Hi All,
Alchemy is not closed, they have relocated to Smithfield in London. Check the website Alchemy | Mastering Services (same web address as always).

Their engineer Neale uses the Pyramix system, you mail him at [email protected]

I'm demoing the native version on my laptop at the moment, and have to say I think it knocks the pants off Pro Tools in some situations.

1) Fade editing - Comes up in a seperate window (not a pop up). The crossfade between 2 regions on the same track appear as 2 tracks so that you can fine tune, and you can pretty much draw the fade if you want.

2) Clip based gain without the need to offline process (like Nuendo does)

3) Fade files ...... what fade files??? !

4) As mentioned earlier in this thread the ability to export a layered fx as library information. Eg a dense cityscape with lots of footstep tracks, cars etc.... you can then call up the library and select your 'preset' but you get a visual representation of all the tracks (basically EDL info) and then turn tracks on/off depending on which parts you want to bring in. Drag and drop!

Pyramix does seem to be more window based, and I remember vaguely someone telling me the Pro Tools was started in the vein of everything in 2 windows?

I'm also not a Pyramix salesman - I love Pro Tools and especially D Control, but next time i can justify buying a new editing system i think i may get Pyramix Native, but then mix in Tools (although in Pyramix you can automate the chanel outputs and it takes VST etc etc)

Why mix in PT? You´ll find that mixing in Pyramix will be a much better experience as the degree of automation control is great and more than that, the mixing bus and associated processing sound much better to my ears. Give it a try!

I'm intrigued. Is there somewhere I can see a demonstration of Pyramix? Some videos maybe or a trial version? I assume there isn't a Mac OS version...

That would be awesome, but no there isn't. But it's worth the trip to PC world just for the program. I just want to add that Pyramix sounds the most natural to my ears. The only other daw I've worked on that gives it run it's money is Sequoia. It's also 3X the price! Just get a copy of bootcamp and your set.

[QUOTE=Electricbacfac;3950358]

"Now I am back home working on a short film in pro tools le I find myself frustrated looking for the picture cuts to sync my atmos track too."

Just the one?

[QUOTE=FullFrequency;5218401]

"4) As mentioned earlier in this thread the ability to export a layered fx as library information. Eg a dense cityscape with lots of footstep tracks, cars etc.... you can then call up the library and select your 'preset' but you get a visual representation of all the tracks (basically EDL info) and then turn tracks on/off depending on which parts you want to bring in. Drag and drop!"

Isn't this along the lines of "export region groups" in PT - which I use often to move complex layered effects between reels?

Well at the moment I'm freelancing around other studios doing other peoples work, but very slowly picking up a client of my own here or there. I do my editing at home, but then dry hire for the mix. At the moment it suits my workflow. I know it's full integrated with Euphonix and a few others but it's 95% digidesign here, and so i have way more chace of grabbing a D Control mix room last minute if i need to. If I ever get to the stage where i can buy my own then maybe, but I love that D Control still (custom faders).

Saying it's much better is a strong statement though. I'd like to do an a/b test on it with their top of the range i/o card Vs a 192 with the same monitoring environment....... anyone tried this?

[QUOTE=ezahp;5219635]It's a little similar yes, but you don't have to create groups and then export, it's a bit more intuitive - highlight, drag, drop into library then to bring back in select fx sequence in library, if you don't want all elements then you can switch them on/off within the library, drag, drop into session

That still sounds just the same as export/import region groups - except that you don't get the option AFAIK of only bringing in part of a group in PT - is it wise though not to bring in tracks based only on a visual representation rather than actually listening to them?

control and + or - on the numeric keypad... (slips audio within region by nudge value - has been in since I've been using tools (10 years or so)

Check out the video demo on the merging site
Merging Technologies
The Post video shows good examples of how the global library works.

You don't have to export or import, just drag and drop, which is much, much faster. There is a trimmer in the library and you can also audition the files before you drag them into the time line.

Dennis

Disclaimer: I do work for Merging.
If anyone has any specific questions you can post them here or contact me directly.

Thank you for the videos, though they are very depressing.

Perhaps. Yet in the end it's a tool for all your nice sounding recordings to edit and mix. Who needs glitter when you've got a thorough system?

LEE G

I think compatiblity with whatever workflow you must interface with is the biggest concern.

I know for me, my PT system has been paid for for years now, and is perfectly viable (even being a G5)- that doesnt speak to it being better, nor worse- just that it still works just fine.

I'm perfectly willing to entertain arguments in Pro Tools's favor on the merits, but "I gots what gots now and what I gots now is what I gots and it works" is the techie equivalent of the Stockholm Syndrome.

ProTools is not the end all by a long shot, but the problem we are staring down is one that is of incremental improvement- not paradigm shift. All systems will require replacement at one point or another- but to be a "fanboy" of any of them is not necessarily profitable. The one truism we do have regarding PT at this point is that it DOES work and is providing a soup to nuts workflow- something that is relatively rare in the film sound universe. Nuendo has spent what, 8 years trying to crack that?. The problem they have not identified is that the industry expects instantaneous support- not excuses or promises that a fix will come in weeks- When PT was adopted on the dub stages at Sony, Fox, Universal, Disney and WB, it was due to a commitment from Avid to GUARANTEE them working NO MATTER WHAT. Avid had the support infrastructure to follow through on that as well- and even though PT was a more limited system, it had a very reliable performance metric that was comforting to the people at the studios.

If any app wants to crack the big league film sound market, they will need a similar level of support and commitment- because from a developer side, It is a truly hellish task.

No-one said anything about not listening to them, of course it's wise to (or rather it would be insane not to) , and yes there's an audition and trim option all within the library.

