And I’m looking at the big picture as far as ExpressCard: I don’t think, for instance, that Universal Audio could have gone to a laptop solution without the new bus, if I understand correctly.

This seems wrong given what I know about OS design. Every audio pump cycle is initiated by an interrupt, either from an audio interface, a timing device or network hardware. Therefore, every cycle necessarily involves a kernel-to-user space transition (preceded by the opposite in order to service the interrupt). The only thing the new architecture allows is avoiding user-to-kernel space data copying. This has been a feature of well engineered operating systems for at least 10 years, and its really quite amazing to me that Windows can only offer this now.

I don’t want to drag CDM deep into kernel coding, but I really have a strong reaction when technical jargon is used to sell technology in an apparently groundless way.

If I am mistaken, perhaps Noel could explain just how the user/kernel mode transitions can be avoiding with WaveRT drivers?

Have I tested DAE compatibility with Logic Pro and DP on the Mac? Yes, though unfortunately not in a long time. I just don’t have regular access to high-end Pro Tools hardware for my own personal testing. Interesting side note: I tried to get more information on DAE compatibility when I reviewed Logic Pro and DP for Macworld. It was very difficult to find people even using the DAE mode, partly because post production is so tied into Pro Tools for software compatibility.

Have I listened to the Mbox Pro converters? Yes. But I wouldn’t even think of comparing them to Apogee converters; these are an entirely different class of hardware, Digidesign isn’t even marketing them in that class, and any direct comparison would be unfair. I think Digidesign would agree.

Anyway, the point isn’t the ability to use Digi’s hardware with other software; the point is the reverse — the fact that Pro Tools software doesn’t work with other hardware. Until other applications can fully support file interchange with Pro Tools, most PT users rely on the software and thus the hardware required to run it. And it seems to me that the primary advantage of Pro Tools has been and still is the TDM platform for plug-ins. Those advantages are lost when you have to switch to LE.

I think there are lots of reasons to choose the alternatives, but certainly if Digidesign wants to sweeten the deal for its base of users, the best thing to do would be to provide a real, high-end mobile solution based on ExpressCard. It should be absolutely possible technically speaking.

But, I’m sorry; I can’t accept that I’m a “poor journalist” just because I point out that these solutions are fundamentally different. The reason the Core Audio drivers don’t matter is that PT’s whole solution is dependent on the TDM end of the equation. So, obviously I’m somehow being misunderstood. But it makes NO sense to me to pretend that the integrated hardware solution of Pro Tools is exactly like the native solutions, when it’s the differences that are the whole advantage in the first place.

I’m pointing out the disadvantages of this model, but one could just as easily point out the advantages — a consistent, hardware DSP-based platform that is really without equivalent. (Universal Audio and PowerCore are both DSP-based, too, and there are some great things about them, but they’re certainly not equivalent to the breadth of plug-ins on TDM — not to mention there are some key differences in how they work technically, though that’s a whole separate discussion.)

Anyway, bottom line:
1. Mobile native system: MacBook Pro gets the same plug-ins, same high-end converters, on the road.
2. Mobile TDM system: MacBook Pro uses different plug-ins (no TDM), consumer-grade converters (LE/M-Powered line)
(obviously, substitute PC, etc. here if you like)

This is ONLY really the case with ExpressCard; if you’re lugging around a PCI Express system it’s a non-issue. But it’s worth observing, and it’s a statement of fact, not opinion. I was snarky, it’s true, but the native platforms deserve a little snarky defense now and then because Apple hype aside, far more of the world thinks of Pro Tools and not its competitors. But, likewise, I’m always happy to look at the many serious advantages Pro Tools offers — and part of the reason native solutions like SONAR, DP, and Logic work as well as they do is the competition from Digidesign.

Likewise, I can’t imagine Digi will leave this gap for long, and that’s why competition is ultimately a great thing for everyone.

plus, the lock-in to apogee seems problematic to me. i much prefer the (not-for-mac) RME-style solution that, like all good technology, uses an open/common protocol (e.g. ADAT or MADI) to connect modular components. with my RME PCMCIA card + digiface, i can connect to apogee, frontier designs, behringer or other converters, or just other digital gear. too many musicians only learn the benefit of this after the “its easy, just plug it in” approach bites them in the ass.

I’ve also been encouraging the author of xjadeo to make a switch to using gstreamer as his internal streaming architecture, thus making it possible to leverage new codecs that are added to gstreamer with zero extra work on his part.

