CPTK users it looks very unfair, Avid's reasoning is that the price was skewed for HD users in 10. It cost me over €1000 to upgrade HD the last time, I used a native bundle offer to soften the blow. Isnt really a valid reason to try and claw back money IMHO from CPTK now.

I am looking at $599 plus possibly a new interface, really not worth it for me. I don't have 100+ track sessions.


----------



## Daryl (Apr 9, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> To confirm: PT11 will have a maximum track count of 96 voices (from their webinar yesterday). The only way to get more is to either buy an HD system with hardware, or upgrade a CPTK for $999. Ditto VCA faders.
> 
> Avid always find a way to cripple their stuff.
> 
> EDIT - also just noticed that iLok v1 is no longer supported in PT11, so that's another $50 to add to the CPTK tax - $750 to keep the features I already paid for.


I don't think that there is anything in this update that is of use to me. I only use Pro tools to open recording sessions, edit, and then export for mixing in Nuendo, so as long as I make sure that the Pro Tools operator saves in PT9 format, I'll stick with what I have. As I'm using Windows, it is highly unlikely that a future OS upgrade will stop it working, so I think I'm good for a fair few years.

D


----------



## zacnelson (Apr 9, 2013)

Do you guys have CPTK1 or CPTK2? I believe it is less of a disadvantage for owners of CPTK2


----------



## Dan Mott (Apr 9, 2013)

As I said in another thread....

I don't think 64bit will make much difference to composers who use a lot of VIs as the following do not support AAX..

Kontakt

PLAY

ENGINE

Omni

Zebra

Machfive

Waves and UAD plugins

And the list goes on. You will still have to use VE Pro until the essential VIs go AAX.

PTs MIDI editor is my favourite by far though. Would be interesting to see if PT becomes a popular tool for more composers, once everything is AAX.


----------



## rocking.xmas.man (Apr 9, 2013)

Kontakt 5.1 is available as AAX. Play will get an AAX version ... at least thats what eastwest said. The AAX Version won't come before Play 4 though, which means when Pro Tool 17 comes out you'll know there are just a few months to wait for the AAX support.


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 9, 2013)

Dan-Jay @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> As I said in another thread....
> 
> I don't think 64bit will make much difference to composers who use a lot of VIs as the following do not support AAX..
> 
> ...



Also a possible problem even if you use VEPRO AAX to host non AAX plugs. Offline bounce may not work. For it to work it has to have an AAX version of the the plugin. As we know VEPRO is a host outside of Protools. It won't offline bounce UAD plugins either as they are running on a separate DSP card.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 9, 2013)

zacnelson @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> Do you guys have CPTK1 or CPTK2? I believe it is less of a disadvantage for owners of CPTK2



Sadly not, Zac - it's the same $999 for 1 and 2 owners, they say.


----------



## FriFlo (Apr 9, 2013)

I am glad I never jumped into PT. It sure is good for mixing and recording! But it is not worth the price you pay for getting it without any track limitations and especially the update policy seems terrible to me.
I think, they would do better giving it away for a competitive price.


----------



## JAM (Apr 9, 2013)

Play, Omni, Zebra2, Waves, Melodyne, AutoTune, Lexicon PCM native, SoundToys, Ircam and Sonnox I believe have all announced AAX but with no specified date. Kontakt 5 and massive are already AAX - not sure about Abbey Road Plugins. As Pro Tools won't be released anywhere between 1 to 3 months, fingers crossed by that time the AAX list will look a lot better.

"Pro Tools expert" are always good to reqularly check as they are hot on the heels of what's happening.


----------



## windshore (Apr 9, 2013)

Avid has basically bet its business on the idea that it can put the genie back in the bottle. I don't realistically see how it will work. I guess if everyone jumps on board their new pricing / AAX paradigm, they might get it. I use PT as my 2nd DAW and wish they would figure things out.

I find it difficult to believe they'll really pull this off as management has virtually no serious background in music or video production. At least they've finally given PT users some options that should have been available several years ago.

