Is ProTools as flakey as it appears?

[spankenstein]

So last time I was shopping I was going to get an 002r but my computer had a SiS chipset which is apparently incompatible with ProTools. So now I'm peeking again and I have a new board and processor (these were given to me so I didn't pick them out) but it's a Intel 915 board and a P4 540 (3.2GHz 1MB cache). So I look at the digidesign forum and sure enough... 915 == bad. WTF? Is it that horrible?

I've run Cakewalk for a few years now (Pro Audio 9 and then SONAR 3), demoed Vegas, demoed Samplitude, used n-Track... never had a problem. Part ofg the drive at me looking at Pro Tools is the interoperability. "Everyone" has PT so it seems like the standard but man... I've honestly never owned a computer that would have been supported and I've owned a LOT of computers. Maybe I'm just ranting but I had to work with a project on PT and instead of just exporting and OMF I had to line up all the .wav files because they want $500 for digi translator. Grrr... I guess my mind is made up now.

[JohnDavisNYC]

i say stick with what you know, because you're running a PC, which on the ProTools side of things is going to give you problems because most (if not all) commercial studios with PT are on Macs anyhoo... the tried and true method of zero point bounces will probably be your best bet for interchangability, unfortunately. i face the same problem because i run logic, and refuse to settle for an LE 002 setup over a full pro version of Logic... if i had 15k i'd get a full HD rig, but for now i'll just do zero bounces of all my audio tracks and import them.

john

[rolandk]

Good thing you checked before you bought the 002. FWIW, if you do get a mobo thats compatible you should be good to go. Switching between PC and Mac isn't a big deal now, it used to be in the bad old days.
I'm tracking on a PC 001 and mixing at a studio w/ Mac HD3 and it works fine. Last time I had to burn the sessions on cdr and import but I just got an external firewire drive for next time.

[ctmsound]

Apparently Digi is incapable of making their software compatible with most popular PC hardware devices...

[kcrusher]

Apparently Digi is incapable of making their software compatible with most popular PC hardware devices...

That's not the case - it's a time/money thing as it is with any company. The PC side has so many different hardware configurations available that resources need to be directed to where they will satisfy the most customers with the engineering resources available. Every new hardware config considered not only needs to be engineered to work, but it has to go through an entire test grid, which means time and money. If the amount of time/money that it would take to make something work properly (like SiS chipsets) can't be offset by the additional sales it would generate, then most likely it won't ever be done.

As for the 915 chipset - it's only because it's too new. It has to be tested to determine what amount of engineering it will take to make Pro Tools work properly and then that engineering has to be done, which can take awhile.

Sometimes the 'latest, greatest' isn't specifically because of this. It's not like Intel or AMD are sending anyone new motherboards ahead of time so that they can make sure software is working properly before they start shipping. In the grand scheme of things, the audio market is tiny in comparison to the whole consumer market.

[rolandk]

Being a Digi Windows Engineer must be a nightmare job.

[Mr. Dipity]

Being a Digi Windows Engineer must be a nightmare job.

It's worse. It's apparently a total fiasco of a department, in a fiasco of a company, owned by a fiasco of a holding company. This according to my friend, who was a Digidesign windows engineer, for a very short time.

His point of view may be bitter and biased, however.

[spankenstein]

Apparently Digi is incapable of making their software compatible with most popular PC hardware devices...

That's not the case - it's a time/money thing as it is with any company. The PC side has so many different hardware configurations available that resources need to be directed to where they will satisfy the most customers with the engineering resources available. Every new hardware config considered not only needs to be engineered to work, but it has to go through an entire test grid, which means time and money. If the amount of time/money that it would take to make something work properly (like SiS chipsets) can't be offset by the additional sales it would generate, then most likely it won't ever be done.

As for the 915 chipset - it's only because it's too new. It has to be tested to determine what amount of engineering it will take to make Pro Tools work properly and then that engineering has to be done, which can take awhile.

Sometimes the 'latest, greatest' isn't specifically because of this. It's not like Intel or AMD are sending anyone new motherboards ahead of time so that they can make sure software is working properly before they start shipping. In the grand scheme of things, the audio market is tiny in comparison to the whole consumer market.

These are firewire devices. I've never had any chipset incompatabilities with antyhign else I've ever used. Ever. M-Audio and MOTU stuf has always worked. Cakewalk, Sonar, Vegas, n-Track, Samplitude... all just worked.

[maz]

the tried and true method of zero point bounces will probably be your best bet for interchangability, unfortunately.

This is soooooo true.

Unless you need to send mix information, it's 100% of the time easier (read: less headache) to just send over infividual wav files that are stem aligned. Even 2 Mac Pro Tools systems opening the same session has some weirdness- i/o labels, drive allocation, crap like that.