User profile for user: Larry Mal
Larry Mal Author
User level: Level 2
369 points

Pro Tools unlocked.

I want to make clear first of all that this thread isn't so much about the ability to run cracked PT software without having a Digidesign interface as it is about what this illustrates about Digidesign's business practices. This is not a promotion or defense of piracy!

First read this:

http://www.airusersblog.com/home-page/2 ... ocked.html

So they are unlocked and cracked, same as any other. But please pay attention to the unlimited voices! As most of you know, Pro Tools has a "voice" limitation unique to DAWs, and the only way to get around them was with purchasing Toolkits with the LE and M-Powered versions, and additional processing cards for the HD versions. Now read this:

http://www.airusersblog.com/home-page/2 ... dgate.html

Make of that what you will. As I say, I neither use nor support pirated software, and don't suggest that anybody else do so, however, Pro Tools is the industry standard, and what happens to it will possibly effect us all.

And either way, if there is an artificial limitation to the processing power of the cards, as there appears to be, then I think it's very important that Avid acknowledge that, and if they won't, then it still should be known.

dual 2.8GHz Mac Pro, Macbook Pro 2.16 GHz, Mac OS X (10.5.6), 2 GB RAM

Posted on May 26, 2010 12:28 PM

Reply
16 replies
User profile for user: Pancenter
Pancenter
User level: Level 6
14,788 points

May 26, 2010 8:32 PM in response to mattrixx

mattrixx wrote:
Bee Jay wrote:


Anyone remember the old single sided floppies? You just had to make a hole in them and boom - you got a double-sided disk with twice the capacity for half the price.


Ah yes... I used to do that.... with a soldering iron. Until I started getting dizzy from the smell!


Hole punch on the old 5-1/4" floppies.

Ha!

pancenter-
Reply
User profile for user: Jon H.
Jon H.
User level: Level 2
195 points

May 26, 2010 10:24 PM in response to Larry Mal

Larry Mal wrote:

...And either way, if there is an artificial limitation to the processing power of the cards, as there appears to be...


Yeah man, Pro Tools installs with all sorts of goodies which they charge a boat load to "unlock". Digitranslator is a good example. (Digitranslator, which, BTW did not work, in case anyone is thinking about using it.)
Reply
User profile for user: Jon H.
Jon H.
User level: Level 2
195 points

May 27, 2010 10:22 AM in response to crimsonnoise

crimsonnoise wrote:
Digitranslator has always been working fine here, I am using it all the time to import OMFs or exporting AAFs. It's certainly working much better than Logic's OMF/AAF import function.


Dude, that's good news. I've actually had good luck with logic's OMF import. But never could get PT with Digitranslator to do the AAF import (correctly if at all).
Reply
User profile for user: mattrixx
mattrixx
User level: Level 3
945 points

May 27, 2010 4:52 PM in response to crimsonnoise

crimsonnoise wrote:
Jon H. wrote:(Digitranslator, which, BTW did not work, in case anyone is thinking about using it.)

Digitranslator has always been working fine here, I am using it all the time to import OMFs or exporting AAFs. It's certainly working much better than Logic's OMF/AAF import function.


In my experience with importing AAF / OMF files to Logic, it is fine when the audio files are contained in a separate folder, but not when you receive an embedded file.
Reply
User profile for user: noeqplease
noeqplease
User level: Level 4
3,589 points

May 28, 2010 8:03 PM in response to Larry Mal

Hi Larry,

Have you tried to run 10,000 audio tracks or virtual synths on ANY darn single session yet? I think if anyone tried that would fry the CPU for sure, and good luck trying to get a hard disk to read that many audio streams...

Furthermore, it is not a "trick" that you are locked into the hardware.

When using the TDM audio engine, it ONLY uses the processing cards for audio playback, it never uses the computers' CPU for this task. the CPU is reserved for the graphics handling, and RTAS plug ins.

This is why TDM works as well as a tape machine : It has the same latency (about 1.2 mS) If you go ahead and run PT HD cracked on a system that only uses the computers' CPU for all tasks including audio streaming, you'll be quite short of the 10,000 voices claimed. and not to mention the amount of IO latency will always depend on your audio interface and drivers. ALWAYS.

I have a PT HD2, and it can run up to 192 mono audio tracks at 44.1 kHz, and reports being able to use up to 32 voices at 192 kHz.

Personally I LIKE limitations like this, because it FORCES artists to decide what sounds they want on their songs. It's called COMMITMENT.

In ALL my 12+ years as an audio engineer I have NEVER come across a session that had that many tracks or any sort in it. It simply is ridiculous.

As one mentor told me many years ago :

"If you can't make a song in 24 tracks or less, then you can't record the song at all".

Cheers
Reply
User profile for user: Eriksimon
Eriksimon
User level: Level 6
15,428 points

May 29, 2010 3:38 AM in response to noeqplease

noeqplease wrote:
"If you can't make a song in 24 tracks or less, then you can't record the song at all".


