Music Player Network

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? #2995538 06/24/19 04:29 AM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824

Doesn't seem like most people are happy with the new pricing structure. I suspect the issue is that in Avid's eyes, there are too many people who sit on software that works, rather than upgrade or subscribe. A lot of people stick with older software if they don't perceive updates as compelling. If Avid can convince everyone to subscribe, then that means a consistent cash flow.

A subscription model needs two elements to survive: the price has to be right (Adobe is a good example of this), or there has to be perceived value in spending money every month (or renewing every year). It sure seems like Avid is doing the reverse - raising prices, while delivering what users seem to think (based on forum and other comments) are tepid updates.

People have been talking about the end of Pro Tools for years, but there are two factors that work against that:

* What happens with all your old Pro Tools projects if you can't open them any more?
* How are you going to collaborate with others, given that PT is as close as we come to an industry standard?

For those reasons, some people will remain committed to PT, and won't mind paying more. Kids coming out of recording schools will want to use the "professional" option. But for those with "soft" support for Pro Tools, there are compelling reasons to switch to just about any other program. Cubase does a whole lot more. Studio One is faster. Cakewalk is free. Ableton Live has a unique paradigm that Pro Tools can't touch. Mixcraft is dirt cheap and ironically, handles video way better than software made under Avid's auspices. Logic is $199 for the full program, not just a year's extension. I could go on, but you get the point.

What do you think is the fate of Pro Tools?

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995539 06/24/19 04:40 AM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824

Just saw an interesting comment online, where someone pointed out it was cheaper to get a new iLok every month, then register and download the trial version of Ultimate, than subscribe to Ultimate. He pointed that out not because he thought it was ethical to game the system, but to underscore that he wasn't sure Avid had thought this whole thing through.

For me, I have nothing against Pro Tools...it's a solid program that a lot of people use and appreciate. But I just don't understand the strategy behind Avid's thinking. At least they could offer a "we'll keep the lights on for you" update price of $50 that wouldn't get you updates, but would keep your existing program going so you could open up your existing projects...and then if a few years later you wanted to update, you'd have to pay a relatively hefty price because of all the updates you skipped.

I dunno… :Confused:

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995543 06/24/19 05:02 AM
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,485
J. Dead Online Content
Bannination Free Since '08
10k Club
Online Content
Bannination Free Since '08
10k Club
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,485
I haven't used ProTools since the 90s. What's the current state of hardware support?

Edit - I'm maybe dating myself but they used to require dedicated interfaces and as far as upgrade, it got expensive and cumbersome when it came to computer, interface, OS, and PT rev. to keep everything working.

Last edited by J. Dan; 06/24/19 05:05 AM.

Dan

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995553 06/24/19 05:34 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 10,858
nursers Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 10,858
Their initial move to subscription a while back, combined with the super slow updates to make it compatible with OSX updates, is what drove me to Logic.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995571 06/24/19 10:54 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,821
Bone Muskeleton Online Content
Triple Secret Banninated
20k Club
Online Content
Triple Secret Banninated
20k Club
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,821
I've seen lots of places that stick with one version of PT because it works. In fact, as I stated in the DAW thread, I recommend that strategy to anyone dependent on software for professional work. Don't fall for the cycle of upgrading just to have the latest and thus risk having to work out things, update projects in the middle, etc. However, I can see how this can be frustrating for Avid, Adobe, etc., to not get that income.

I used to work for a software company and the programmers would stick with one version of a development environment when working on a project. They wouldn't update the development environment nor the OS until the project was completed.

I have not looked at the new pricing for PT because I'm not really in the market for it. But regarding your comment about Adobe ("the price has to be right"), I'm not sure of that. I've seen a lot of designers move away from Adobe because they don't want to be part of the subscription model. Maybe the price is right, but the style isn't for them. I know for myself having added a few subscriptions to my life lately, that I need to keep an eye on all of them and not let myself jump into too many.


