another classic hook

clearly from atlantis 1981

------------






and never forget

 

Last edited: Oct 18, 2019

I think all has been corrected. Some of us are just easily triggered. And for good reason...

 

no problem, my song is this

 

What section was this again?

 

Lemme tell you what real musicians prefer...
Modesty. Diversity. Creativity. Freedom Of Choice. Inspirational Tools. Uninterrupted Flow.

Now, let's see how not real are these guys...
Some of the Cubase users are:
Deadmau5, Hans Zimmer, Accept, Amon Tobin, Boris Brejcha, Dirty Loops, Dub FX, Front 242, Infected Mushroom, Junkie XL, Kraftwerk, Marillion, Meshuggah, New Order, Noisia, Paul Haslinger, Steve Morse, The Glitch Mob, Tristan, Vinnie Moore, The Weeknd, Avicci, Martin Solveig , Todd Terje, Paul Oakenfold, Justice.

Some of the Logic users are:
Armin Van Buuren, Nicky Romero, Ed Sheeran, Disclosure, Eric Prydz, Kygo, Above & Beyond, Marshmello, Coldplay, Carl Cox, Pharell Williams, Kendrick Lamar, Chromeo, Taylor Swift, Brian Eno, Depeche Mode, Stephen Wilson, BT, Underworld, Markus Schultz, Tocadisco, Bjork, The Prodigy, Jacob Collier, Shpongle, Ellie Goulding, Adele, Robert Babicz, Joey Beltram, Trevor Horn, Darude, Vulfpeck, Astronaut, Klaypex.

Some of the Ableton Live users are:
Martin Garrix, Skrillex, Daft Punk, David Guetta, Diplo, Steve Aoki, Kaskade, Laidback Luke, Dada Life, Rent Reznor, Richie Hawtin aka Plasticman, The Chainsmokers, Paul Van Dyk, Mark Knight, Owl City, Timbaland, Ferry Corsten, DJ Shadow, Jean Michel Jarre, Fat Boy Slim, Orbital, The Crystal Method, Andrian Belew, Caribou, Dubfire, Moguai, Burial, Imogen Heap, Maceo Plex, Angerfist, Steve Duda, Vernon Reid, Nina Kraviz, Kiasmos, Bob Sinclar, Giorgio Moroder, Breakbot, Mr. Oizo, Kid Koala, John Digweed, Danny Elfman, Gotye, Matador, Freemasons, Mouse On Mars, Luke Slater, Ludacris, Kenny Dope, Moeny Mark, Goldfish
Also, a hefty bunch of well known artists which i won't be bothered because it's getting too long uses FL Studio, Cakewalk, StudioOne, Reaper etc. The infamous Taskforce himself uses Cubase Pro 10 with Acid Pro Next rewired, also Cakewalk and Ableton Live. His -also famous- wife uses Reaper and Sibelius.

I could go on forever, but i will leave you with an old story which i 've repeated before:
I remember Digidesign's big empty rack accessory selling for 800 US dlrs. Which by all means it was a 150-200 dlrs typical open rack enclosure but because it had the logo on it, it had to be sold 4-5 times its normal price. Now this is typical Avid.
Think of this as an overview example of what they charge versus how much it is really worth.
And when i quoted earlier that Avid's revenue from PT & audio bulk alone is as much as all the other companies it is true. But this is just the major factor of why & how most music is shite and everybody sounds the same nowadays. Most current hits are 4 track beats you can produce on a 80dlr phone and at best, their music sounds like someone recorded himself beatboxing while taking a dump. In other words, no-music-at-all but hey no worries, it sounds good, 'twas mixed in Pro Tools, right ?
As someone i know said, you can try polishing a turd but sure as hell you can't make it smell good. And that is what PT really is. A polished 4track cassette recorder digital turd. I 'd use the Studer over PT without any hesitation any day or night.
Cheers.
PS: And those way overpriced control surfaces you are referring to as sort of "mixing consoles" , they are gimmicks alright. Try mixing on anything like a Harrisson, SSL, Neve, Oram etc. and get back to us with your findings lol.

 

Last edited: Oct 19, 2019

I asked you not to share my secret.

 

Best DAW and best VST is urself:

 

make it two...

 

Nice drop!!!

 

...wasn't that that Baxter's masterpiece...?

Oh, he wasn't beatboxing tho.. he was keychaining - amazing sound-design nevertheless. Still hopefully you didn't steal the sound at the end of the drop. You could be risking a nasty lawsuit...

 

Well, that's easy enough: PT HD was the first DAW introduced to most professional studios back in the mid-Nineties, and so became the de facto standard for the industry. It's also far and away the most expensive. And it's also the one company that fixes it so that you have to buy their very-expensive SATA/Thunderbolt cards (either HD or HDX) in order to use any interface, whether it be one of their (again) very-expensive ones or a third-party interface with a jacked-up price in order to include Digiports. The basic outlay of cash for a PT HDX setup (that's native, meaning there's no onboard DSP, just the routing), not including an actual audio interface, is $3,000. Couple that with their draconian re-up policy of $800 per year, and they would have to be the worst company on Earth not to make more money than "all the other companies combined".

Not sure where you're getting your data, though, as Avid (nor any other DAW manufacturer) is not a publicly-traded company and therefore doesn't provide sales figures to the public.

Really? How many other DAWs have you used? All of them? I have PT 12 and it's decent for audio. Shit for MIDI. It's no more or less stable than any other DAW o the market. It's usability as a DAW was never up for debate. However, any other DAW on the market has it beat purely on the basis that: 1) they don't have artificially-limited audio and MIDI track counts and 2) don't require an annual $200 payment to maintain your perpetual license (assuming you own the software and assuming we're talking about regular PT, not PT HD/HDX), $300 if you let that payment lapse 30 days beyond the expiration date, $399 upfront a year if you don't feel like outright buying the software and just want to rent it instead, $600 for a perpetual license (that you still have to maintain the next year for $200 or no more updates or support).