I hope this clarifies things a little.

One thing I will say in Digidesign’s defense is that the older a product, user interface, and codebase become, the harder it gets to innovate. Just dealing with the code can be a nightmare, and because you’ve got this user base that’s used to the UI, you’re often under pressure from your users to keep the status quo. I’m not sure that entirely explains some of the features PT users want that Digi hasn’t been delivered, but it’s definitely a factor. Competition has a way of motivating companies to find solutions to that, though.

As for mobile ExpressCard interfaces — this is absolutely likely to be the first of many, especially given the throughput it’s delivering! Just this week, we saw the Universal Audio stuff go ExpressCard. RME? TC/PowerCore? Digidesign? I’m sure we could see all kind of new hardware using that slot. (And this goes for the PC, too; Windows users were kind of scratching their heads initially as Mac users about what this mysterious new slot was …. here’s your answer.)

Thanks for your well-tempered reply. I agree. More competition would be great. We’ve seen it completely alter the visual front and have also seen some great innovation in terms of work flow in that arena.

Digidesign is so well entrenched that there seems little real innovation going on in terms of their software. They have been ridiculously slow to develop things like dynamic cross fades and better surround panning which have become a bit of an embarrassment in comparison to the competition. Partly this is a symptom of their entrenched user base and beta testing. People tend to forget ProTools is now over ten years old and that it has existed in its current state for a good, lets say, somewhat conservatively, 7 years. Maybe all apps have a life span in that eventually the users forget to look outside the status quo and therefore never find a need to push the products development.

Apps like Ableton Live completely escape the old analog metaphors and reshape the status quo making new ways of working apparent. Maybe it will take a company like Apple to innovate and push things forward in terms of post. It will however take a partnership in terms of audio hardware to push into industry which requires an integrated standard. It won’t be Digidesign because ProTools is simply too busy catering to the law of minimum innovation that its entrenchment demands.

I’m not suggesting people shouldn’t look at all the options or arguing that ProTools isn’t bettered by other tools for some tasks. In terms sequencing and composition ProTool’s heritage (as a DAW rather than a Sequencer) makes it an absolute dog for that task. If I was doing music alone the only place I’d use Tools is for traditional tracking and maybe mixing depending on the size of the project. That said, the inverse is also true. Pro Tools does what it was built to do very well. But then I think we probably agree anyway….I am far from a Digi Apologist.

In terms of speed… I am talking mainly about Dialogue and FX editing which involves many thousands of files/regions and I’ll argue till I’m blue in the face that ProTools is faster - it’d take me another ten years to work out if this is just a matter of practice….I’ll be deaf by then and it won’t matter. Maybe we need an editing stand off - Editing at 10 paces….

Ardour (which I use every day) will be great when its ironed out a little and (crucially) has a video track (Not sure why this is taking so long). What I hope a project like Ardour can do in unison with less entrenched developers is establish an open standard for audio sessions that will encourage interoperability between applications. This would really shake up the industry as people could move between apps with greater agility. Such a standard would completely undermine the Digidesign business model and would drive innovation. We would suddenly have ProTools Free again. Any company who opts out will write themselves out of a developing market place. What can I say…I’m a dreamer.

With regard to your point re: students. Its a soft spot for me. I teach audio engineering and sound design at a major university. Whats more I am responsible for the decision to go with ProTools and have installed studios based on TDM systems at the University. Its an agonizing decision to go with an expensive Proprietary system particular when I see the most interesting work in audio today (and for some time) based completely in the free/open source fields (PD specifically). I have to balance the need to meet expectations of ‘industry standards’ while gently gently encouraging students to work in less proprietary, more exploratory, less determinant formats. At the moment I am developing a course based solely on Ardour and PD. I hope that the fact that students can work on these tools on any machine they have lying around will see them more willing to invest time in exploration/innovation.

If anyone is interested in working on an developing an open source audio course maybe this would be a good collaborative/wiki project.

ProTools remains front and centre but I hope my students are well versed in the history of DAW and Sequencer development, and that they have access to Cubase, Live, Reason, Reaktor, Soundtrack and PD. Of course in my experience students with a real interest are already using Cubase or Live and they are keen to add ProTools to their belt.

I use ProTools less and less - but with a deadline and 90 minutes of messy dial and effects to edit I know there is really only one option for me….