For broadcast audio when you have insanely tight deadlines this gives the opportunity to provide a lot more detail in the time that you may have been able to provide previously...IMO. Although yes if you're working on feature where every scene is bespoke then it's not going to be quite as useful.

It's worth spending some time with a free trial for sure, and judge for yourself. I'm still pro tools and will be for the forseeable future, but when it comes time for an upgrade/system change Pyramix will certainly be a serious consideration.

that is a nice feature....


Not one I personally would be willing to switch platforms for, but nice nonetheless.

Some of us are okay with "working," but I want to LIVE!

As long as the commitment Avid is willing to make is focussed on merely "working," the tools will never be a commodity.

I think we're getting to the point where being able to cut awesome sounds isn't going to be enough, and sound houses are, more and more, going to be competing on their ability to turn out work faster and cheaper than the other guy, and that's going to require innovation in the tools, processes and workflows, not the sounds you use. And we, the sound people, can't innovate the tools and process without interoperability.

I know more about sound design than any cubicle-dwelling marketing executive, wether he is employed by Digidesign, Steinberg, Yamaha or Merging. And while I have something that works, I really would rather have something that lets me, within the limits of practicality, devise my own process, since, speaking with my supervisor hat on, my only real value is in having a faster process than the other guy.

I'm not making any demands or anything, but I'm just highlighting the line we cross where this "ecosystem" is no longer helping us but hindering us.

I think having a richer integration with sound libraries organization and such is where the path is- We are really not being significantly slowed down by the editorial tasks, and things like mega regions have been addressed in apps like AudioVision and obviously in an elegant manner by Pyramix- are nice, but the issues I see are more time based- with things like the mixing and cutting in a 5.1 manner which simply never were required from editors previously- we also have to bridge a wide continuum of expectations... (remember cue sheets?).

For me, it comes down to managing library data- not cutting and workflow as much- Mainly because the paradigm is again so broad- editors cutting reels at home cannot take advantage of server based topographies in the same manner that someone at Soundelux, or being on a studio lot.

I think it is sort of interesting because we migrated from the "landlocked" Film Composer to more portable Final Cut solutions- which though fine for picture editorial, are pretty much grossly inappropriate for doing design and large scale FX work. However now there is a misunderstanding of who "should" edit picture vs who "can" edit picture.

I am all for progressive technology, but I have no desire to adapt until it is a widespread standard.

In the end, the tools should be slaves to us, not the other way around. And the more one changes tools the less one gets to hone their skills in executing their craft-

Allow me to get to the point, Charles. It's not about having a faster Pro Tools, it's about ME using my specialized knowledge and laser-like client focus to build a faster/cheaper/better workflow than SONY.

When digidesign implements incremental change, it makes the bear slower. I want the lawyers to be able to run faster and in different directions.

well, I guess we have different needs- Every time the "cooler" and "Hipper" solution arrives , especially if a computer is involved, it usually is followed with 6 months of swearing and throwing innocent objects in order to relieve the stress of the $%#^ thing not working.... And requiring MANY free hours of labor and substantial career embarassment to fix something which worked just fine previously. I have grown aware that I am growing old for that.

I think it is actually one of the reasons I am veering more towards recording actually.... though I just got hired on a project for a few weeks of editorial.


voicing this reminds of a Churchill quote actually-

"Those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart. Those who are not conservative when they are older have no brain."

Actually I would like to see most lawyers be running like that, but in fear of their own lives.....

If I could accumulate my entire argument into one word, it would be:

"WOLVERINES!"

we should go shoot sometime.... I do have an AK now....

It is very calming.... almost like medatation actually.

I did a test job on Pyramix today (i'd been demoing a native version for editing on my laptop), using one of the Euphonix Fusion desks. The mixer window runs independantly to the edit window - you assign tracks to a fader, and it hooks up via Eucon, so it's working a different way.

Being a Pro Tools baby this felt alien, and actually realised that Pro Tools (in the box) does a number of things very differently (mainly integration with the desk as it's more of a big mouse) and i now realise how spoilt i've been in learning sound in that environment. Anyone with more experience would have felt at home I think. It took me a while to get used to it, and not being able to do bank/nudge faders was a little weird for me, but once I'd set up my banks on the Euphonix it was ok, although i was still a complete novice to that way of working. it has potential but I think it's better at editing rather than an all in one solution.
One thing i found frustrating was that I had a number of quick pan movements i wanted to make, and i felt like it was lagging behind me a little bit and i ended up drawing in what i wanted to do.

I think i'd only be able to make a fair opinion on it if i could sit on it for a few days rather than just a few hours though, but thought i'd share none the less..... But for now I'd rather improve my PT skills instead of learn Pyramix

watched the post demo video for pyramix. Could be a bad vid, but so underwhelming.

Some of it looks intriuging no doubt.

Why is there a pop up window for EVERYTHING?
Why does he click the mouse for EVERYTHING?

I don't have time to be clicking on the ol mouse.

Take my first impression with a grain of salt, but, comparing most of the stuff he was explaining to how I currently do it, all it looks like is that more windows pop up and you navigate through them.

I'll watch some more video's. I'm really hoping to see an AHA moment WHY DOESN'T PRO TOOLS DO IT LIKE THAT???

hmm..

The music editing video is the same. He clicks everything. mentions about how awesome it is to zoom with key commands.

The library/file management window on the right takes up half the screen real estate until he draaags it smaller.

An equivalent smart tool just doesn't exist. Gain on a clip pops up in a seperate window!

I'm not getting this. There needs to be video which explains the competitors weak points and how awesome pyramix is in this respect.