Oh, and I was wrong in my previous post about the price of Pro Tools Ultimate, if you want to buy a perpetual license for that. It's fucking $1,899, plus an additional $200 for something called a "Digilink License". What's that, you ask? Well, unless you have a Digilink License, you can only use Avid audio interfaces (not the Digilink card, mind you -- you still have to buy that! -- but the interface it plugs into). Plus $800 a year for every year after that (you can also rent -- er, "subscribe" to it for about the same $800 a year if you don't care about losing it the minute you stop paying for it).

 

How is it not publicly traded man. Is it not in the stock market ?
http://ir.avid.com/news-releases/ne...ology-announces-q4-and-full-year-2018-results
And interesting is : https://simplywall.st/news/avid-tec...-does-its-beta-value-mean-for-your-portfolio/
There's quite more like this if you search. Btw, when i said i'm all with you i meant it man and i agree with all. I am well aware of PT and its incarnations. The fkrs stick with their outrageous pricing for ever. Why bother when suckers will pay them ...
Cheers

 

True, but nowhere on any of their financial statements is expressed the breakdown of either sales or subscriptions specifically to Pro Tools. Avid has a strong customer base in Live Sound, Graphics, Newsroom Management and a host of other products and services which all funnel into their cash flow pool. In addition, since it is impossible to compare actual sales of PT with any other developer of digital audio software it cannot be accurately stated that they are industry leaders in revenue specifically apples to apples. Maybe they are, but maybe is never a sure bet. I'd rather go with Dakota Sunrise to show in the 5th race at Pimlico...she's sure to come in!

Tip: Always bet on the horse that takes a dump in the paddock before the race, it tends to loosen them up and they perform up to or better than their potential.

It didn't.

 

Not in the one i posted. And i am no expert in finance, actually about the opposite. In an older post of mine (about 2 yrs back perhaps?), a financial analysis had a specific mention of PT+Avid audio gear annual revenue. I just can't remember if it was 3rd party or theirs. I will try to find it. Cheers

 

Thanks.

 

@Lois Lane
Found my post, can't find Avid's report. But what's important and take my word for this as i remember reading it on their own report vividly, ~45% of Avid's income comes from their audio line. That makes Avid's audio line annual revenue about 200mil dlrs. to those who may not understand these figures, as i said before, Yamaha bought Steinberg for a mere 28 mil. I 'm guessing Avid makes 28 mil or so, on maintenance alone every year lol. So yes, i don't like Avid one bit but they are the number 1 established name in the audio industry and as much as we may hate it, they aren't going away anytime soon imho.
Cheers

 

While many of the posters made and have valid points, but also (computer based) digital audio still have many "flaws", both conceptually and practically. Not to mention several myths and misconceptions that are perpetually promoted as "truths". For example it is promoted/misunderstood, that for summing, bit depth has a ANY sort of relevance, when it does not. Summing ( in daws) is a simple addition, as +( in opposition to ANY gain or amplitude change which ARE multiplications, as *), which by definition does NOT require a (re)quantisation, meaning that summing, done "correctly" does NOT change the bit depth of the original files, nor is required to.
But, that's also actually wrong.Summing also induces an amplitude change (not in the individual files, but in the result ) which should be treated, and represented (and solved) as such .
Disclaimer: That's MY view on this subject, based on a number of things.

Analog summing is a VERY different thing, subject to a great number of variables, from the channel count, to the load on the PSU, the (sound of the )mixing buss itself and a gazillion of other factors.

Also, not all daws do "things" in the same manner. Cubendo for example, does respect the summing ( meaning that two 16 bit files summed, will result in a 16 bit file, given that NO gain changing operation have taken place, not even by the "pan law") which is easily verifiable. Reaper on the other hand, will (re)quantise the result, no matter what, to reflect the chosen bit depth for the given project, and that's also easily verifiable.The Bitter plugin will come in handy for that
And again, also there is no such thing as "headroom" in a daw, regarding processing bit depth or representable frequency wise. That is needed, because plugins ( and not only) can't operate otherwise. They need "predictability", otherwise they simply can't work. But that doesn't make it "okay", its just how the "system works".
Also, file bit depth and processing bit depth, are not the same thing A dither plug will still operate at his processing bit depth, even if it does a bit reduction, as a result.

Also, the so called "non-linearities", are actually a joke, because a "dip in the frequency" is NOT a non linearity. Non linearity, as a mathematical and engineering term is that a result of an operation, will not be two or n times the SAME. Which daws, or any digital audio device for that matter, is entirely incapable to create, because again, it NEEDS, promotes and creates predictability. It is the basis and the reason for its creation. It can record (accurately represent) the results (in its limits), but again, it is entirely incapable to create them.

On the other hand, saying that two daws sound the same is... hmm.... . The relevance and importance of this "problem", is ... actually debatable. Meaning, that how much one will be (or let be ) affected by that, is a personal choice. If one does not like the result or the workflow, simply have to adapt somehow. By changing the conditions, or by changing the workflow.
Saying that the, or a daw, is to blame for failures in creating and mixing... is at best a half truth. People did hits on all kind of lo-fi, low tech gears and didn't even known that, they just did it.But nevertheless, they (daws) are equal only in their function, they are different in many, many ways.

 

Surprised nobody mentioned this place...
Definitely shows differences between DAWs!
http://src.infinitewave.ca/

 

There is a difference, but not when processes are left outside and the sample rate, resampling and bit depth match. And the src comparisons on the link proves exactly that.