I do wish they'd invest more energy in midi and also score integration. I hate not having a score editor that's totally integrated!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 9, 2013)

If Avid is able to continue with this routine, they'll be one of the few companies that can, that's for sure.

I happen to think they can just because of all the people who will continue to buy the next Pro Tools system, but I don't have the statistics handy in my armchair to know whether that's enough to support such a large operation.

Just remember: even though Pro Tools has always been "behind" all the "Pro Tools killers" in some ways, it had a head start of several years - and those years were when computer years were 20 years, not 3 like today. And it continues to outsell other software.


----------



## dcoscina (Apr 9, 2013)

I don't find the work flow bad at all. I love the plug ins like Structure and Strike as well as Hybrid. Even Xpand has quite a few usable sounds. More than a few in fact. I also love Velvet. I just upgraded to DP8 and have been mostly using it these days but PT10 is the second one I turn to for projects. I shouldn't have bothered with Cubase 7 since, no matter how great everyone says it is, I cannot get into it. Just doesn't fit my way of working.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 9, 2013)

Structure seems like a very well-kept secret. It's probably the best sampler out there for people making custom libraries (with the caveat that I haven't worked with the latest Machfive). Things like legato samples are built in - you don't need a custom script for that.


----------



## Per Lichtman (Apr 9, 2013)

I'm glad that they are finally adding two must-have features into the mix since their absence had lead to such a mass exodus.

The pricing still seems really odd to me, though. I already had those headline features for years in Cockos Reaper for $60 for my personal/small business license - and with unlimited track counts, unlike Pro Tools.

However, I would certainly hope that the video playback is more stable in Pro Tools than Reaper.


----------



## woodsdenis (Apr 9, 2013)

Per Lichtman @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> I would certainly hope that the video playback is more stable in Pro Tools than Reaper.



Seeing as it has borrowed code from media composer I would hope that it would be exemplary in this regard. They were making a big deal about video integration in the NAB webcast.


----------



## Per Lichtman (Apr 9, 2013)

@woodsdenis Yeah and that combined with the fact that Reaper's video support has been a low-point for the program in the past made it all but a given. 

Reaper has been improving though (3 choices of API for reading the video, the ability to do rudimentary editing by splicing the video, increases in interleaved export options, etc.) but I would not want to rely on it on a project with an aggressive timeline at this point, especially given the trial and error that has been required in setting it up each time so far.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 9, 2013)

Dan-Jay @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> As I said in another thread....
> 
> I don't think 64bit will make much difference to composers who use a lot of VIs as the following do not support AAX..
> 
> ...



dont forget that regular tracks count and any plugins uses a little ram from the pro tools resources so more ram actually is great. 
it was night and day with logic pro 64 bit. even w/o any of the sample ram pluigns in 32 bit it came so far. then with 64 bit it went sooo much more.


----------



## The Darris (Apr 10, 2013)

I agree, it being 64bit would help tremendously with the plug-in side regardless if you use a lot of ram. At least compared to PT 8. 8 had so many issues with cpu limits and ram, etc. I have an i7-2600K and PT would run into CPU limits when I was only spiking around %17 cpu usage period, thus PT would freeze up my computer and I would have to hard reboot. Needless to say, ctrl+s is my best friend.


----------



## Drakken (Apr 10, 2013)

The biggest new feature here for me (which really should have been in already) is offline bouncing - that's a huge time-saver. 64-bit processing is nice as well.

I'm still back on PT8 M-Powered, so it looks like an upgrade would be $400. Not something I'm willing to spend right now, but it will certainly be tempting if I get some extra cash down the road.

And I do almost everything with MIDI. I don't find PT that difficult to use, though I wish certain things with MIDI automation were handled differently.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 10, 2013)

The Darris, I had CPU issues running very few plug-ins as well on PT 8 (and so far not in PT 10, although I only got it fairly recently). But I'm pretty sure we both encountered variations of the same bug, because that's almost certainly not a 32- vs. 64-bit issue.

When I posted about that on the old DAW-Mac mailing list, several people said that it wasn't universal. So there must have been some problem that got sorted out.