The great thing about music is that there's always something to learn. The frustrating thing about music is that there's always something to learn!
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995573 06/24/19 11:03 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Mike Rivers Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by Anderton


A subscription model needs two elements to survive: the price has to be right (Adobe is a good example of this), or there has to be perceived value in spending money every month (or renewing every year). It sure seems like Avid is doing the reverse - raising prices, while delivering what users seem to think (based on forum and other comments) are tepid updates.


There are two kinds of people who use Pro Tools. One really needs to use it. They work on complex projects, they know what they want to do, they learn how to do it in Pro Tools, they understand the reason behind newly added features (whether they think they'll ever use it or not), and it's how they make their living. Then there are people who never stop tinkering with their projects and don't want to miss what else they might be able to do with the next update. They choose Pro Tools because there's probably more written about it, and solutions and suggestions are everywhere. They usually have some other way to make a living.

Quote
People have been talking about the end of Pro Tools for years, but there are two factors that work against that:

* What happens with all your old Pro Tools projects if you can't open them any more?
* How are you going to collaborate with others, given that PT is as close as we come to an industry standard?


Why is not being able to open an old project a problem? It's done. If you want to re-issue the project, surely you have a copy of the stereo master well preserved. If you want to add a fresh track or change a vocal, you can import the audio files into a new project and start fresh. You have your original mix as a reference, and you know you don't want to re-create this exactly, so what's the problem? I realize that being able to open an old project as it is can be a time saver, for example if, after a week's work, you finally got the perfect vocal track pasted together from fourteen takes and ninety two punch-ins, you don't have to do that work all over again. But maybe, fifteen years later, the second take is really great and only needs a couple of fixes.

As far as collaboration goes, how many people really do that on a large scale? Most people can work with passing a rough mix (updated as necessary) back and forth. You don't need to pass on the whole project until you're handing it over to someone to mix. And from articles I've read in the past few years, famous mixers usually want to be handed pre-mixed stems rather than a project with 400 tracks.

Quote
What do you think is the fate of Pro Tools?


It will continue to survive. Those who have a legitimate use for the program (not just the software, the whole Pro Tools world) won't bail out. Remember when Nashville studios were moving to Nuendo? That didn't last. They had Mitsubishi digital multitrack recorders when New York and LA had Sony, and that didn't last either. But the greatest number of users of any DAW aren't major studios. Other than perception, there's no reason why they can't do their projects on any of today's full featured DAWs. And some day they'll discover that they can't open their old Studio One or Cakewalk projects, just like Pro Tools.

25 years ago, we said that what we needed was a standard for DAW editing functions and project description files so that any program could open a project created in another program, but that hasn't happened, and it isn't likely to happen. One of the things that make that difficult is that we've become conditioned that digital recording is perfectly reproducible. We accepted, and sometimes even embraced the fact that a multitrack recording made on an Ampex sounds different when played back on a Studer or an Otari. A project tracked on a Soundcraft or MCI console will sound different when mixed on an API or SSL console. But - OHMYGAWD! - Pro Tools and Studio One use different arithmetical algorithms so if you could open the project in a different DAW, it would sound subtly different - which seems to be a big deal these days.

.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995584 06/24/19 12:37 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 80
Greg Mein Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 80
At this point I fall firmly into the hobbyist category where I rarely get great value out of the music software I buy or upgrade, sometimes not using it for months or almost never. I often upgrade with the best intention that I'll get real busy with it soon and then weeks or months go by while I'm procrastinating or more often, busy with other things. The thought of paying for a subscription to any of this would be the end of it for me and it's possible I'd go back to using some type of multi-track hardware recorder (I might even get more done!). It's what happened with Quicken. I was happy using it to keep track of my finances and then upgrading when upgrades became available but then they suddenly switched to this subscription model and I held back. I created an Excel spreadsheet that morphed into being fairly advanced and flexible with automated and detailed formulas and pretty soon I had no need for Quicken while also learning a great deal about spreadsheet programming.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995617 06/24/19 04:09 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11,422
Geoff Grace Offline
MPN Advisory Board
10k Club
Offline
MPN Advisory Board
10k Club
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11,422
Here's what I wrote in another forum on June 19:

Originally Posted by GeoffGrace
It's interesting that this should happen while I'm reevaluating my use of Pro Tools going forward.

