one small step for digidesign, one giant leap...?

[degrotebozewolf]

I was very pleased to see that digidesign has finally begun the open the pro tools software to other audio interfaces. It is no suppise that when digidesign bought m-audio, that the pro tools software was beginning to take a step forward to open up the marked for people that don't have the money to buy digidesign hardware.
As a pro tools user for a couple of years, i discoverd that compatibility between studio's and musicians is a major thing, as more and more users make music in there own homes, and have the mixing and mastering done by professionals, compatibility is the key to saving time and money.
If you consider the price of the software, it is comparible to cubase, samplitube, logic, etc, and digidesign could become a major player in the consumer marked for audio software.
these are just my thought's about the pro tools m-powerd software, and i would like to hear your thought's about this in this thread.

Greeting's
Kriz

[Skytouch]

I concur, Kriz. Digidesign is so close to getting this right. PTLE software on an iLok is the right answer, but enforcing certain M-Audio interfaces is still off the mark I think. Not knowing if there are underlying technical reasons, Digi has released new drivers for supported M-Audio interfaces, and I'm reading about some M-Audio users having hardware issues apparently related to these drivers.

Digidesign, are these drivers required to make PTLE fundamentally compatible with the supported M-Audio interfaces? If so, then would it be possible for you to someday rewrite the underlying PTLE code to be more directly compatible with the Core Audio standard?

Conversely, have you written these drivers as a way of enforcing hardware requirements?

In a heartbeat, I would run PTLE MP with my Apogee AD8000, and honestly, I don't have a big problem piggybacking onto an Audiophile 192 via SPDIF... except when I read about some users having issues getting the M-Audio interfaces to play nicely with PTLE.

I'll be optimistic and assume I would have no problems getting this system to work, but why must I be concerned about this in the first place? Why not a truly open, iLok-protected copy of PTLE MP software? I think many people would buy an M-Audio interface anyway because they're such a good value.

I currently run a 002R system, and the hardware is literally a dongle that the AD8000 passes through via ADAT I/O. I can even live with this... except the 002R driver does not permit running PTLE simultaneosly, or otherwise misbehaves, with certain Core Audio apps in my setup. I consider switching from 002R to MP to resolve these issues, but hesitate when I read about potential new issues with MP drivers.

Digidesign, I hope your first iLok version of PTLE proves to be a huge, secure success, and that the benefits of truly opening your software to the Core Audio hardware standard prove to outweigh the benefits of your traditional hardware-enforced model.

Sky

[Carped]

digidesign could become a major player in the consumer marked for audio software.
--------------------------------
No way ProTools can compete with Logic, Cubase or D.P. These programs offer much more for the money - ease of use, tons of plug-ins, midi features, what not. Just consider Digi's new EQIII: any other program has integrated a similar plug-in 5-7 years ago (some of them better sounding). The only reason to go for PT is and remains studio compatibility. I could imagine the opposite: the other programs entering the world of high end studios, Digital Performer e.g. runs cool on Digi Hardware, it can even use RTAS plug-ins.

[mpark9000]

digidesign could become a major player in the consumer marked for audio software.
--------------------------------
No way ProTools can compete with Logic, Cubase or D.P. These programs offer much more for the money - ease of use, tons of plug-ins, midi features, what not. Just consider Digi's new EQIII: any other program has integrated a similar plug-in 5-7 years ago (some of them better sounding). The only reason to go for PT is and remains studio compatibility. I could imagine the opposite: the other programs entering the world of high end studios, Digital Performer e.g. runs cool on Digi Hardware, it can even use RTAS plug-ins.



PT already competes with all those programs. You think Digi is some small startup trying to edge in on the market? Oh, please.

Also, why on earth would anybody want to adopt the RTAS standard? If anything, Digi should look in to using AU in PTLE.

[Carped]

Don't get me wrong, I am not into digi-bashing. I mostly work within ProTools but I have to run for help in other programs too often, either for quickness or simply because PT can't do what I want. Here's what I needed just this week and couldn't find:
- A tremolo on guitar, found the free nomad plug-in but it didn't sound like a guitar tremolo at all
- A printed score for a studio musician
- A softsynth detuned to an oriental scale
I found everything within minutes in Logic Express, which is a cheapo version. I love to mix in a PT studio with all those expensive 3rd party plug-ins but I wish they would give their own digirack plug-ins a complete overhaul and take them to the 21st century. PT is certainly no newcomer trying to edge in, I agree, but PT M-Powered is. And it takes some serious effort to compete with the other consumer market programs. Including stripped down versions of Reason, Live and the IK Bundle is not enough. The Digi people have just been sitting on their asses too long watching the bucks roll in.
Are you guys really familiar with Logic and D.P.?

[mpark9000]

Are you guys really familiar with Logic and D.P.?



I've been using Logic since version 3. It all depends on what you are doing. If it's commercial sessions, then PT has a much better workflow. If it's mostly personal composing, then Logic can be a good choice. It also depends on the type of music. It seems like Logic is going for the ultra-cool dance techno whatever you want to call it. PT is designed as a tool with a clean interface to get the job done regardless of the style.

Going between studios is a nightmare in Logic, even if it's a Logic file to begin with. Same story with importing MIDI files, etc. The environment just adds another level of complexity for this.

I've found that Logic 7 is too buggy to be useable, but I've seen reports from others of it being perfectly stable for them.

[Carped]

It all depends on what you are doing. If it's commercial sessions, then PT has a much better workflow.


I totally agree. But I think Logic and Cubase are just more attractive for the consumer market. I like D.P. because it is very much like ProTools, but has a cooler midi section. And yes, transferring is mostly a horror, OMF is not very helpfull.