Revamping the whole engine would also solve problems like that, of course.


----------



## Dean (Apr 10, 2013)

mverta @ Sun Apr 07 said:


> I use PT8, with a very large template. I use VE Pro locally, and across my network to a second Mac tower, and a Mac laptop. I've never had a hitch, which is why I stick to it.
> 
> _Mike



I use PT8 and Ve Pro,..works great for me too. D


----------



## The Darris (Apr 10, 2013)

PT8 LE or HD??? Huge difference.

I think the issues I faced with PT8 stemmed from it originally being on Windows XP, they only put out two updates to convert it to Windows 7 and stopped updating it after that. If PT10 is doing great on it, awesome, I'm glad they are getting stuff sorted out. I just personally feel that it won't meet my requirements as a composer. I am glad to have the experience I have on it though because it is so universal in the industry, nice to have some PT chops.


----------



## Bernard Duc (Apr 20, 2013)

> Reaper has been improving though (3 choices of API for reading the video, the ability to do rudimentary editing by splicing the video, increases in interleaved export options, etc.) but I would not want to rely on it on a project with an aggressive timeline at this point, especially given the trial and error that has been required in setting it up each time so far.



[off topic] Now (since 2 updates) Reaper can use VLC for video playback and it runs very smoothly, many fixes have been done and new features are being tested... (and if you go in the Reaper pre-release forum you will see some much more outstanding things tested and polished)


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Tue Apr 09 said:


> zacnelson @ Tue Apr 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Do you guys have CPTK1 or CPTK2? I believe it is less of a disadvantage for owners of CPTK2
> ...


Guy, I was checking the PT11 details out, and it is worse than you think. Not only is it $999 to get your CPTK features back, but they still won't work until you buy some Avid hardware. Totally nuts, IMO.

D


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 1, 2013)

Daryl @ Wed May 01 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Tue Apr 09 said:
> 
> 
> > zacnelson @ Tue Apr 09 said:
> ...



Actually the good news is they've fessed up and said they're reconsidering the whole CPTK situation following a massive backlash. We should know more in the next week or so.

I'm pretty sure the hardware thing was based on a misinterpretation if one person's comment and has been discounted, but hopefully they'll clarify soon.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Wed May 01 said:


> Daryl @ Wed May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy Rowland @ Tue Apr 09 said:
> ...



This is what Avid has to say in the FAQ:


> Q: Why isn’t the Complete Production Toolkit supported with Pro Tools 11?
> A: To ensure the greatest level of reliability and performance to customers who need extremely high tracks and channel counts, the premium set of tools previously available to Complete Production Toolkit owners will only be available to customers using the latest Pro Tools|HD family hardware with Pro Tools HD software. If you own the CPTK along with Pro Tools, you will have the opportunity to upgrade to Pro Tools HD 11 software for $999.


That seems fairly clear to me. No Avid Hardware, no CPTK features.

D


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 1, 2013)

Daryl @ Wed May 01 said:


> That seems fairly clear to me. No Avid Hardware, no CPTK features.
> 
> D



Yes, apparently not - they "clarified" in the forums.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Wed May 01 said:


> Daryl @ Wed May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > That seems fairly clear to me. No Avid Hardware, no CPTK features.
> ...


I guess that only time will tell. It does seem rather odd that the link to the FAQ both from the Avid site and the duc contains the quote I posted though.

D


----------



## lumcas (May 1, 2013)

Daryl @ Wed May 01 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Wed May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ Wed May 01 said:
> ...



don't have to wait for time, I can tell you right now 8) 

OK, kidding...apparently you never know with AVID, but it should work like that: If you want to keep CPTK features you have to upgrade to 11HD and without hardware it'll basically behave like vanilla 11+nonexistent CPTK, the same way 10HD works now - it's 10+CPTK without AVID hardware attached (less I/O, no Heat option and some other features). Bummer anyway


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 1, 2013)

Here's what Tony Cariddi, Avid Marketing Director posted here regarding hardware - http://duc.avid.com/showpost.php?p=2031 ... tcount=985



> To be clear, keeping Pro Tools software open has been key to the strategy since PT9 and remains so today. We haven't suggested or implied that we'd close off future versions of Pro Tools to work only with Avid hardware.