This began when I discovered that Pro Tools hasn't been releasing all of my RAM when deactivating my virtual instruments. On average after a VI has been made inactive, Pro Tools continues to hang onto roughly 50% of the RAM it used for that plugin. This can add up fast when instantiating and deactivating a variety of plugins. Simply closing and reopening the session won't help. I have to quit Pro Tools and reboot it to release the RAM.

Shorty after discovering this issue, Logic 10.4.5 was released, showing no evidence of this problem on that DAW. I decided to call Avid tech support about this issue, and they insisted on using email instead to sort this out. At this point, it's still unresolved after several days of back and forth messages. As an Apple customer, I'm used to top notch technical support. Avid's support has been a letdown so far—not just compared to Apple but compared to Digidesign. So far, it's been all questions and no answers.

I already have Logic Pro X, but it was last my main DAW during the '90s (before the term "DAW" was coined). Nonetheless, it's been looking more and more attractive to me with its new disable/enable tracks feature, the intuitive tempo features introduced last year, and 1,000 tracks limit. Pro Tools' advancement during the same period has been relatively weak, in my opinion.

I can't imagine abandoning Pro Tools any time soon, but I can imagine it playing a diminishing role in my workflow going forward.

Since then, I've updated my OS to Mojave, and tried the same activating/deactivating process in Pro Tools. Now, it's only hanging on to roughly 25% of my RAM. There are some tips that Avid support sent me by email that I have yet to try, so the situation remains unresolved.

I think Avid's moves to push the subscriber model will hurt them—eroding Pro Tools' dominance—but I don't see the end of Pro Tools on the horizon.

I mostly continue to use Pro Tools due to inertia at this point. It's been my main DAW ever since it got its MIDI act together. I don't have to think about Pro Tools when I make music, as it's become second nature to me.

Also, I never really warmed up to the object oriented approach of Logic back when I was using it, and I've always preferred Pro Tools' way of handling audio to that of any other DAW.

Nonetheless as the negatives of Pro Tools are affecting me more, and the positives of using Logic are looking better, I am seriously reconsidering the way I work. Most composers report that the new Logic Pro X 10.4.5 release is a "game changer." (There's that phrase again.)

Best,

Geoff


Enthusiasm powers the world.

Craig Anderton's Archiving Article
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Bone Muskeleton] #2995619 06/24/19 04:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11,422
Geoff Grace Offline
MPN Advisory Board
10k Club
Offline
MPN Advisory Board
10k Club
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11,422
Originally Posted by Joe Muscara
I used to work for a software company and the programmers would stick with one version of a development environment when working on a project. They wouldn't update the development environment nor the OS until the project was completed.

That's my policy as well.

Originally Posted by Joe Muscara
regarding your comment about Adobe ("the price has to be right"), I'm not sure of that. I've seen a lot of designers move away from Adobe because they don't want to be part of the subscription model. Maybe the price is right, but the style isn't for them. I know for myself having added a few subscriptions to my life lately, that I need to keep an eye on all of them and not let myself jump into too many.

I avoid the subscription model for software as well. I didn't upgrade Photoshop after CS5 because Adobe switched to the subscription model. I finally bought Photoshop Elements last month because it's not subscription based; and Apple is about to drop 32-bit support, thereby rendering the CS5 version of Photoshop obsolete. As it turns out, today's consumer version of Photoshop is roughly as full-featured as the pro version from nearly a decade ago.

Best,

Geoff


Enthusiasm powers the world.

