SAW VS Pro Tools 9.0

[Dave Labrecque]

Nah, not the auto delay comp thing. That's internal. I mean when the audio goes out of the soundcard to your headphones and you play to what you hear and the sound comes back in and it's late in the timeline because of soundcard processing and (I think) driver monkey business. You can compensate for that in SAW if you want to. Sometimes you really need to!

Nah again, try setting up any PT native or LE system so you are monitoring through an external mixer. Record a track. Punch-in on a spot while listening to the first take. You will hear double...like the track is going through slapback delay. You can't turn off the sound running through PT without also turning off your cue mix.

Guess I'll have to take your word for it till I dig deeper. That stuff would surprise me, though. I mean, how are people getting by if there are those problems?

[Carey Langille]

No worries dave, the Latency he talks about is the same in PT9 as it is in Sawstudio, its whatever your cards latency is.. this is the same on all systems.... we use both here in the studio and it works exactly the same, no one has complained about any latency on either platform.. Its really pretty crazy how well pt9 works... i had blinders on for the longest time, i still mix using sawstudio, but the differences are smaller than i thought....

[Carl G.]

So after after a couple of decades they finally caught up to speed almost... but still can't get the monitoring for overdubs exactly right.
Hmm.... Glad I went with SawStudio.... not only is the monitoring perfect for punchins, it even allows you to chose how you want your punchin - any angle of softedge or not!
And speaking of speeds, I like SawStudio's blazing fast mixdowns.
Plus... other things PT 9 doesn't have, like "Shades" (GUI displays which are customizable), and lightning fast F-keys (24 different combinations of layouts which are also customizable), ability to save and recall countless numbers of F-Keys and Shades, pristine NATIVE EQ and compression and gating INSIDE every channel with no need to be patched (and built into the speed of the program). And then there's "SoftEdge" and it's creative applications and ease of use?
And...those are just a few "comparison" thoughts.

Plus my preference is the "Console" layout and feel, combined with brilliant navigational linking of sections in both the "multi-track" and the "Console" to allow overviews, sectional combinations of views, to sample editing views, with the touch of a key or click of a mouse - yielding superior work flow and blazing fast production, which allows you to you to focus on creativity and production of masterpieces in audio engineering.

[Dave Labrecque]

No worries dave, the Latency he talks about is the same in PT9 as it is in Sawstudio, its whatever your cards latency is.. this is the same on all systems.... we use both here in the studio and it works exactly the same, no one has complained about any latency on either platform.. Its really pretty crazy how well pt9 works... i had blinders on for the longest time, i still mix using sawstudio, but the differences are smaller than i thought....

Oh -- well that's not about the host, that's about the hardware interface. I see. All of those have some (small) latency, right? Grek was saying that SAW has a way to compensate for that easily. He must mean the "record loopback latency adjust" in SS. I've never messed with that and never noticed a problem. But then, I rarely loopback. I suppose, technically, now that I think about it, a musician punching in or overdubbing is responding to that slightly latent signal when laying down his new part. Interesting. Never thought about it. Aren't we talking only, like, a millisecond or two?

[Dave Labrecque]

So after after a couple of decades they finally caught up to speed almost... but still can't get the monitoring for overdubs exactly right.
Hmm.... Glad I went with SawStudio.... not only is the monitoring perfect for punchins, it even allows you to chose how you want your punchin - any angle of softedge or not!
And speaking of speeds, I like SawStudio's blazing fast mixdowns.
Plus... other things PT 9 doesn't have, like "Shades" (GUI displays which are customizable), and lightning fast F-keys (24 different combinations of layouts which are also customizable), ability to save and recall countless numbers of F-Keys and Shades, pristine NATIVE EQ and compression and gating INSIDE every channel with no need to be patched (and built into the speed of the program). And then there's "SoftEdge" and it's creative applications and ease of use?
And...those are just a few "comparison" thoughts.

Plus my preference is the "Console" layout and feel, combined with brilliant navigational linking of sections in both the "multi-track" and the "Console" to allow overviews, sectional combinations of views, to sample editing views, with the touch of a key or click of a mouse - yielding superior work flow and blazing fast production, which allows you to you to focus on creativity and production of masterpieces in audio engineering.

Carl, I'd encourage you to stick with SAWStudio. It seems to be working for you. Unless I'm misunderstanding.

[Carl G.]

Carl, I'd encourage you to stick with SAWStudio. It seems to be working for you. Unless I'm misunderstanding.

Well, that helps clear up things if I had any questions

[Fulvio fullcode Politi]

Like what?

Having a mixer like structure:
1) Latching channels on the fly and operate more full channel strips together (without having to create any group)

2) Store/Recall full channel settings including patched fx pre and posts on the fly

PostFader inserts.

Fu

[Grekim]

No worries dave, the Latency he talks about is the same in PT9 as it is in Sawstudio, its whatever your cards latency is.. this is the same on all systems....

Not exactly. I've gotten different numbers in different DAWs with the same card and driver. And different numbers with different buffer settings. I'll have to look back at my notes, but I think I've seen as much as 20 milliseconds with a 1024 buffer in SAW using a Digidesign asio driver. I've even seen the timeline placement of the returned signal earlier than the one sent out.

Yes Dave, the loopback latency adjust is where you can compensate. PT (non HD version) is the only DAW I know that doesn't allow you to do this.

Carl...I'm dead certain about the monitoring issue. I've seen complaints in PT 9 about it too from people who switched unknowingly.

Something else comes to mind....maybe fixed in PT 9...I doubt it. But, when you want to do a punch-in you need double the "voices." There are limitations to how many voices you can use depending on which version you are using. In PTLE 7 you had 32 mono or 16 stereo voices you could use simultaneously. Well, let's say you have tracked 24 mono tracks and you want to punch in another 16 at once. Can't do it unless you take some of the first batch offline. They keep upping the voice count with each version which is good.

[Microstudio]

PT9 now has auto delay compensation you don't have to have HD.

[Microstudio]

Having a mixer like structure:
1) Latching channels on the fly and operate more full channel strips together (without having to create any group)

2) Store/Recall full channel settings including patched fx pre and posts on the fly

PostFader inserts.

Fu

We are getting into semantics.....