In a way it is a pity that many "starters" these days begin with a fully fledged DAW, in stead of with for example a basic 4-track analog cassetterecorder that they have to master first. I feel that would give a much more 'grounded' and basic knowledge of what multitracking is and isn't.
Reply
User profile for user: CSeye
CSeye
User level: Level 1
60 points

May 29, 2010 9:28 AM in response to Eriksimon

+In a way it is a pity that many "starters" these days begin with a fully fledged DAW, in stead of with for example a basic 4-track analog cassetterecorder that they have to master first. I feel that would give a much more 'grounded' and basic knowledge of what multitracking is and isn't.+

Not to mention having the chops to play a part from start to finish without messing up.

It took some fore*thought to bounce instruments with wide gaps between low and high frequencies (e.g. bass guitar and tambourine ) to the same track in order to apply eq to the respective low and high ranges without adversely effecting the tone of each.

Stuff like that.

University students of photography are still required to learn how to take pictures with a manual camera because it teaches them how to adjust exposure for various tonal ranges *at time of capture*.

* fore as in four track.
______________________

It'll be interesting to see how Digi responds to this and the fact that Mackie has put out a PT compatible mixer.

Native systems are only going to get more powerful. I really like having the option to use my Apogee interface (insert your favorite audio interface here ___) with any DAW of my choice.

PT 8 is very impressive and did grab my attention when it was first released. If a native version were ever released, I'd probably give it some serious consideration. Then again, I love using Logic and Cubase without jumping through any hoops!
Reply
User profile for user: noeqplease
noeqplease
User level: Level 4
3,589 points

May 30, 2010 12:09 PM in response to Eriksimon

Eriksimon wrote:
noeqplease wrote:
"If you can't make a song in 24 tracks or less, then you can't record the song at all".


In a way it is a pity that many "starters" these days begin with a fully fledged DAW, in stead of with for example a basic 4-track analog cassetterecorder that they have to master first. I feel that would give a much more 'grounded' and basic knowledge of what multitracking is and isn't.


+1. Completely agree.

I still think they should start with a limited set of tools, and learn the basics too.

ONE microphone. With multiple polar patterns. This way the newbie can explore these in depth bafore going to a Stereo mic configuration.

ONE mic preamp. One that has only a basic set of functionality, like hipass filter, gain, and output trim.

ONE compressor. One that has all the basic functions of a compressor. Like the LA2A, Gain, Gain Reduction, Limit / Compress switch. No more.

ONE DAW with 24 tracks or less limitation. The old Pt LE was great because of it's 32 tracks limit. That's including effect Auxes, Master Busses, whatever. I would even get one with 24 or less tracks to be made. Really, when you can do unlimited tracks, it does mess up creativity.

Cheers
Reply
User profile for user: tbirdparis
tbirdparis
User level: Level 5
5,524 points

May 30, 2010 4:41 PM in response to noeqplease

Sure, in principle I agree. However... In modern music production, I absolutely, easily, effectively and completely justifiably regularly use many multiples of 24 tracks to produce work. Crafting and designing complex and rich elements in a modern music production situation can always get you into very high track count territory, and there is nothing to defend about working this way. If you know what you're doing, the music is not necessarily a disorganized mess of rubbish at all. The way I work, my buss stems always come down to something in the range of 16-32 stems anyway - which are the principle "characters" of the music. They just don't happen to always be made of one track each, they can be the complex assembly of many tracks.

So while I wholeheartedly agree with you that new users who've never felt what limited tracks meant can lead to bad habits, I wholeheartedly disagree that the use of high track counts is only a bad habit.
Reply
User profile for user: Larry Mal
Larry Mal Author
User level: Level 2
369 points

Jun 1, 2010 11:40 AM in response to Mike Connelly

Mike, I feel that you've missed what the point of the linked articles is. Everyone knows that LE and M-Powered are capped artificially, what a lot of folks didn't know is whether or not the HD cards were.

And now that the software has been cracked, it seems that there is no limitation in voices whatsoever. This is making a lot of folks feel that Digidesign could have limited the ability of the HD cards in order to further the need and sale of those cards artificially. People are saying that for their needs, one card could have sufficed for what the three they felt they had to buy did.

You can make of that what you will. I only posted what I thought was a news item of interest.

I made no claims either, as to how many tracks one needed to record any music well. I don't see how that point has anything to do with this: the fact is, whether or not one needs 200 tracks or 10, it rankles to have a piece of software that is artificially limited and yet can be cured with money.

Because, no matter how few tracks folks here think other people should be limited to- no matter how few tracks the Beatles used on Sergeant Pepper's- the fact is a modern DAW doesn't know what a track is, it only processes information that is organized for your sake into "tracks".

This is why only Digidesign cripples their software into few "tracks", and it's only to sell more product. The only limitation is your system and your processor, which in this case is HD. And if that is still crippled, and it's that expensive, then native processing is looking like a more valid alternative all the time, and that is what I wanted people to be able to think about for themselves. And that's why I posted the articles.
Reply

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

Pro Tools unlocked.

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.
Learn more Sign up