Craig Anderton's Archiving Article
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Mike Rivers] #2995621 06/24/19 04:38 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11,422
Geoff Grace Offline
MPN Advisory Board
10k Club
Offline
MPN Advisory Board
10k Club
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11,422
Originally Posted by Mike Rivers
Originally Posted by Anderton
People have been talking about the end of Pro Tools for years, but there are two factors that work against that:

* What happens with all your old Pro Tools projects if you can't open them any more?
* How are you going to collaborate with others, given that PT is as close as we come to an industry standard?


Why is not being able to open an old project a problem? It's done.

It's not a problem, if you followed the tips contained in Craig's Archiving article. Unfortunately, few of us do that.

Speaking as a songwriter/composer, I don't always finish a song idea right away. I sometimes finish it years later. When that happens, it's helpful to be able to open the file in the DAW format in which it was created.

By the way, it's good to see you here, Mike! wave

Best,

Geoff


Enthusiasm powers the world.

Craig Anderton's Archiving Article
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Mike Rivers] #2995626 06/24/19 05:09 PM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Originally Posted by Mike Rivers

Why is not being able to open an old project a problem? It's done. If you want to re-issue the project, surely you have a copy of the stereo master well preserved. If you want to add a fresh track or change a vocal, you can import the audio files into a new project and start fresh. You have your original mix as a reference, and you know you don't want to re-create this exactly, so what's the problem? I realize that being able to open an old project as it is can be a time saver, for example if, after a week's work, you finally got the perfect vocal track pasted together from fourteen takes and ninety two punch-ins, you don't have to do that work all over again. But maybe, fifteen years later, the second take is really great and only needs a couple of fixes.


I'm not sure how Pro Tools stores its files, but with a lot of programs, unless you bounce and export (i.e., as Geoff referenced), it can be really difficult to reconstruct what you did in a different DAW. I agree with the "it's done" part most of the time, but I'm always opening up old projects to cull audio examples to accompany articles, or do remixes. That's probably not exceptionally common, but...

Quote
As far as collaboration goes, how many people really do that on a large scale?


Not very many, but with audio for film collaboration is a real issue. I can't see those people ditching Pro Tools, ever.

Quote
But - OHMYGAWD! - Pro Tools and Studio One use different arithmetical algorithms so if you could open the project in a different DAW, it would sound subtly different - which seems to be a big deal these days.


I often wonder about that. Sometimes I think they're just using different panning laws or whatever. It would seem that in theory, once that digital data stream leaves the A/D converter and is processed with 32-bit floating point or 64-bit processing, there wouldn't be a lot of room for variations. A summing bus is a summing bus...right? So it you tell Studio One or Pro Tools to add 2+2, wouldn't they kind of have to come up with 4? Or does it not work that way?

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: J. Dead] #2995669 06/24/19 09:05 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,575
KenElevenShadows Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,575
Originally Posted by J. Dan
I haven't used ProTools since the 90s. What's the current state of hardware support?

Edit - I'm maybe dating myself but they used to require dedicated interfaces and as far as upgrade, it got expensive and cumbersome when it came to computer, interface, OS, and PT rev. to keep everything working.


They work with a lot of third-party audio interfaces now. I am using mine with an RME interface.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Geoff Grace] #2995673 06/24/19 09:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,575
KenElevenShadows Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,575
Originally Posted by Geoff Grace

I avoid the subscription model for software as well. I didn't upgrade Photoshop after CS5 because Adobe switched to the subscription model. I finally bought Photoshop Elements last month because it's not subscription based; and Apple is about to drop 32-bit support, thereby rendering the CS5 version of Photoshop obsolete. As it turns out, today's consumer version of Photoshop is roughly as full-featured as the pro version from nearly a decade ago.


For much the same reason as I still continue to use Pro Tools, I reluctantly subscribe to Avid's Photography Package of $10/month for Lightroom and Photoshop. I have been using the same program for about twenty years, and as I said in another thread, there's great value in establishing a strong rapport and work flow. That is something I value. I get right on with creating. I do not want to interrupt the flow by wondering how to do something or searching for something.

The difference here, at least for me, is that Photoshop in particular is generally acknowledged as the most powerful, full-featured photo editor. Sure, software such as Affinity is nipping at their heels, but it's still the most powerful, still a leader.

Hoewever, Pro Tools is not the most powerful, and they're definitely not leading. They're following.

Being able to open old sessions is valuable, and that coupled with the same reasoning as I have for continuing to use Photoshop would be reasons I would stay. However, if I am eventually forced to pay for a subscription model, I will likely try and keep an old computer with Pro Tools around so that I can continue to open old sessions, and begin using another DAW, possibly Reaper, Studio One, or Logic, which I would likely determine after evaluating them and figuring out which had the most intuitive workflow for me.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Geoff Grace] #2995675 06/24/19 09:14 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,575
KenElevenShadows Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,575
Originally Posted by Geoff Grace
Originally Posted by Mike Rivers
Originally Posted by Anderton
People have been talking about the end of Pro Tools for years, but there are two factors that work against that:

* What happens with all your old Pro Tools projects if you can't open them any more?
* How are you going to collaborate with others, given that PT is as close as we come to an industry standard?


Why is not being able to open an old project a problem? It's done.

It's not a problem, if you followed the tips contained in Craig's Archiving article. Unfortunately, few of us do that.



I do that sort of archiving from time to time. I would be likely to do it more often if it were less time-consuming.

But yes, we frequently "re-purpose" stuff or use some elements from mixes, so we are diving into old sessions fairly often, and it's nice to have something open, be appropriately labeled, or be able to use an old mix and modify it slightly, and on and on. It's extremely valuable to us.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995695 06/24/19 11:21 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Mike Rivers Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by Anderton

I'm not sure how Pro Tools stores its files, but with a lot of programs, unless you bounce and export (i.e., as Geoff referenced), it can be really difficult to reconstruct what you did in a different DAW.


I hardly ever use Pro Tools, so I haven't even looked at what it puts in its project folder. Basically, though, all contemporary DAWs (well, with the exception of Audacity, for one) create WAV files, so there's something that can be imported into just about any DAW. Where you get in to trouble, though, is that the bounds of the WAV file are when you start and stop recording. If you record a whole song start to finish, you get a file that's a few minutes long or longer. If you punch in a word, you get a file that might be shorter than a second. And unless you have the guts and gumption to un-do the last recording before punching in that same word again, you get another short file. All DAWs have a file naming convention that, with some thought, can be sorted out, and just about all of them are time-stamped broadcast wave format, but if you don't have really good documentation of what you recorded it can be difficult to put a take together from a pile of fragments, of which you really only used a handful in the final assembly. That's where consolidating tracks or whatever the program calls it - making a single file that plays what you hear - becomes valuable. But even if you have that as well as the 25 punch-ins, you might decide 5 years later that maybe a different one would be better, and then you have to figure out which one goes where. To which I say "what's the budget?"

Quote

Originally Posted by Mike
But - OHMYGAWD! - Pro Tools and Studio One use different arithmetical algorithms so if you could open the project in a different DAW, it would sound subtly different - which seems to be a big deal these days.


I often wonder about that. Sometimes I think they're just using different panning laws or whatever. It would seem that in theory, once that digital data stream leaves the A/D converter and is processed with 32-bit floating point or 64-bit processing, there wouldn't be a lot of room for variations. A summing bus is a summing bus...right? So it you tell Studio One or Pro Tools to add 2+2, wouldn't they kind of have to come up with 4? Or does it not work that way?


