Comments on: The New Avid: M-Audio, Sibelius, Digidesign Subsumed into Avid Branding?

By: SM

SM — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:07:08 +0000

I think this is good for AVID. A total Brand which will be bigger! Too many names sometimes confuse people

By: Peter Kirn

Peter Kirn — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:15:59 +0000

@Ken:
Interesting. Well, on the video side, Avid is a very, very well-known name as both the vendor and the product. So I don’t expect them to start calling their video products Pro Tools.

The other thing I’d say is that Sibelius isn’t as much of a “niche” tool as you may think – certainly no more than any other music product. Notation is a big deal to a whole lot of musicians and educators. It’s a big market, which is why Avid acquired the company, and why you now see Sibelius-powered notation facilities in Pro Tools. (I’m actually a little surprise that the latter hasn’t gotten more attention, but I think it’s because many people do notation as a separate workflow. For those who want both, that’s still big news, though; I’d pick that over the notation features in any of the other DAWs.)

By: Ken Burk

Ken Burk — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:13:03 +0000

First, my impressions of the brands today:
Sibelius – niche tool for scoring. Certainly worthy in doing its thing.
Pinnacle – shovelware for webcams
M-Audio – “meh” audio. Cheap stuff for entry level/hobbyist.
Digidesign – the hidden company behind ProTools
ProTools – high cache. Big dog on the block that everything else is compared to.
Avid – In every movie credits. Not personally familiar with the products – but I see the name.

So as I see it – there are 3 things worth holding onto. Sibelius and ProTools as product names, Avid as a company name. If Sibelius as a standalone product is going away, then that is fine too. If I were management, I’d be looking to make a product lineup of

ProTools Lite Audio (current M lineup)
ProTools Lite Video (Pinnacle crap)
ProTools LE Audio (digidesign host M-Box and 003)
ProTools LE Video (new lineup)
ProTools HD Audio
ProTools HD Video
ProTools HD A/V

Now you have a company that is recognized (Avid) with a brand that is recognized (ProTools) that are both class leaders.

By: Jan Klug

Jan Klug — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 03:38:12 +0000

@silhouette: it *is* from the mid-90’s ;)
to be more precise, from german music-tv station VIVA:
http://www.viva.tv/

By: Downpressor

Downpressor — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:30:35 +0000

Ugly design, but no matter. I dont buy any of those products myself.

By: Peter Kirn

Peter Kirn — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 11:50:13 +0000

Yes, the model for the Avid video stuff and Digidesign has absolutely been proprietary hardware platforms, and you know that’s why they’ve been less appealing to me — and, honestly, to a lot of the kind of audience who reads this site. I might also point out that for a lot of us, that’s not some sort of philosophical stand — there’s a community of musicians that relies on the audio interface flexibility and plug-in compatibility the competing hosts provide because it just suits the way we work. That’s nothing against the people for whom the Pro Tools model works, but there is a difference.

Of course, that’s the real question here — how the “Avid” umbrella applies to these very disparate products and what, exactly, Avid is planning for the future. Maybe they’re moving away from this largely-proprietary model on their flagship, high-end audio/video products.

They’re talking about the future, here, so I’m just not sure what they mean. ;)

And the fact is that people associate “Avid” with the part of the company that is most interested in proprietary, hardware-based platforms, and the least with stuff like M-Audio and Sibelius. So, yes, it’s in their court to prove what they mean.

By: grainmachine

grainmachine — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:26:02 +0000

Well Peter, while I certainly wouldn’t disagree with very much that you said there, words _do_ have meanings ! … and _whatever_ AVID intend to do concerning format interoperability with Sibelius, or AVID FCP etc, the fact remains that AVID’s business model is, and always has been, tying users of their software into buying their hardware … i’m not saying that this is evil, or even necessarily a bad thing, i’m just saying that it is the case.

There are many DAW’s & Video Editing software suites out there of which one could honestly claim that the maker’s “core strategy” is opening them to “third party products and solutions” … but, with all due respect to both you and Mr. Spreadbury, AVID clearly isn’t one of them when it comes to audio & video interfaces / soundcards / plug-in formats etc etc.

Furthermore, with respect to plug-in formats, VST & AU are indeed the “property” of Steinberg & Apple, and I for one would certainly welcome some sort of cross-platform, open-source plug-in format, but for the time being (while we’re waiting for such a thing to evolve) when plug-in developers develop for those formats, they are nevertheless developing for a wide range of “software solutions” … wheras if these same developers want to have the possibility of selling their products to the comparatively wealthy ( and Pro Tools dominated) post-prod and pro studio market, AVID forces them to develop for the (Pro Tools-only) RTAS format. One can argue about the reasons for AVID’s strategy here (and once again i’m not saying that it’s evil … they can obviously do whatever they want with their products ! ) … but ensuring support of third party solutions it most certainly ain’t …

By: Peter Kirn

Peter Kirn — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 09:18:55 +0000

@grainmachine:
I’ll defend Avid on this one. Yes, it’s true that Digidesign hasn’t embraced the audio interface and plug-in interoperability elsewhere, though those things are a whole other can of worms. I have some questions about the long-term viability of formats like VST, ASIO, and AU, too, because they are really proprietary formats that happen to have wide adoption, more than standards in the sense of having oversight of more than one company, and there are plenty of technical complaints one might have, as well. I mean, as you know, I’m a big fan of that flexibility, which is why I haven’t been such a big fan of Pro Tools. At the same time, it doesn’t really impact either Sibelius or M-Audio.

What I believe Digidesign and Avid have meant by this issue, so far has been more in the realm of file format interoperability. Pro Tools has made some steps forward, and I know some of the Avid video products have — Final Cut Pro gets mentioned in the press release. And Daniel can speak to this, because Sibelius has had a long history of making progress on file format interoperability, none of which changed when they were acquired by Avid. (Doing file formats for notation, by the way, is a heck of a lot *harder* than it is for audio projects, so it’s worth commending them on that.)

I think it’s all about what happens next. If people aren’t in love with the Avid brand right now, then in a way it mirrors what Avid is saying — that it’s time for a change. So we’ll see what that change looks like.

By: vicz

vicz — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 03:32:21 +0000

Its like Ford buying BMW and Mercedes and then thinking it’d be a good idea to rebrand all the cars as Fords….

By: grainmachine

grainmachine — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 03:13:07 +0000

“one of Avid’s core strategies is to ensure that Avid products work well with other third party products and solutions” you are joking right ?

like Pro Tools works well with industry standard VST / AU plugs and third party audio interfaces I presume.

come on, AVIDs strategy from day one has been designed precisely to do the opposite …