What 3 things about DP 8 annoy you the most?

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Lets put it in perspective:

You've succeeded in getting our attention. The floor is yours. Aside from "pt is so much better" and "why am I always the victim" and "I don't care enough about YOUR post to read it" do you have anything positive to contribute?

[toodamnhip]

I think perhaps part of why some might take issue is that you said "normal day to day mixing." What is "normal and day to day" actually might vary as you mentioned you use a lot of plug-in automation. I'm not sure just how much. Perhaps you use more than other people and that's why you're running into issues that others are not. Your "normal and day to day" may be different than others, so that description of the kind of mixing you're talking about is subjective and different for different people.

I know my normal day to day production and mixing is not “normal”.
.
I like to compare what I strive for in my mixes to the movie “Life of Pi” and it’s cinematography.

The quality of the cinematography in that movie compared to other movies is what I strive for when I mix. The clarity and ART and style of the mix and production. Full of movement and dimension.
I automate everything, and LOCK IN everything with full snap shot, even pasting in snap shot automation on the fly. Even on ONE word sometimes. I echo pan everything so that if a part is panned right, there is an echo of it left in a delay that gives it 3 dimensions.
...It is not uncommon for me to use a 20k Yamaha 24 fader DM2000 board or Avid artist mix to ride 40-80 tracks of EQ;s and compressors and FX on tracks. Boosting Highs artistically, and riding compression ratios throughout a song. Pasting automation on the fly..etc...All with a full battery of VIs running.
But the comparison I made here with pro tools is on a simple orchestral mix of about 25 tracks. It is a great way to feel the responsiveness of Pro Tools as compared to DP. For one thing, I did the 1st round of mixes INSIDE of DP. And because of the people it is going to for mix approval, I was asked to mix the real final mix in Pro Tools. I take the Pro Tools file with me to Italy, we tweek a bit, and boom...I go home happy. The first mix was MIDI orchestra, the second and final mix, a fully blown orchestra, but it is practically the same track count due to the arranger’s genius. As a matter of fact, I’ve double many tracks in Pro Tool which should make Pro Tools slower than DP. Instead, it was faster than DP.
So this is a rare opportunity to really compare the SAME song, and SAME general mix...

Of course, I do miss some things about DP..totally. I really miss pasting EQs and compressors on the fly. I miss a ton of functions and features that I use in DP.

I will say this. About a yr ago, I thought Pro Tools gassed out on VIs compared to DP. It seems like DP was better at working with VE Pro.
So there are pros and cons to all of these systems.

I just wish, on a pure audio , mixing level, DP felt like part of my arm when manipulating volume automation and other automation in the sequence editor the way Pro Tools does. It just feels so much more responsive. There is ZERO lag or feeling of disconnect from the screen in Pro Tools. No beach balls, EVER.
>Instantaneous beyond anything DP feels like. IN PT, It feels like I am grabbing a real object. A fader almost feels 3 dimensional, an edit point too. DP feels like it has to ponder things, even if for a millisecond. You guys might jump to the wrong conclusion and think I mean BIG lags in DP..no, not at all. Though it can get fairly retarded when an 8o track mix is amost done. But in this instance, We’re talking the smallest lag in DP> But it is enough to make Pro Tools feel quite refreshing when manipulating objects on the screen.
I am not divorcing DP, but I have thoroughly enjoyed visiting my Pro Tools mistress..lol

Instead of infighting, I would hope members would LISTEN and see where the bar is, at least in the area of responsiveness and audio efficiency when it comes to plug ins and automation and mixing.

And by the way, I work with software several companies. There are differences in DP that involve DPs’automation and efficiency. And the things I run into have been confirmed by tests with several companies, this is way beyond anecdotal story telling by some guy who’s system is worse than all other happy users. I know this from the viewpoint of programmers trying to work their products inside of DP.
Of course, DP is not the only company to give programmers fits. Pro Tools in vers 11 is making developers sweat..I am running PT 9.
Anyway, I am starting to babble. TIme to sleep.

[Phil O]

...But the comparison I made here with pro tools is on a simple orchestral mix of about 25 tracks. It is a great way to feel the responsiveness of Pro Tools as compared to DP... ...I just wish, on a pure audio , mixing level, DP felt like part of my arm when manipulating volume automation and other automation in the sequence editor the way Pro Tools does. It just feels so much more responsive. There is ZERO lag or feeling of disconnect from the screen in Pro Tools. No beach balls, EVER.