Well, sure, there are standard pan curves, and non-standard pan curves, and different ways of calculating a crossfade which you get with every edit and punch. But depending on what kind of arithmetic you're using - 24-bit floating point in one system, 64-bit fixed point in the other system, for example - , 2+2 might add up to 3.9998265. Some people think that they can hear that.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995721 06/25/19 02:37 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,855
R
RABid Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
R
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,855
I'm a casual hobbyist. Years ago at Gearfest I bought the guitar effects rack that came with a copy of Pro Tools at a really good price. A budget way in. I also took a class at Sweetwater that was pretty good. I since did one year of rental and bailed. Same with Waves. No other effects company makes me pay every year to keep using the project. If I cannot do it with Live, Reason, Komplete and Logic I probably don't need it. For 20 year I upgraded Cakewalk/Sonar every other time. I've also skipped years of Komplete. PT wants too much of a penalty for skipping. Paid it once. Will not do it again.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: RABid] #2995732 06/25/19 03:48 AM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Originally Posted by RABid
If I cannot do it with Live, Reason, Komplete and Logic I probably don't need it.


In other words...it's all about the music thu

Quote
For 20 year I upgraded Cakewalk/Sonar every other time. I've also skipped years of Komplete.


And weren't penalized in either case.

Quote
PT wants too much of a penalty for skipping. Paid it once. Will not do it again.


Seems to be a pretty common attitude.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2995793 06/25/19 03:44 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,855
R
RABid Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
R
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,855
One more points. To make a continuing payment subscription work you need distance over your competitors. A reason for your customers to pay more. PT and Waves no longer has that gap. They only have a name, and the name does not mean as much as it used to.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: RABid] #2995818 06/25/19 05:56 PM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Originally Posted by RABid
One more points. To make a continuing payment subscription work you need distance over your competitors. A reason for your customers to pay more. PT and Waves no longer has that gap. They only have a name, and the name does not mean as much as it used to.


I'm not sure I agree about Waves. I checked out their Abbey Road Chamber reverbs and some other recent plug-ins, they're pretty amazing. But I think their way of doing business makes the most sense if you have one of their bundles, because there are enough maintenance changes from year-to-year (like converting everything to VST3) to make it worthwhile. Also, the last time I renewed, there were some new plug-ins that didn't cost anything extra.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2996663 06/29/19 11:30 PM
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 724
SteveCoscia Offline
Gold Member
Offline
Gold Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 724
My son was a avid Pro Tools user for years - he had a 2012 version on an old MacBook. Recently, the old MacBook died and he opted to not get the new Pro Tools. Now he is using Reaper and liking it.

There are likely thousands of similar cases out there.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2996682 06/30/19 03:04 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Gus Lozada Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
AVID started their slow, painful death after they sold M-AUDIO and started to lose thousands of small home-studio users who were attracted into Pro Tools because it was "the standard" you could use with dozens of interfaces and keyboard controllers made by the same company, offering indeed an "echosystem" which also included studio monitors. Small studio owners were so proud they had "the standard" in their studios -even without an HD system-. And people like me was selling for the first time, massive amounts of software in Latin America.

... then, they sold M-Audio... no more options of small interfaces to get some money from... no keyboards... no control surfaces... no keyboards...

Heck, even for live sound and hi-end studios, they only have now TWO mixers. One for live, one for studio.

... so, rising the prices seemed to be a good idea... or not? It is a great idea... for their competitors. LOL.


Músico, Productor, Ingeniero, Tecnólogo
Director de Ventas, América Latina y Caribe - PreSonus Audio Electronics

Instagram: guslozada
Facebook: Gus Lozada - Facebook

www.guslozada.com
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2996751 06/30/19 06:43 PM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Well Gus, working for PreSonus, I'm sure you're aware that a lot of Pro Tools users have gone to Studio One. When I gave seminars and asked who used which DAW, 10 years ago Pro Tools was by far the majority. When Logic dropped the price to $199, there were fewer hands for Pro Tools, and more for Logic. Then Studio One and Ableton Live started chipping away at the Pro Tools / Logic group. My sense is that a lot of newcomers are attracted to Studio One, and that there's a type of person who totally "gets" Ableton Live so they go in the direction.

As mentioned in the previous post to yours, Reaper also has their market share. It's fine, but a little rough around the edges for me. I think Studio One and Ableton Live do a fantastic job of offering consistency, and a well-thought-out experience. A lot of DAWs seem more internally disjointed.

