What's new

Not renewing Pro Tools "subscription"

robgb

I was young once
For me, the fanboy response I usually get about Reaper really turns me off on it. And someday, I may give it a try. But until it has a chord track like Cubase, I can't see me using it any more than I do S1.
I guess it's no worse than the Pro Tools fanboy response. Or the Logic fanboy response. Or the Cubase fanboy response. People like what they like, use what they prefer, and calling them fanboys isn't really productive.

Can Reaper accommodate zero latency recording? That would be quite interesting.
Well, I'm not absolutely sure Pro Tools or any other DAW can achieve zero latency (despite any claims), but I've never once had a single issue with latency in Reaper.
 

Fredeke

Active Member
Well, I'm not absolutely sure Pro Tools or any other DAW can achieve zero latency (despite any claims)
Zero latency is technically impossible without bypassing the computer entirely (which many prosumer interfaces provide as a monitoring option). What Avid actually means is ultra low latency: 0.7ms if I remember well (but only with their expensive interfaces, otherwise it's something like 1.5ms). And other brands may just refer to the computer-bypass trick.
 
Last edited:

robgb

I was young once
Zero latency is technically impossible without bypassing the computer entirely (which many prosumer interfaces provide as a monitoring option). What Avid means is ultra low latency: 0.7ms if I remember well (but only with their expensive interfaces, otherwise it's something like 1.5ms). And other brands may just refer to the direct monitoring trick.
This article suggests to me that latency can be a problem with Pro Tools. So I'm not sure what the zero latency claims are about:

https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-page/2018/8/2/have-you-seen-the-new-low-latency-monitoring-in-pro-tools-20187-why-hasnt-everyone-noticed-how-important-it-is-free-tutorial
 

dzilizzi

I just hang around pretending I know something
I guess it's no worse than the Pro Tools fanboy response. Or the Logic fanboy response. Or the Cubase fanboy response. People like what they like, use what they prefer, and calling them fanboys isn't really productive.
The Reaper love is not bad here. You all are very good talking about the pros and cons. I first heard about Reaper over on Gearslutz and according to the users there, it can do no wrong. It is the most perfect DAW ever! Everyone complains about ProTools and Cubase and we use it anyway. That's what I meant by fanboys. It is not a logical love to me. After hanging out here, I've actually thought about trying it.
 
OP
JohnG

JohnG

Senior Member
Interesting, @Fredeke thanks.

You can do near-zero latency on Digital Performer too, as long as you use their Cuemix setup. I've not met an engineer who does use it but it's possible.

Just one minor (but to me, meaningful) correction to your post, which is that the HD-Native Thunderbolt PT interface is about $1,000. Still not nothing, but not nearly as expensive as once they were.

It's not quite as low-latency as HDX, but a lot more affordable for small / home studios.

There are plenty of posts comparing HDX to HD Native Thunderbolt on duc.avid.com -- this being one:

Posted by Matt Hepworth on duc forum: "96kHz with HDN [HD Native interface] at 64 buffer is slightly lower than 44.1kHz on a TDM system, but it's over three times the latency of 96kHz (0.48ms) with a TDM system (if you're using HD I/O with both systems for a fair comparison). HDX at 96kHz is 0.50ms. TDM and HDX are that low REGARDLESS OF BUFFER.

HDN is 1.67ms, but only at 96kHz and with a buffer of 64. At a buffer of 128 it's unusable for tracking for most artists trying to record vocals, saxophone, etc.."


I don't know Matt at all; there are a lot of people who seem knowledgeable there but -- it's the internet.

I've recorded with the HD Native Thunderbolt and it's fine if you set the buffer to 64. I record at 48k typically, unless it's an orchestra at a recording venue, and then the engineer does everything so I remain blissfully ignorant.
 

Fredeke

Active Member
Just one minor (but to me, meaningful) correction to your post, which is that the HD-Native Thunderbolt PT interface is about $1,000. Still not nothing, but not nearly as expensive as once they were.
I stand corrected. Last time I checked (in 2015), their cheapest interface was $7000. But I see now I'm not up to date.

ps: I would love to set my buffer at 64. But 256 is more like it (128 for ultra-light sessions, 512 for cpu-intensive ones)
 

robgb

I was young once
I first heard about Reaper over on Gearslutz and according to the users there, it can do no wrong.
Call me a little skeptical. I haven't read much about Reaper at Gearslutz, but I imagine that people are hyped about Reaper because it is so customizable and can do just about anything you want it to—within reason. I don't think that's saying it can do no wrong. Like any software, it has glitches, problems from time to time. Fortunately, new releases to fix any problems and to make improvements come out monthly.
 
OP
JohnG

JohnG

Senior Member
This article suggests to me that latency can be a problem with Pro Tools
If so, that's really not accurate. The one real advantage (not attributable to its being "the industry standard") PT has going for it is low/near-zero latency.

Otherwise its continued dominance, I think really would be solely attributable to it's being the legacy industry standard. Mind you, it's good for other things, but that latency thing is tough to crack.

