![]() ![]() To make this possible Pro Tools would ship as a core software product containing 95% of the most used functionality. One of the reasons other DAWs are powering ahead in features is they don't have the baggage of meeting the needs of lots of different groups, for example, Studio One is not trying to do post, or even video, just music, Ableton the same. It may already exist in Avid, but the first thing we would do is split development into Music and Post teams, tasked with working together on core functionality, but also given the ability to develop differing solutions for music and post users. Which leads us to the Pro Tools software offering, which as you can see from the ACA results is expected to meet the needs of several different groups of users - and in our view that's impossible. Of course, the good news for Avid then would be to say to people who need more power/shorter latency is to buy the hardware for greater peace of mind. Minimum specs should remain, as does with any other product, but how much power a user gets from their Pro Tools software is down to the machine they are using. We understand that Avid is in some way trying to ensure a QoS (Quality of Service) for the end user, albeit tacet as there is no legal recourse, but in doing so they have made a rod for their own back. ![]() The limitations of Pro Tools' core functionality should be based on the power of the user's machine - like every other DAW on the planet. There should be no crippling of Pro Tools software based on what hardware you own. #Ardour vs.pro tools full"For the absolute best performance, add a Fairlight Audio Accelerator to your system! You’ll get blazing performance with amazing sub‑millisecond latency for hundreds of tracks with full real-time processing of EQ, expander/gate, compressor and limiter dynamics, and up to 6 real-time plug‑ins per channel!"Īvid should do the same with DSP, simple as that. Blackmagic do this with Davinci Resolve and the Fairlight Audio Accelerator this is how they sell it… If people need Avid DSP cards and interfaces, then they should buy them, if they don't then they still get the same Pro Tools features, just less power. However, we think it's time for Avid to stop using limitations to sell their DSP solutions, in other words, sell the hardware on its own merits, just like they sell control surfaces. Some Pro Tools users still need DSP, it's certainly not dead, and until someone reinvents the laws of physics, especially around the area of latency (the time it takes to process instructions) then DSP is always going to be needed. The problem with faith is that if you hold on to it and don't accept things might change then it becomes dogma. If you want to try and imagine how little the computer did then think of browsing the web, in that case, your interface is the graphical interface, and most of the hard stuff is done on other computers. As you can see in our History Of Pro Tools series, the first systems used the computer mainly as a user interface and nothing more all the heavy lifting happened on DSP cards and external hardware. When Digidesign decided to harness DSP based processing for audio, it was both a leap of faith and a brilliant way to give audio professionals power not available from the average computer. ![]() We've been speaking as a team and discussing what strategy we would employ to ensure Pro Tools continues to have a healthy future and wanted to share it with the community for discussion. This article is not about Pro Tools features it's about product strategy and direction of travel. Little did we know Avid would effectively confirm this in an exclusive interview with Pro Tools Expert. ![]() A few months ago we wrote an article about the fault line running through the Pro Tools product line, that HDX and the way it is sold is becoming an increasingly limiting factor in the development of Pro Tools. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |