After much waiting for Digidesign to move up to Mac OS X, I recently
purchased the Digi 002 Rack running ProTools 6.1.

I'm hoping the experts in this forum can give me some guidance, but so
far my opinion of ProTools 6 is that it's too frustratingly cumbersome
to be useful! It slows my Mac G4 (see specs below) down to a crawl
when the ap is open, even screen redraws take forever. I've been
experimenting with changing the Playback Engine settings' H/W Buffer
Size, CPU Usage Limit, and DAE Playback Buffer size, which seems to
cure one problem, (i.e. lower H/W Buffer size improves latency
issues), but cause another set of problems.

I finally got a reply from Tech Support, but they tend to blame the
problems on running multiple plugins, but my problems occur with no
plugins inserted.

I'm running a single processor G4 upgraded from 400Mhz to 1Ghz, 1.19GB
of ram, running OS X 10.2.6. I'm driving two monitors, and am
beginning to wonder if the dual monitor setup could be part of the
sluggishness problem, seeing how OS X is so graphically intensive.

I'm also wondering if I need to purchase an external hard drive for
best results, (I'm currently using a partition of my internal hard
drive, (not the startup partition of course), as my record disk.
Could that be part of the problem?

I sincerely hope those of you with expertise in this area can help, as
I've been a huge ProTools fan from their earliest days. I'm just
wondering if I should just scrap this new gear and software and go
back to using my old Powermix version (4.2.1) that didn't require any
hardware, but worked wonderfully for me, (albeit in OS 9).

Thanks in advance.

John

mrwizzer wrote:

After much waiting for Digidesign to move up to Mac OS X, I recently
purchased the Digi 002 Rack running ProTools 6.1.

I'm hoping the experts in this forum can give me some guidance, but so
far my opinion of ProTools 6 is that it's too frustratingly cumbersome
to be useful! It slows my Mac G4 (see specs below) down to a crawl
when the ap is open, even screen redraws take forever. I've been
experimenting with changing the Playback Engine settings' H/W Buffer
Size, CPU Usage Limit, and DAE Playback Buffer size, which seems to
cure one problem, (i.e. lower H/W Buffer size improves latency
issues), but cause another set of problems.

I finally got a reply from Tech Support, but they tend to blame the
problems on running multiple plugins, but my problems occur with no
plugins inserted.

I'm running a single processor G4 upgraded from 400Mhz to 1Ghz, 1.19GB
of ram, running OS X 10.2.6. I'm driving two monitors, and am
beginning to wonder if the dual monitor setup could be part of the
sluggishness problem, seeing how OS X is so graphically intensive.

I'm also wondering if I need to purchase an external hard drive for
best results, (I'm currently using a partition of my internal hard
drive, (not the startup partition of course), as my record disk.
Could that be part of the problem?


Well you might have other problems but if you bucked up for 002............I'd
buy a separate HD for audio............absolutely.


I sincerely hope those of you with expertise in this area can help, as
I've been a huge ProTools fan from their earliest days. I'm just
wondering if I should just scrap this new gear and software and go
back to using my old Powermix version (4.2.1) that didn't require any
hardware, but worked wonderfully for me, (albeit in OS 9).

Thanks in advance.

John











My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

Hi there! I just bought an 002 rack as well. I haven't gotten it up and
running yet, as I am having issues with my new G4.

How are you taking your video out. Are you using a second video card? I like
the Canopus ADVC100. It's a little box that takes RCA video and audio in,
and converts it to firewire. It also has RCA outputs on it. I just plug that
into a firewire port, and makes life really easy. If you are doing hi-res
picture, that can be a problem. I just finished mixing a short on an HD3
rig. We were running tons of plug ins, over 100 tracks of audio, and full
res picture, we started to get a little lag. It was because of the picture.
We re-converted to a lower res, and everything was fine. That may be your
issue.

-Dave


Jonathan Viking wrote in message
om...
After much waiting for Digidesign to move up to Mac OS X, I recently
purchased the Digi 002 Rack running ProTools 6.1.

I'm hoping the experts in this forum can give me some guidance, but so
far my opinion of ProTools 6 is that it's too frustratingly cumbersome
to be useful! It slows my Mac G4 (see specs below) down to a crawl
when the ap is open, even screen redraws take forever. I've been
experimenting with changing the Playback Engine settings' H/W Buffer
Size, CPU Usage Limit, and DAE Playback Buffer size, which seems to
cure one problem, (i.e. lower H/W Buffer size improves latency
issues), but cause another set of problems.

I finally got a reply from Tech Support, but they tend to blame the
problems on running multiple plugins, but my problems occur with no
plugins inserted.

I'm running a single processor G4 upgraded from 400Mhz to 1Ghz, 1.19GB
of ram, running OS X 10.2.6. I'm driving two monitors, and am
beginning to wonder if the dual monitor setup could be part of the
sluggishness problem, seeing how OS X is so graphically intensive.

I'm also wondering if I need to purchase an external hard drive for
best results, (I'm currently using a partition of my internal hard
drive, (not the startup partition of course), as my record disk.
Could that be part of the problem?

I sincerely hope those of you with expertise in this area can help, as
I've been a huge ProTools fan from their earliest days. I'm just
wondering if I should just scrap this new gear and software and go
back to using my old Powermix version (4.2.1) that didn't require any
hardware, but worked wonderfully for me, (albeit in OS 9).

Thanks in advance.

John

On 6 Aug 2003 13:55:12 -0700, (Jonathan Viking)
wrote:

After much waiting for Digidesign to move up to Mac OS X, I recently
purchased the Digi 002 Rack running ProTools 6.1.

I'm hoping the experts in this forum can give me some guidance, but so
far my opinion of ProTools 6 is that it's too frustratingly cumbersome
to be useful! It slows my Mac G4 (see specs below) down to a crawl
when the ap is open, even screen redraws take forever. I've been
experimenting with changing the Playback Engine settings' H/W Buffer
Size, CPU Usage Limit, and DAE Playback Buffer size, which seems to
cure one problem, (i.e. lower H/W Buffer size improves latency
issues), but cause another set of problems.

I finally got a reply from Tech Support, but they tend to blame the
problems on running multiple plugins, but my problems occur with no
plugins inserted.

I'm running a single processor G4 upgraded from 400Mhz to 1Ghz, 1.19GB
of ram, running OS X 10.2.6. I'm driving two monitors, and am
beginning to wonder if the dual monitor setup could be part of the
sluggishness problem, seeing how OS X is so graphically intensive.

I'm also wondering if I need to purchase an external hard drive for
best results, (I'm currently using a partition of my internal hard
drive, (not the startup partition of course), as my record disk.
Could that be part of the problem?

I sincerely hope those of you with expertise in this area can help, as
I've been a huge ProTools fan from their earliest days. I'm just
wondering if I should just scrap this new gear and software and go
back to using my old Powermix version (4.2.1) that didn't require any
hardware, but worked wonderfully for me, (albeit in OS 9).

Thanks in advance.

John


I am currently running 6.1 on an HD2 sytem on a new 1g Mac also. (Ox).
I would admit that there are some unusual bugs with this version. I
often get a CPU overload message that many times interrupts a take.
Tech support has a bunch of excuses for this also even though I've
seen this error on several different systems.

I cannot speak for the 002 system and certainly you need an external
drive to store audio on. But I'm anxious for the next PT upgrade to
see what secret problems they have solved that they claim never
existed.

BP.

Read the first (locked) post he

http://duc.digidesign.com/cgi-bin/ub...ubb=forum;f=24



-- TAPKAE
http://tapkae.com

"We're the cleanup crew for parties we were too young to attend"
(Kevin Gilbert)

You might want to change the numbers of colors in the preferences tab
to thousands of colors instead of millions.

When we upgraded to 6.1(for our TDM rig), we kept getting PCI overload
errors. This happened only while recording. We could play as many
tracks and plugins as before, just couldn't get it to record. We found
out that the burst rate on the ATTO card under OS X defaults to the
maximum. Ran the ATTO configurator tool and dropped the burst rate
down a bit, and now it works great. If only I could use my ALTIVERB!!!

One of the cool things about the 6.1 software, is that it is backward
compatible with most version of PT. We built a session in PT6, saved
it and it opened up and worked perfectly in 5.1. Made some changes to
the session and saved it. Started OSX and it opened up and worked
perfectly in 6.1. Pretty cool!!!

We kept PT 5 on OS 9 until the Audioease idiots get it together and
make an OSX version of Altiverb.

Another cool thing about 6.1 is the ability to output video through
any capture device. We have a Formac. Import a Quicktime movie, drop
it on the timeline, then output to external video. Now when I get a
work dub for a film, I capture the 3/4" using Final Cut 4, make a QT,
and the 3/4" machine gets TURNED OFF! No more shuttling. It's great.
I'm hoping some of the film guys will start sending the work prints
out in QT.

Hope this has been helpful.







On 6 Aug 2003 13:55:12 -0700, (Jonathan Viking)
wrote:

After much waiting for Digidesign to move up to Mac OS X, I recently
purchased the Digi 002 Rack running ProTools 6.1.

I'm hoping the experts in this forum can give me some guidance, but so
far my opinion of ProTools 6 is that it's too frustratingly cumbersome
to be useful! It slows my Mac G4 (see specs below) down to a crawl
when the ap is open, even screen redraws take forever. I've been
experimenting with changing the Playback Engine settings' H/W Buffer
Size, CPU Usage Limit, and DAE Playback Buffer size, which seems to
cure one problem, (i.e. lower H/W Buffer size improves latency
issues), but cause another set of problems.

I finally got a reply from Tech Support, but they tend to blame the
problems on running multiple plugins, but my problems occur with no
plugins inserted.

I'm running a single processor G4 upgraded from 400Mhz to 1Ghz, 1.19GB
of ram, running OS X 10.2.6. I'm driving two monitors, and am
beginning to wonder if the dual monitor setup could be part of the
sluggishness problem, seeing how OS X is so graphically intensive.

I'm also wondering if I need to purchase an external hard drive for
best results, (I'm currently using a partition of my internal hard
drive, (not the startup partition of course), as my record disk.
Could that be part of the problem?

I sincerely hope those of you with expertise in this area can help, as
I've been a huge ProTools fan from their earliest days. I'm just
wondering if I should just scrap this new gear and software and go
back to using my old Powermix version (4.2.1) that didn't require any
hardware, but worked wonderfully for me, (albeit in OS 9).

Thanks in advance.

John

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:27:37 GMT, Robert Pascarella
wrote:

3/4" is still the primary delivery format for work tapes in the movie
biz. (ADR, foley, scoring...)

Plenty of cheap machines and cheap tape.





One of the great things I love about PT is importing a movie.
Very convenient for quick programs.

I though we killed 3/4 Umatic as a format a long time ago. Beta SP!

BP.

Robert Pascarella wrote:
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 01:02:09 -0400, Phil Hadaway
wrote:

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:27:37 GMT, Robert Pascarella
wrote:

3/4" is still the primary delivery format for work tapes in the movie
biz. (ADR, foley, scoring...)

Plenty of cheap machines and cheap tape.

I beg to differ. But no sense in arguing over it.
Even Beta SP is holding on for dear life now with D-Beta in common
use. I'm seeing a lot of DVCam too. Not to mention the rising
popularity of QT imports.

I'll take a 16mm reduction from the workprint, please.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 6:33:05 -0700, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in message ):

I'll take a 16mm reduction from the workprint, please.
-----------------------------snip----------------------------

Sadly, I think the days of workprints are going away, especially in LA. The
last two major features we did both did dailies to HD tape, and projected the
HD for preview screenings and rough-cuts. The movie was mixed using a Beta
SP source from the Avid output. The first time either client ever saw any
actual film was when the digital intermediate was made -- and even that was
made from a digital 2K file.

Things are changing all over in post.

--MFW

Marc Wielage wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 6:33:05 -0700, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in message ):

I'll take a 16mm reduction from the workprint, please.
-----------------------------snip----------------------------

Sadly, I think the days of workprints are going away, especially in LA. The
last two major features we did both did dailies to HD tape, and projected the
HD for preview screenings and rough-cuts. The movie was mixed using a Beta
SP source from the Avid output. The first time either client ever saw any
actual film was when the digital intermediate was made -- and even that was
made from a digital 2K file.

I'm seeing more and more of this, and I'm also seeing more and more problems
that don't get noticed until it's too late as a result.

I'm still providing services to the few people that are still cutting magfilm.
There aren't too many of them, but they are out there and they are generally
rabid loonies.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 03:25:49 GMT, Marc Wielage
wrote:

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 6:33:05 -0700, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in message ):

I'll take a 16mm reduction from the workprint, please.
-----------------------------snip----------------------------

Sadly, I think the days of workprints are going away, especially in LA. The
last two major features we did both did dailies to HD tape, and projected the
HD for preview screenings and rough-cuts. The movie was mixed using a Beta
SP source from the Avid output. The first time either client ever saw any
actual film was when the digital intermediate was made -- and even that was
made from a digital 2K file.

Things are changing all over in post.

--MFW


Just did the same thing on a documentary. HD at 24p. Does anyone else
think that this does not look even close to film? If I hear another
Sony rep tell me that this is giving film a run for it's money, I'm
gonna implode.

I'm not knocking it...actually, it's pretty cool. But it doesn't look
like film.

BP.