# Serious ProTools HD alternatives?



## spikescott (Dec 9, 2014)

Mainly for audio post/ADR/Radio production, NOT music creation.

Just looking at alternatives for our second audio suite. We need solid, dependable and professional.

Pyramix? 

Fairlight wayyy too expensive.

Is Nuendo dead?

Anyone used any of the above? Are there any serious others? Any recommendations welcome.

Thanks


----------



## jdieks (Dec 9, 2014)

Nuendo is not dead. I know at least 3 (post)studios in the Netherlands that use it.

http://www.wavestudios.co.uk/ (I've heard the Amsterdam office use Nuendo at least, though I'm not 100% sure)

http://www.gvstudio.nl/

http://www.thesoundpost.nl/studio01.html

Guerrilla games (killzone) uses it too I think..

But yeah.. most use pro-tools.

Where possible I try to use Nuendo myself too though 

Check out this video about ADR in Nuendo: http://youtu.be/ML5UOzcxm90

Cheers,

Jeroen


----------



## Guy Rowland (Dec 9, 2014)

spikescott @ Tue Dec 09 said:


> Mainly for audio post/ADR/Radio production, NOT music creation.
> 
> Just looking at alternatives for our second audio suite. We need solid, dependable and professional.
> 
> ...



Pyramix has some really fantasic tools - for audio editing, I've never worked with anything better. It's really quite different to other daws in terms of its mixer / project structure and that takes some getting round. Also some major workflow omissions for me, the biggest of which is that there's no equivalent to Pro Tools' audio suite, where you can render an effect right on the timeline. I have v7 - they're on 9 now so there might have been some improvements since then, I'm not sure. I did find their support terrible - distinctly uninterested in listening to customers issues, very keen on trying to sell you more stuff. I had some real tech issues (video playback in 64 bit etc) they didn't want to fix it, only charge me a lot more for a far more expensive product that I didn't want or need. My sense is that they're losing ground all the time by not keeping their customer base happy. Oh, and no midi, don't know if that's important.

Nuendo I haven't used, but do use Cubase all the time. With that crucial caveat, I think Nuendo is the one to watch. I think your position will be echoed all round the world by freelancers and smaller post houses, baulking at the $5k start up cost of PT HD, $600 pa for updates and a poor reliability track record. When the next version of Nuendo rolls around, it'll have a really strong feature set (though personally the ability to render an effect to a file is still a must-have, and I think it's still lacking there in the current version).

Fairlight I hear nothing but horror stories about, but never used.

If you had to buy right now, one option is getting a PT CPTK license from ebay as fast as you can, and then convert it to PT11HD. Don't buy into the HDX hardware, a solid third party solution will be as good and much more cost effective. Longer term, I think PT HD's decline is distinctly possible, there's no reason right now for pro music studios to stick with it. Its cripplingly expensive and Avid's track record for bug fixing is atrocious. For post its more tricky, I think we'll see a very slow migration away from PT towards Nuendo, even if Steinberg's product isn't quite there yet.


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 9, 2014)

ASIO is great as long as you don't rely on a final mix using a DAW.
Getting dry signals out of the box using Pyramix or even the ancient Scope DSP is far better than that "wide" Native sound.

You can still get a decent mix in a DAW, but using dedicated audio chips instead of the one size fits all CPU/OS is most rewarding.
That's why HD guys want that extra quality.

It's what they use on the big jobs.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Dec 9, 2014)

chimuelo @ Tue Dec 09 said:


> ASIO is great as long as you don't rely on a final mix using a DAW.
> Getting dry signals out of the box using Pyramix or even the ancient Scope DSP is far better than that "wide" Native sound.
> 
> You can still get a decent mix in a DAW, but using dedicated audio chips instead of the one size fits all CPU/OS is most rewarding.
> ...



