#1691803 - 04/26/06 01:47 PM
What I Don't Like About ProTools
|
Walter Treppler
Member
Registered: 04/26/06
Posts: 2
Loc: St. Louis, MO
|
Offline
|
|
This is written to "Love Letters From Fight Fans". I couldn't find the email address ANYWHERE in EQ Magazine or EQ's website.
What I Don't Like About ProTools
I, normally, just read the mag and move on, but the article "END NOTES: A FEW THINGS I DON'T LIKE ABOUT PRO TOOLS" by Scott Colburn prompted me to write.
Scott...amen brother. I'm a longtime user of Cakewalk products (from Cakewalk DOS to Sonar 5 Producer Edition). I recently felt the need to (ahem, "Had To")purchase Pro Tools since everyone on the planet asks, "Do you have Pro Tools?" My engineer warmed up to Pro Tools pretty quick, but I am still a bit frustrated. We do everything from bands to corporate voiceover projects. Sometimes the VO projects' recording times can go over an hour. It would be nice to bounce these projects in computer time since they need to be split into regions in Sound Forge for output. I realize it's billable, but c'mon. And how about an option to mix multiple interface outputs to multiple files if need be or to a stereo file from multiple outputs?
And how about "smart" monitoring from the computer. We don't ALWAYS want to hear the signal from the interface output and get the echo effect it produces due to latency. We monitor the mic from the board in realtime period. Just give me the hard disk output (or maybe I'm missing something). Sonar has a little switch on the channel strip. Hmm. Easy peazy.
Then there's track height. Why can't I just grab the bottom of the track and resize it to whatever height I want (with any tool enabled). And/or resize all tracks at once. Track folders would be a nice feature too.
OMF??? $495.00??? Stalag 13 is violating the Geneva Convention. Or they just screwed up on licensing the technology to other vendors.
Midi sysex is a pain too. Why do I have create a whole session file to move system exclusive to and from any piece of equipment in my studio. How about a simple screen that just dumps it back and forth right in the session I'm working on? Then everything is in one place. Makes sense to me. Especially if you do your mix automation on your hardware.
And it seems as though being the "Industry Standard" affords Pro Tools/Avid to shirk their tech support responsibilities. Some of the plug-ins purchased with the system are STILL not showing up in Pro Tools. This after sitting on the phone for an hour waiting for a rep to pick up. I got frustrated, gave up and left it to my engineer to figure out. Still missing some. Also, why no DirectX support capability? I feel so trapped.
It's too bad so many people are indoctrinated into believing Pro Tools is the end-all be-all audio software program. Maybe if Pro Tools saw a little market share decline they would sharpen these (and other) aspects of their product. And support other hardware interfaces than just their own.
Kudos to EQ and their writers for exposing more and more people to other software programs out their. Now if we could just educate the masses that studio without Pro Tools IS NOT a day without sunshine.
Walter W. Treppler
Above the Dogs Recording
St. Louis, MO
audio*web*multimedia I
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1691805 - 06/28/06 07:48 AM
Re: What I Don't Like About ProTools
|
Walter Treppler
Member
Registered: 04/26/06
Posts: 2
Loc: St. Louis, MO
|
|
Offline
|
|
"IMO...if you have customers that are coming to you ONLY because of which DAW app you use to edit...then maybe those are not the best customers to have...?"
It's not the old customers, it's the new ones that call.
Anyway, I saw my letter in the latest issue of EQ and figured I would check the forums to see if some Pro Tools users responded and set me straight on any of the issues I brought up.
Thanks for your response.
wt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1691806 - 07/25/06 07:10 PM
Re: What I Don't Like About ProTools
|
Derek Downs
Member
Registered: 06/15/06
Posts: 6
Loc: Oakland CA
|
|
Offline
|
|
One word- Macintosh. I certainly agree to an extent and would like to see DigiD step up to the plate to make PTs play better with others. I also at times resent their propriety. On the other hand I have never (knock on wood) lost data, had PTs crash on me while running on a Mac. I cannot say that about running the same on my PC. I find Windows to be unreliable, and I just simply dont trust it. Pro Tools was made for Mac as they say, and us mac people are used to the propriety game and have learn to accept it, though believe me I think it sucks. I guess the good part is that the quality is very consistent. And once again I dont have a problems with dissasters. I do like DP and Sonar, and agree that they have there strong points. I also like Logic expecially for working with sound for a vid in Final Cut. How lucky are we to live in an age where we have so many choices! I appreciate what you wrote say here but also feel that PTs is the standard for a reason, reliability. I envy anyone who can turn down business for any reason!!! I only like about umm, 80% of my customers. JK- Ultimately I agree, Digi could be a zillion light years better with MIDI and compatibility and that sucks for sure.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1691807 - 08/13/06 01:35 PM
Re: What I Don't Like About ProTools
|
Philip O'Keefe
10k Club
Registered: 12/17/00
Posts: 17674
Loc: Riverside,CA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
I own several DAW programs, and I like various aspects and features of each of them - there's nothing that says you have to stick to just one program for everything you do, and I, like a lot of people, will switch between different applications for different tasks.  
However, that doesn't mean that, in a perfect world, I wouldn't like to have everything available in one application.
I do most of my work in Pro Tools. On a PC.   It's reliable as a rock for me, and I like the way the program is laid out. I find it very elegant and the metaphor of tape deck / editing block / Mixing console relates well to the way I came up with recording - which was analog decks and mixers. And IMO, that metaphor, along with the reliability, speed and ease of use and elegance of the program, have a lot to do with its popularity. The fact that it is in such widespread use is another bonus for me, because I know that something I start here can easily be taken just about anywhere and a compatable studio will be available.
However, that doesn't mean there are not things I'd like to see changed / added to PT. For me, the biggest issue is lack of MIDI notation. I've been complaining about that one for years, and it's something I had back in 1988 with an Atari running C-Lab Notator, so I don't really see a reason why they can't implement something other than a piano roll in PT. And I really HATE piano rolls - unlike notation, they require you to look at two different areas of the screen to determine note duration and pitch, and for someone familiar with standard notation, I think that slows you down. Of course, Avid's recent purchase of Sibelius may bode well for the eventual inclusion of high-quality notation in PT, but we will have to wait and see how that pans out. But for the first time in years, I have some hope in that regard.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?home&NewsID=15431
I'd also like to see delay compensation added to the LE line. And the ability to increase the I/O beyond 18 channels at 44.1 / 48 kHz, or 10 channels at 88.2 / 96 kHz. I'm not asking for third party audio interface support - beyond PT MP and the M-Audio products, I suspect that will never happen. But why not allow people to run two Digi 002 or 002R interfaces at once? Digidesign's still going to be selling hardware and making the money, and as far as I/O, there's still quite a division / gap between HD and LE. IMHO, a bit too much of one.
However, Digi's done a lot to help cover the middle ground with the recent release of PT LE Music Production Toolkit, with the much higher track count and other upscale features. But it sure would be nice to be able to run that along with 32 channel output to a analog (or in my case) digital board...
There's always something most people would want to change about any application, and IMO, the trick is to find the application that works best for you overall, and if wanted / needed, supliment that with additional programs. But for the way I like to work, PT is the best fit for me overall - warts and all.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Anderton, Matt Harper
|
|
|