Sorry, TDH but I'm just not seeing that on my system. I worked on a project today that is mostly audio (33 audio tracks, 6 MIDI tracks driving Garritan Aria player). All 33 audio tracks have automation, mostly volume, pan, sends and a few plug-in controls. When I edit the automation in the SE I get "No beach balls, EVER." Movements seem as instantaneous as when I'm working on a 1 track project. I don't doubt what you're experiencing, but I don't think it's the normal DP experience. And, I'm still on DP7.24. Folks are saying DP8.04 is snappier. Just sayin'.

Phil

[James Steele]

What would be nice is if people here could work out if there was a difference that was holding back DP performance on your setup rather than doubting your opinion and your agenda. Or maybe there is a fault with DP that should be corrected. Anyway - either way stick around on this forum !

I'm catching up on this thread, and let me just say that I don't think TDH has an "agenda." And people are free to express opinions. It would probably be helpful if a lot of this was reported to MOTU directly with detailed information, etc., if there's a way to compare it apples to apples in terms of how DP handles plug-in automation versus PT, which from what I read seems to be the crux of the issue?

[James Steele]

I automate everything, and LOCK IN everything with full snap shot, even pasting in snap shot automation on the fly. Even on ONE word sometimes. I echo pan everything so that if a part is panned right, there is an echo of it left in a delay that gives it 3 dimensions.
...It is not uncommon for me to use a 20k Yamaha 24 fader DM2000 board or Avid artist mix to ride 40-80 tracks of EQ;s and compressors and FX on tracks. Boosting Highs artistically, and riding compression ratios throughout a song. Pasting automation on the fly..etc...All with a full battery of VIs running.

From this it seems to me that your style of mixing puts you at the outer edge of the curve as far as pushing the limits of DP. I've never tried doing full automation snapshots on every parameter so frequently. Do you do a snapshot across ALL tracks, on ALL automation parameters all the time, even when they might be redundant? (For example, only one or two tracks have a change occurring, but you snapshot 24 or more tracks, sending redundant parameters to the tracks that aren't changing?)

I'm just wondering. Granted that makes it very easy on the user, but does seem to create a lot more work on the computer. I guess it depends on your time constraints. I tend to be more precise about only automating tracks/parameters that are changing. Anyway, perhaps I misunderstand. But sounds like the method in which you work puts more demand on DP and it may be why some don't understand why they can have similar track counts as you and similar number of VIs and not have the same sorts of issues.

[Killahurts]

I've been watching this thread and trying to figure out what about DP8 annoys me most. Most all the things I'm coming up with are bugs/issues that MOTU will eventually fix. For instance, not going to exactly where in the sequence I double-clicked in the TO, is profoundly annoying to me. But this they will fix, so..

But I have thought of a couple of small items:

1. Not fond of the way virtual instruments work in DP, especially when bouncing MIDI/VIs to audio. I still can't decide if I want to keep all the VI tracks together, like at the top of the TO, so I can get to the faders on my console/controller for access to quick mixing, or put the VIs together with their respective MIDI tracks, maybe in a folder. The advantages of that is that you don't have to move the MIDI and VI tracks together to bounce them.

Solution: An "instrument" track could be MIDI and audio from the VI, together in one track. You could have as many MIDI tracks within the instrument track as you want. The track would show MIDI data in the tracks overview, until I hit the (one) render button, which renders the VI to audio, with or without plugin and volume settings. If I choose not to apply volume and plugin settings, they will continue to be applied for the resulting audio, I'm simply trading MIDI for audio. The track itself would have an undo button, which takes it back to MIDI, unlike freezing which requires you to go back and re-enable the original tracks it froze.

2. The notation/lyrics/guitar chord stuff is abysmal in DP. I think it's somehow worse than it used to be. I had to write lyrics into a piece the other day for the first time.. what a kludge, like pulling hairs one at a time. Plus, there used to be a way to quantize the notes for the score without actually quantizing the MIDI (so you don't get 128th note rests, etc. Maybe that feature is still there, I just don't know where?

Solution: give us a better and more workable score setup, that actually works graphically on the screen, rather than being all in the preferences. And when we select MIDI and go to notation, give us a smart tool that will "prep" the MIDI to display reasonably in the score (like I said, there may be this already).

There are more, but I gotta go finish this trailer piece..

[toodamnhip]

I don;t know about ”redundant” snap shots. Let’s just say every track has EVERY parameter locked via snap shot.
The reason I do this is because once I think a mix is “done”, I love going in a pulling on EVERYTHING, via touch mode, WITHOUT recording, to see if a mix is the best it can be.
This is one of my “secrets” so to speak.

When things are LOCKED, you can tug on an eq for ex. and see if boosting the 5k boost some more makes it better, or reduce a compression ratio to see if the vocal sounds better less squashed...etc...If so, cool, go ahead and do it a second time and write. Or, tug on that EQ or compressor while recording automation and if you don’t like the result, undo.