I still think Cakewalk has merit, too, although it will always be limited by being PC-only. It is one of the deepest programs out there, second (IMHO) only to Cubase. Between Pro Tools and Cakewalk, I'd take Cakewalk in a heartbeat.

Your comments about M-Audio are interesting. I never thought of that angle, but you're right...Avid removed the aspirational path.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2996796 07/01/19 05:02 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Gus Lozada Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Originally Posted by Anderton


Your comments about M-Audio are interesting. I never thought of that angle, but you're right...Avid removed the aspirational path.



I am pretty sure, as an insider, that this was a very sensitive point they never considered.
M-AUDIO was "the official" Consumer/Pro-sumer hardware for Pro Tools. Then you could aspire to a 003 or MBox 3 Pro. Then to HD.


Músico, Productor, Ingeniero, Tecnólogo
Director de Ventas, América Latina y Caribe - PreSonus Audio Electronics

Instagram: guslozada
Facebook: Gus Lozada - Facebook

www.guslozada.com
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Gus Lozada] #2996810 07/01/19 10:41 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Mike Rivers Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by Gus Lozada

M-AUDIO was "the official" Consumer/Pro-sumer hardware for Pro Tools. Then you could aspire to a 003 or MBox 3 Pro. Then to HD.


Hi, Gus! Good to see you again.

I think it's a good thing that Pro Tools is getting back to their roots - supporting the full time professionals. There are enough DAWs for "the common man" so that Avid doesn't really need that business. What they need to do in order to keep that business is to be sure that every update that the subscribers get works and doesn't break anything else - and they can do that better when they aren't dealing with $500 customers who expect free lifetime support and upgrades.

PreSonus has a good thing going with Studio One now that few other manufacturers bundle much in the way of DAW software with their hardware. While Studio One isn't my cup of tea, if I was starting from scratch, I could see starting with it and sticking with it. Buy a Behringer interface these days and you get a link to download Audacity. Actually, I have a lot of respect for Audacity but it's no Pro Tools.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2996883 07/01/19 07:33 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,257
techristian Offline
Platinum Member
Offline
Platinum Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,257
What can I say? I'm still using Cubase SX V1 ! As soon as you connect a computer to the internet, you will need updates BY DESIGN, because all of your traffic will be coming from the internet and thus VIRUS software of every sort. Assuming that some of you even collaborate with pro tools users online, you would even need PROTOOLS anti-virus updates to avoid Trojans. And do we need another 25 features to clutter up the UI even more ?


Dan

Last edited by techristian; 07/01/19 07:40 PM.
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Mike Rivers] #2996919 07/02/19 01:06 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Gus Lozada Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Originally Posted by Mike Rivers

Hi, Gus! Good to see you again.


Hi Mike!

Incredible to think we met around these pages 20 years ago... nice to "see" you!
It's good to be back at the 'hood.


Originally Posted by Mike Rivers

There are enough DAWs for "the common man" so that Avid doesn't really need that business. What they need to do in order to keep that business is to be sure that every update that the subscribers get works and doesn't break anything else - and they can do that better when they aren't dealing with $500 customers who expect free lifetime support and upgrades.


Their price increases tell the opposite. They need income. And if they only have "the professionals", well, they will have to pay the new, higher price.
And about "not breaking anything else", they recently had a serious problem with the online thing deleting sessions. I mean, that's "normal" with all software developers, but still, does not help having new, higher prices and still failing like that with bugs.


Originally Posted by Mike Rivers

PreSonus has a good thing going with Studio One now that few other manufacturers bundle much in the way of DAW software with their hardware. While Studio One isn't my cup of tea, if I was starting from scratch, I could see starting with it and sticking with it. Buy a Behringer interface these days and you get a link to download Audacity. Actually, I have a lot of respect for Audacity but it's no Pro Tools.