Depends on the job and market I guess. Everything I've done in TV for the past 5 years has been entirely in the box, either at my own studio or at a facility (and I've not experienced any issues using RME either). Going ITB is the no1 thing I'd suggest for a smaller suite - you just don't need that hardware. I've worked at several with that arrangement perfectly happily. The worst facility I've worked in was an under-specced PTHD hardware rig. It was on a permanent brink of collapse.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 9, 2014)

For at least 15 years I haven't seen a dub stage / sound post house in Los Angeles that didn't use ProTools. 



Guy Rowland @ 9th December 2014 said:


> The worst facility I've worked in was an under-specced PTHD hardware rig. It was on a permanent brink of collapse.



Guy makes a good point, however. Having been thrown under the bus by Avid with PT 9.x and an HD hardware setup that is not compatible with new versions of the software, I can understand your reluctance to invest in the company's tools.

I don't know what else one does.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Dec 9, 2014)

JohnG @ Tue Dec 09 said:


> For at least 15 years I haven't seen a dub stage / sound post house in Los Angeles that didn't use ProTools.



Pro Tools' US dominance isn't shared quite so uniformly in the rest of the world, fortunately. Good to read Jeroen's post re Holland. In the UK, Murdoch's Sky empire exclusively use Fairlight (for reasons unknown). Almost all the other post facs I know here are PT, plus a few that also have Pyramix.

The good news as far as Nuendo is concerned is that all a studio needs to do to make the transition is install the software. So if you were a studio, John, AFAIK you could install Nuendo tomorrow and it would work with your existing hardware. I think this will have a much greater effect with music studios - if a PT studio starts getting demands from clients to use Cubase Pro 8 (and I strongly suspect they will in the fullness of time), it's dirt cheap to become so equipped. There's no significant features now missing in CPro 8 from PT11 HD - as we know, Cubase is far better equipped for midi, infact. IMO Steinberg have it exactly right to distinguish their 2 DAWS in terms of post features, not also for higher end music features as Avid do, which makes their music studio use hysterically uncompetitive. It's approx 1/10th of the cost to buy Cpro8 than PT11HD, and 1/6th to annually update. I'm convinced that more and more music producers, musicians and clients will be making the transition, and it is they that will force the change in studios. Eventually I can see a day when there's so few left using PT that studios won't need to keep up with the subscriptions (if they do already), and quietly let it die.

Post is more complex, PT more ingrained. I can sort of see it going the same way, but over a much longer timeframe. As ever the single biggest issue is compatibility with other rigs and studios, that's the inertia that is stopping greater pace of change. But it's very relevant to the OP's question - if it can function as a standalone facility with no need to switch to others, then there's a much reduced barrier to competition. Thinking of right now, today, I'd still go for PT11HD. With an eye to the future, I'd pick Nuendo.


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 9, 2014)

spikescott @ Tue Dec 09 said:


> Mainly for audio post/ADR/Radio production, NOT music creation.
> 
> Just looking at alternatives for our second audio suite. We need solid, dependable and professional.
> 
> ...



what's wrong with pro tools? 
you know have pro tools HD that its open to any hardware. I still use PT9 HD and its very good. minus the 32 bit of course. PTHD11 seems like a good investment now that you can use any computer and any audio interface.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 9, 2014)

gsilbers @ 9th December 2014 said:


> what's wrong with pro tools?
> you know have pro tools HD that its open to any hardware. I still use PT9 HD and its very good. minus the 32 bit of course. PTHD11 seems like a good investment now that you can use any computer and any audio interface.



I don't think this is accurate. PT 11, at least according to Avid, is not compatible with "any audio interface."

From Avid's website:

Pro Tools HD 11 Approved Audio Interfaces and Peripherals

Last Updated : February 13, 2014
Products Affected : Pro_Tools_HD 

Not Officially Supported Audio Interfaces and Peripherals (Untested)

Audio Peripherals & Interfaces
Sync HD (Blue)
192 I/O
192 Digital I/O
96 I/O 
96i I/O
MIDI I/O
PRE I/O (Blue)

http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_U ... eripherals


----------



## spikescott (Dec 9, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ 9/12/2014 said:


> I think your position will be echoed all round the world by freelancers and smaller post houses,



We absolutely can't complain about the many years of good service our ProTools rig has given us. 

