theblue1 said:
I haven't read the whole thread
Well, I'll respond anyway... even though I am sure if you
would take the time to read the whole thread, I wouldn't have to comment because I believe everything you mentioned has been addressed...
theblue1 said:
It's guaranteed you're not monitoring your input through the converters only one sample behind. Such a thing would be patently impossible. I'm not familiar with the TDM architecture but in a dedicated system you can minimize buffering and you can, indeed, get processing latency very low. As you note, not zero latency... but near zero, to be sure, on a par with a self-contained digital mixer.
I never said anything about what sort of latency I have through my
converters. That is irrelevant to me. Any latency introduced by my converters will be there
regardless of what system I am using because my converters will be the same. That is a constant.
What I said is this: ProTools has an indicator on each individual track with a number showing what the actual delay is in samples.
I already gave examples of what those numbers are in different scenarios.
theblue1 said:
I haven't read the whole thread and I realize you all have hashed this out at length, so I'll just stick in my two cents on "real" Pro Tools -- with the understanding that I completely agree on the crucial importance of making a clear distinction between the two very different product tiers:
If you noticed, I put "real" in quotes.
I did this as a way to differentiate it in this particular discussion.
For
these purposes, it IS the "real" ProTools.
If I booked time in a "professional" recording studio based on them telling me they have "ProTools"... I would cancel my session if I later found out they only have an "
Mbox"
theblue1 said:
I completely understand why one might feel that PT TDM is the only "real" Pro Tools as it is the current flagship product and in that sense it continues the lineage of earlier hardware based PT's.
No. That is not why I called the TDM versions of ProTools the "real" ProTools (and I also sometimes referred to it as the "full" version)... I called it that because there are separate products: "ProTools" and "ProTools LE"
They are really completely different systems.
They even use different plugin formats.
If you were on the phone with Digidesign tech support and you were telling them you had "ProTools" and you had an issue with
anything, you had better let them know you are talking about "ProTools
LE" because they would have very different things to say regarding how to help your situation. They are different.
There are plenty of products in the world where there is a "real" "full" "true" "professional" etc, version... and there is a "lite" "limited" "consumer" etc, version. That is just the way it is.
...and in this particular scenario, where you are talking about "the ProTools used by my favorite major artist and big time engineer to make that #1 record"-- they are using TDM -- not the one you get for $450. -- and since the
TDM version is the one being asked about, I think it is perfectly reasonable in this scenario to refer to it as the "real" ProTools... like they use in the "real" studios...
theblue1 said:
But tell the ARMY of Pro Tools LE users that they're "not real" and I think you'll have some edgy folks on your hands.
I never said that ProTools LE users
themselves as people are "not real", but they are surely not using the same ProTools that is used in the "pro" studios.
It is ProTools LE--- "Light Edition"
The software is similar, but there is a reason it is has a different name.
theblue1 said:
If PT LE is not "real" then someone better tell Digi so they can SUE the mofos who are stealing their nameplate.
Now you are just being silly.
Obviously "ProTools LE" is a
version in the ProTools line of products... but it is
not "ProTools"... it is "ProTools
LE"
theblue1 said:
I simply don't think it's realistic to say that a reference to Pro Tools ONLY refers to TDM systems. And I don't think Digi would agree with that, either.
If there were a question about "how do I copy and paste audio in ProTools" it would most likely not matter which version of ProTools you used. I would not need to make any distinction in that case.
...But when you are talking about "what is so great about this ProTools that the pros use? what can it do that Fruity Loops can't?" then
one of the versions would absolutely be the "real" version... can you guess which one?
theblue1 said:
Now... why don't we compare RADAR with Sonar or Cubase or... ?
It should be just as illuminative.
Or not.
that was already talked about.
theblue1 said:
Oh... and on the input monitoring latency thing, I have a handy dandy workaround... it's called an analog mixer and it's truly zero latency (within the bounds of physics, anyhow).
And it was a tiny fraction of the cost of... oh, never mind. It's ALWAYS gonna be apples and oranges.
Although I do use an outboard console (Sony DMX R-100), in a world where you have to recall a mix from last year at a moments notice and have it ready to go sounding exactly the same in a matter of seconds, having a mix full of outboard gear patched and recalled is not a realistic option.
...and that is not a "workaround"... that is a whole other way of working.
There are all sorts of "workarounds"... you can monitor what you are recording directly through your interface rather than through your sequencer... you can use a "low latency monitoring" type thing whereby you will be bypassing all plugins in your sequencer while you are recording and monitoring direct... I am sure there are several things to "workaround" the problem...
...but the question was "what can ProTools do that <x> can't"... and, like I said, you don't need to worry about any "workaround" tricks and you can simply record and make music with no worries like that.
Also, I need to make something very clear... this is not to say anything bad about PT LE or sonor or any host based system... they are all good and serve a very valuable purpose. This is just noting what the
advantage of a TDM system is.