The difference we like to make is that we make our own DAW, unlike like Steinberg / Yamaha, same company, company's official software, but NOT made for Yamaha or other brands...
We highly respect every other manufacturer. But when it comes to integration, we are right at the place M-Audio/AVID were 10 years ago and we have a more solid DAW for musicians and producers and better hardware solutions.

* Still NO Keyboards. I will work on that later...


Músico, Productor, Ingeniero, Tecnólogo
Director de Ventas, América Latina y Caribe - PreSonus Audio Electronics

Instagram: guslozada
Facebook: Gus Lozada - Facebook

www.guslozada.com
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Gus Lozada] #2996956 07/02/19 10:59 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Mike Rivers Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by Gus Lozada

The difference we like to make is that we make our own DAW, unlike like Steinberg / Yamaha, same company, company's official software, but NOT made for Yamaha or other brands...
We highly respect every other manufacturer. But when it comes to integration, we are right at the place M-Audio/AVID were 10 years ago and we have a more solid DAW for musicians and producers and better hardware solutions.


I recall a couple of Steinberg interfaces that integrated a couple of features with Cubase or Nuendo interfaces but that was several years ago. In the Goode Olde days, "Digital Audio Workstation" didn't mean a piece of software as it does today, but rather a system that included hardware and software (think Fostex Foundation or Fairlight). PreSonus brought this concept back with their close integration of Studio One with their new digital consoles and interfaces. While the software would work with any interface, and any interface would work with other software, using the two PreSonus products together as a system gave the user features and functions that aren't available or don't work as smoothly in a mixed system. . . . although it took them entirely too long for them to make the console function as a full DAW control surface, though I think they have it now.

While you have to get used to Studio One's workflow and graphics, the combination of the software and hardware does indeed make a complete workstation that could maybe even make me happy if I wanted to work that way.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Mike Rivers] #2996992 07/02/19 04:20 PM
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Anderton Offline OP
MP Hall of Fame Member
OP Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 7,824
Originally Posted by Mike Rivers
While you have to get used to Studio One's workflow and graphics, the combination of the software and hardware does indeed make a complete workstation that could maybe even make me happy if I wanted to work that way.


The DAW/interface integration seems in theory like it might be trivial, but in practice, it does make life a lot easier when preamp settings are stored with the project.

Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2997031 07/02/19 08:39 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Gus Lozada Offline
10k Club
Offline
10k Club
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,333
Originally Posted by Anderton
The DAW/interface integration seems in theory like it might be trivial, but in practice, it does make life a lot easier when preamp settings are stored with the project.


... and the fat channel settings if you used a template for the mixer / interface...


Músico, Productor, Ingeniero, Tecnólogo
Director de Ventas, América Latina y Caribe - PreSonus Audio Electronics

Instagram: guslozada
Facebook: Gus Lozada - Facebook

www.guslozada.com
Re: Is This Really the End of Pro Tools? [Re: Anderton] #2997063 07/03/19 02:01 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
Mike Rivers Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 179
If I remember correctly, the latest series of StudioLive consoles can save preamp settings along with a snapshot or scene or whatever they call it. Same for the Fat Channel settings, which has always been a StudioLive feature. You don't need Studio One for those unless you're recording. The sort of things I was thinking of that make the combination of the hardware console and software program a complete system are how Studio One can be controlled from the console work surface and vice versa. Now that they have moving faders, the console faders - which are your level indicators as well as controllers - work in conjunction with automation written in the software. And don't the larger StudioLive consoles have transport controls, too, that control the software? Since it now emulates Mackie Control and HUI, you can get that interactive control with just about any DAW software.

To me, good workflow means the ability, when tracking, to be able to work like you have a console and a recorder. While all of those functions are supported in most any DAW program, having a program that's designed with the console in mind, and vice versa, makes - or at least I should say, has the potential to - workflow smoother, and certainly easier to set up when you're starting with a living room floor full of sealed cartons.


Moderated by  Anderton 

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3