But we've gone as far we can go before major replacement. We have PTHD10. It's a TDM HD3 system. 192D, SYNC, Video Satellite & a Control24. If we go to PTHD 11, then ALL of that stuff would need to be replaced. 

When your faced with a potential clean sweep like that, it's only right that we should look at what else is out there. Compatibility isn't a major concern for us. I think we've only actually given or received a PT session about 4 times over the past 10 or more years. Clients don't care what we are using as long as it's quick & doesn't breakdown - I think they use the same criteria for the engineer working it I guess :D 

We're in no rush - it's all working fine & dandy at the moment. But at the point when something dies, then we need a plan. We either Upgrade all the Avid stuff, or replace it with something else.


----------



## studioj (Dec 9, 2014)

PT HD 11 is compatible with any core audio / ASIO interface. You are limited to 32 channels of IO however.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 9, 2014)

studioj @ 9th December 2014 said:


> PT HD 11 is compatible with any core audio / ASIO interface. You are limited to 32 channels of IO however.



A pity that such compatibility doesn't extend to their own interfaces purchased new just a few years ago.

And by 32 channels, do they mean 16 stereo pairs? In the past, I've had this issue when communicating with Avid -- "channels" to them are mono. 32 stereo pairs is barely enough inputs for the way I operate, so 16 would not suffice.

I feel like I've been had, as the expression goes. I bought a brand new rig from them in 2011 and the (very expensive) hardware is not supported for PT11.


----------



## jaeroe (Dec 9, 2014)

I would definitely entertain working in something other than Pro Tools if it didn't have such a huge foot hold in film. As much as I like many things about PT, the video engine problems are just insane - especially in PT 11 with this video engine redesign. It really is ridiculous and there are tons and tons of people complaining about it to a deaf Avid. Avid is a terrible company with the way the treat their customer base and with sorting out known issues.

From my experience, Pyramix and Nuendo have a much stronger presence in Europe than the US and Canada. Seems like music is the larger portion of users for those two. (I'm most familiar with Pyramix, which is awesome in many many ways).


----------



## studioj (Dec 9, 2014)

Yeah it is hard to avoid the Avid sphere here in LA for sure... I do enjoy producing/ writing in PT and keeping the music in the same DAW from start to finish. And that is going to get even easier with the upcoming render features. 

I'm pretty sure that is 32 mono channels. If you need lots of io, core audio with PTHD is not the way to go... alternatively HD Native gives you 64 channels or 32 stereo pairs. 

HDX is compatible with the old blue interfaces. I run a blue 192 here with my HDX card. I do feel for the people that invested in a control 24 however. That situation blows. John G, if you so desired, HDX cards are pretty affordable on ebay these days, and you could sell you older accel cards to help make up the cost. You don't need to buy a new interface even though they tell you that you do. You just need a little $40 adapter.


----------



## studioj (Dec 9, 2014)

Spikescott -

If you are a multi room facility you should really give the new waves digigrid a serious look. I have 3 rooms networked with it and it is fabulous. Audio can be freely routed between the rooms and as a bonus I get some DSP acceleration because I have Waves Soundgrid plugins. Word on the street is that some exciting 3rd party devs are releasing that format in the coming year.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 9, 2014)

studioj @ 9th December 2014 said:


> John G, if you so desired, HDX cards are pretty affordable on ebay these days, and you could sell you older accel cards to help make up the cost. You don't need to buy a new interface even though they tell you that you do. You just need a little $40 adapter.



Thanks!

I may wait until the day something "breaks" -- can't update my UAD plugins or the Mac dies -- but it is heartening to know that there might be a path forward that doesn't cost $20k.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 9, 2014)

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


----------



## José Herring (Dec 9, 2014)

I'm not up on the latest, but couldn't John buy the Native HD card and then use his existing Avid interfaces with it?


----------