The other advantages (all the engineers use it, all the dub stages I've seen use it, all the really large studios use it....) are more a matter of it being there first. That's not nothing, but over time that would be easier to change.
 

Fredeke

Active Member
Call me a little skeptical. I haven't read much about Reaper at Gearslutz, but I imagine that people are hyped about Reaper because it is so customizable and can do just about anything you want it to—within reason. I don't think that's saying it can do no wrong. Like any software, it has glitches, problems from time to time. Fortunately, new releases to fix any problems and to make improvements come out monthly.
Reaper can do some wrong, and I've done plenty of wrong with it ! ;)
 

robgb

I was young once
You can do near-zero latency on Digital Performer too, as long as you use their Cuemix setup. I've not met an engineer who does use it but it's possible.
I'm not really sure what the issue is. I have an inexpensive Behringer UMC202HD and I can get zero latency for my live playing by simply using the direct monitor. It really has nothing to do with the software—although latency is very, very low on my Kontakt instruments as well.
 

dzilizzi

I just hang around pretending I know something
Call me a little skeptical. I haven't read much about Reaper at Gearslutz, but I imagine that people are hyped about Reaper because it is so customizable and can do just about anything you want it to—within reason. I don't think that's saying it can do no wrong. Like any software, it has glitches, problems from time to time. Fortunately, new releases to fix any problems and to make improvements come out monthly.
There are a few that would jump on every DAW complaint thread and extol the virtues of switching to Reaper. It was annoying, especially when you just want to fix whatever is wrong and go on with your project.
 

Fredeke

Active Member
There are a few that would jump on every DAW complaint thread and extol the virtues of switching to Reaper. It was annoying, especially when you just want to fix whatever is wrong and go on with your project.
I must agree. I am a Reaper convert myself, but I don't get why we're talking so much about it in a PT thread.
How about switching to Adobe Audition, for a change? (It has nice colors and can play several tracks at once!)
 
OP
JohnG

JohnG

Senior Member
I'm not really sure what the issue is.
I know what you mean -- if there are these other ways to do it, why would people continue to pay so much for Pro Tools?

For large studios, it's reliability and really an astonishing capacity for tracks. At a large orchestra session for a film, there may be a hundred tracks (stereo) playing back with pre-records and a dozen or more mics rolling during take after take, pickups and all that. When the orchestra's $10k an hour, or more, you simply can't run out of headroom on the recording device, or run into some other limitation.

For me, it's working with other people, my customers and engineers and studios. They ALL use Pro Tools. Just sent a session to Abbey Road and they flew it in in seconds; we recorded the group and then I get the session back.

To some extent these "advantages" are more an "industry standard" thing than a clear performance advantage. But low latency with a huge session -- that's indispensable.
 

robgb

I was young once
I must agree. I am a Reaper convert myself, but I don't get why we're talking so much about it in a PT thread.
How about switching to Adobe Audition, for a change?
I brought it up because someone suggested that Reaper might be a good place to "start" before graduating to another DAW. I just wanted to point out that Reaper is not a "starter" DAW, but a sophisticated piece of software that holds its own against other DAWs.
 

Fredeke

Active Member
I brought it up because someone suggested that Reaper might be a good place to "start" before graduating to another DAW. I just wanted to point out that Reaper is not a "starter" DAW, but a sophisticated piece of software that holds its own against other DAWs.
Yeah, don't worry. I plead guilty.

To some extent these "advantages" are more an "industry standard" thing than a clear performance advantage. But low latency with a huge session -- that's indispensable.
I never pushed any DAW that far, so I really can't speak to that. But I'm afraid you're right. I wouldn't dare try and push my home setup so far. I've recorded up to 24 tracks simultaneously and everything went well - but 240 tracks?
 

robgb

I was young once
I know what you mean -- if there are these other ways to do it, why would people continue to pay so much for Pro Tools?
You've completely ignored that there are other ways to do it, as I pointed out. I'm glad the big studios use Pro Tools and it's something they can rely on. And they can certainly afford the ridiculous price they pay for that one feature that may or may not matter. Good on them. But when I work with studios, I simply deliver stems and the choice of DAW means little in that regard, so clearly your demands are different than mine.
 

dzilizzi

I just hang around pretending I know something
I brought it up because someone suggested that Reaper might be a good place to "start" before graduating to another DAW. I just wanted to point out that Reaper is not a "starter" DAW, but a sophisticated piece of software that holds its own against other DAWs.
LOL! That was me. And I didn't mean it was a starter DAW, just that it is affordable for a student which makes it a first choice. Every other DAW is in the hundreds of dollars to get into, even with the educational discounts. Who can afford that on a student budget?
 

Daryl

Senior Member
But when I work with studios, I simply deliver stems and the choice of DAW means little in that regard, so clearly your demands are different than mine.
Then how do you deal with Playlists and multiple takes that need editing afterwards?
 

dzilizzi

I just hang around pretending I know something
Yeah, sorry. Blame my ADD. I get off topic easy. I'm going to go away now.
 
Top Bottom