And here - http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?p=20 ... ost2031893 - regarding pricing



> We understand your concern about the crossgrade plan for CPTK owners and appreciate that this decision has a strong impact on some of you. As many of us regroup after returning from exciting NAB, Musikmesse and ProLight + Sound shows, we're now investigating amendments to the plan.
> 
> We're looking forward to bringing you an update on this topic over the next couple weeks so that you have the information you need when the product becomes available.
> 
> ...


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2013)

Well, either way I think that I can't believe anything they say until I see it for myself.

Therefore, my solution is going to be:

Studio 2, buy PT 9 with M Box for £326.66 and get a free update to 11. Install 10 as well.
Studio 1, buy upgrade to PT11 from PT9 for £225.22 and install 10 and use 10.

This way I can open any files from other studios in S2 and still have CPTK features in S1.

I didn't really want to upgrade, but I sort of need to have a PT 10 installation, and this seems the cheapest way.

D


----------



## mk282 (May 2, 2013)

"Pro Tools 11, now doing what every other DAW was able to do in 2007. The game has CHANGED! 


LOL. They make me laugh.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2013)

My new Film Music Magazine column discusses my views on this.
http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=11244


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 2, 2013)

> With all the DAW zealots out here in the tech universe proclaiming their DAW of choice as the best, there is simply no denying that in the professional world of film and TV composers, engineers, and post production houses, ProTools has always been the industry standard.



Pro Tools hasn't been the industry standard for sequencing, Jay, just for production. You know that, but this seems like a curious premise!


----------



## quantum7 (May 2, 2013)

It's about time PT joined the rest of the DAWs in the 21st century with PT11.......now back to my Cubase 7.



Nick Batzdorf @ Thu May 02 said:


> Pro Tools hasn't been the industry standard for sequencing, Jay, just for production. You know that, but this seems like a curious premise!



Very True!


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu May 02 said:


> > With all the DAW zealots out here in the tech universe proclaiming their DAW of choice as the best, there is simply no denying that in the professional world of film and TV composers, engineers, and post production houses, ProTools has always been the industry standard.
> 
> 
> 
> Pro Tools hasn't been the industry standard for sequencing, Jay, just for production. You know that, but this seems like a curious premise!



Of course, but if you go to almost any really working composer's studio, you will see PT, along with their DAW of choice. And most likely, their engineer will mix in PT and the post house will be using PT.

So I should have said perhaps, "With all the DAW zealots out here in the tech universe proclaiming their DAW of choice as the best, there is simply no denying that in the professional world of film and TV composers, engineers, and post production houses, ProTools has always been the industry standard for interaction between composers, engineers, and post houses."

But i thought every reader would be bright enough to get that


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 2, 2013)

Well, I'm not bright enough.

Besides, the Celtics suck.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu May 02 said:


> Well, I'm not bright enough.
> 
> Besides, the Celtics suck.



And yet, they are still playing and the Fakers....err.... Lakers, are not


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 2, 2013)

Yeah? Well, META WORLD PEACE can kick Rondo's ass - especially when he's injured.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 3, 2013)

Bruce Paine at Avid just said there will be a response from Avid on the CPTK issues within a week - http://duc.avid.com/showpost.php?p=2037 ... count=1217 . He also mentions release is now "late Q2, 2013".

It's pretty inconceivable that they wouldn't change something about their plans, having gone through the whole "we've heard you, we're cooking something up" business. The question is not "if", but "what". My money is on a $599 upgrade to PT-HD for existing CPTK users, and an ongoing PT-HD software-only option for new. This will appease many of those upset, but not all, as it will lock us into upgrades double the price that they were previously.

They were so dumb to name one of their new hardware boxes "HD Native". Native in our world tends to mean software. The obvious solution to this CPTK mess was to just rebrand CPTK (which is an ugly, arcane term) as HD Native (which could be priced differently), but, um, they can't do that now. DOH!


----------