This ability to “tug” on the mix so to speak, IN EVERY MANNER, requires EVERYTHING be locked.
Once I have a LOCKED mix, I can rest assured that I can only improve things or let them stay as they are.

Also, I work on so many projects, some of them over yrs, that having a locked mix is important to me for recall purposes.

If locking a mix didn’t have so many benefits, I would not do it as yes, it is a draw on the cpu.
But for this discussions purposes, I am doing the same in Pro Tools and it is still faster.
As to the other user reporting that he sees no beach balls, let’s forget I mentioned beach balls. That’s the extreme lag. My main point was that there is an immediacy of responsiveness in PT that is generally more organic than DP.

By the way, I do NOT like how Pro Tools works when it comes to “tugging” on a mix. When NOT in write mode, and grabbing a fader, the moment you let go, it sanps back. ie, only touch “tugging” is available. In DP, you touch touch or latch when tugging on a mix. Also, PT 9 doesn;t have trim automation except in HD. This sucks. So score some points for DP!!

And to the point about reporting to tech support. There have been so many bugs I have reported where I have been told they will check into it, do a test etc. And NEVER heard back after the initial, “we will check it out” response. It would be helpful if MOTU’s tech support got back to us better, even saying, “hey, we did a test and found out blah blah blah”. instead of disappearing. It is a PITA to fill out those damn forms and get no response or dropped balls. Truthfully, I assume, maybe incorrectly, that they monitor this site closely. If they don;t, they should.
If I could copy and paste what I write here, into a tech support EMAIL, without all the rest of that damn form, I would do it more often.
How about we are able to set up a response template ONE time. And all additional support claims, use that? Instead of all the little extra windows we have to fill out EACH TIME. yikes.

[Killahurts]

Oh and

3. Plugin windows don't float on top. This may be responsible for the most mouse clicks I currently have to do in my life.

[FMiguelez]

Oh and

3. Plugin windows don't float on top. This may be responsible for the most mouse clicks I currently have to do in my life.

+1

Even though one can quickly get them back via command-tilde, it's still very annoying to see the plugin windows go behind other windows. Sometimes they just need to stay put!

[Dan Worley]

Oh and

3. Plugin windows don't float on top. This may be responsible for the most mouse clicks I currently have to do in my life.

+1

Even though one can quickly get them back via command-tilde, it's still very annoying to see the plugin windows go behind other windows. Sometimes they just need to stay put!

Yes, please, please, please! But it needs to be a preference. A simple "float" button on each plug-in window, or something like that.

[Killahurts]

Oh and

3. Plugin windows don't float on top. This may be responsible for the most mouse clicks I currently have to do in my life.

+1

Even though one can quickly get them back via command-tilde, it's still very annoying to see the plugin windows go behind other windows. Sometimes they just need to stay put!

Yes, please, please, please! But it needs to be a preference. A simple "float" button on each plug-in window, or something like that.

Agreed!!

[bayswater]

Oh and

3. Plugin windows don't float on top. This may be responsible for the most mouse clicks I currently have to do in my life.

+1

Even though one can quickly get them back via command-tilde, it's still very annoying to see the plugin windows go behind other windows. Sometimes they just need to stay put!

Yes, please, please, please! But it needs to be a preference. A simple "float" button on each plug-in window, or something like that.

IIRC, OS X actually has the ability to let a developer define a window as one that floats. Not clear why something like this is not more common.

Afloat is a utility that lets you define a window as floating, but it puts the "float" command in the Windows menu so it's not clear whether it would work with plugins in DP. Apparently it does work with Logic plugin windows.

Cubase plugin windows have a float option, so how hard can it be?

[Kubi]

For those experiencing performance issues, I'd highly recommend the following, assuming you already have plenty of RAM:

Run DP8 in 64bits in OS 10.8, off of an SSD.

That's what DP8 was made for (well, the 64bit part and the OS10.8 - but the SSD really puts it over the top), and that's when you get amazing performance. Better than any older DP version, better than any 32bit ProTools (so, anything prior to PT11 - which I don't have and haven't tried.)

Works for me.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

So Kubi, where is the best place to put that SSD? Boot or project?

[mikehalloran]

1. There are still SOME annoying bugs. That I HAVE found workarounds makes them NO less annoying. They've been reported and are BEING worked on.

2. DP 7.24 projects WITH Izotope plugs, when opened in DP 8, do not retain the SETTINGS for those plugs. Again there's a workaround - finish the PROJECT in 7.24.

3. There might be SOMETHING else I find ANNOYING but I forget WHAT it IS.