The Competition

[Julian Gough]

I am posting this after reading the topic in the Suggestions section about confidence monitoring, in particular the drawing of waveforms during recording. I was going to reply under the same topic until I noticed that I had digressed. So I am posting under the General section instead. Also this posting could generate the odd comment from other members, so I wouldn't want to clutter up the Suggestions section.

A couple of weeks ago I was watching a Sadie5 record 128 tracks. It was drawing the waveforms as it went. While recording I was able to look back over the recorded material (the same take), make cuts and remove unwanted audio from the timeline. I could not listen to the material as I was recording at the time, but because I could see the waveform I was able to make a start to the editing process. If nothing else, cutting out unwanted takes from the timeline was a bonus. I point out that this was not beta software, it is available to buy NOW!

Before then I would agree that there was no advantage to seeing the waveform during recording, but now I have changed my mind. It is not a case of confidence monitoring, I have meters for that. Even without the ability to make cut points, I would love to be able to drop a mark post an event and then be able to move it back along the timeline to a point, using the waveform as a guide.

I take the point about the increased risk of recording clicks and glitches while drawing waveforms, and I wouldn't want to comment in the case of Sadie since I don't use Sadie as a rule, but I would note that Sadie are a DAW manufacturer of long standing and have always drawn waveforms during recording, I think if there were clicks and glitches, the audio world would know about this by now. Sadie has always appeared to be smooth and effortless, but at 128 tracks, it looked as if it was hardly breaking into a sweat (the hard drives must have been going some).

Having used Pyramix almost exclusively for over two years, I am still very enthusiastic about it, but last year I went to a Sadie demonstration, after which I mentioned to my Pyramix dealer that they were on his heals. At the time he laughed it off. Now I think I can honestly say Merging, you've been over-taken.

All the best,

Julian

[Roland Clarke]

Not so fast Grasshopper!!!

I was at the production show today and had a look at an early version 5 Beta copy of the new Pyramix. Some really great features comming just around the corner complete with a serious redesign of the mixer that seems to adress many of the problems people have sited about Pyramix. Sadie were there too and they were demonstrating their new 128 track system. I have to say it looked good and after speaking to one of their reps I was of the distinct impression that they are feeling under presure to respond to the Pyramix challenge. This sort of competition I feel is healthy and without doubt their system has its merits.

It is very easy to gloss over where Pyramix is today in the market place because we have come to expect such high standards not least because since ver 4 they are setting the benchmark. From what I saw of ver 5 it is a worthy upgrade and I can understand why to many it may seem they have not been moving forward as quickly as we might like, but you have to factor in the work that has been going on developing ver 5 (I was lead to believe this is going to be available around August) and the side developement of things like V-Cube.

Whilst the realtime drawing of waveforms is a nifty trick, I would suggest that the need to monitor during a recording is for most people a more important consideration, the gain in time and speed could come at a dreadful cost otherwise. One feature I did like on the new ver 5 was the scrolling track window (at times during working it is for me better to have the audio moving and the cursor fixed).

The other consideration is that the Sadie system I was told comes at a price. With its dedicated controller I was told it cost around £19,000! You can get a lot of Pyramix for that price. They were also quoting prices of around £10,000 for their 8 channel DSD system. Sensibly configured Pyramix can do both (with the ver 5 upgrade to come).


Regards to all


Roland

[Julian Gough]

This sort of competition I feel is healthy

I agree with you Roland, Merging have an excelent product which I will continue to support. I am not about to throw away my investment in Pyramix to go over to the Sadie camp.

When I did my original research into file based multitrack systems, the result of which ended in my employers buying Pyramix, Sadie did 8 tracks to Pyramix's 64. Sadie did not make the shortlist. I wanted a 96 track system and was told that a high track count Pyramix system was in developement. Over two years later Pyramix is still at 64 tracks but Sadie have gone to 128 tracks. That is one hell of a jump.

I don't think for one minute that the Merging development team will have been resting during this time. I realise that hi track count is only 1 feature in version 5, and it is not a high priority for every user.

Whilst the realtime drawing of waveforms is a nifty trick, I would suggest that the need to monitor during a recording is for most people a more important consideration, the gain in time and speed could come at a dreadful cost otherwise. One feature I did like on the new ver 5 was the scrolling track window (at times during working it is for me better to have the audio moving and the cursor fixed).

So it now looks like a traditional tape machine. You see, for me, I call that a nifty trick, a nice touch but it doesn't change the functionality of the system (if you disagree then I bow to your opinion). Waveform drawing in record is a benefit, that I didn't realise until I saw it on the Sadie system. If it puts the recording at risk of errors, then NO I don't want it, but this didn't appear to be a problem for Sadie.

The other consideration is that the Sadie system I was told comes at a price. With its dedicated controller I was told it cost around £19,000! You can get a lot of Pyramix for that price. They were also quoting prices of around £10,000 for their 8 channel DSD system. Sensibly configured Pyramix can do both (with the ver 5 upgrade to come).

DSD is currently of no interest to me, so I cannot comment (and you have to buy the key if you want to do both), but I did a very rough calculation and a 128 track Sadie with two MADI cards and no hardware controllers came in at a very similar price to a matching turnkey Pyramix system. If anything slightly cheaper

All the best,

Julian
(crumbs! I've just seen the time, I'm going to bed)

[tim lofts]

I've been a Pyramix user for a year now, and think the system is superb. I'm working in a new facility, and at job interview stage was asked what system I wanted to work on. The only system I didn't want to work on was audiofile, other than that, I'd be happy to fit in with the rest of the company. The company was traditionally Sadie but went with Pyramix due to cost, ability to do mastering as well as post, and being the new thing. As I said, I've been really pleased with it apart from a few gripes, lack of OMF export being in my consideration, b**** ridiculous. The mastering guys have gone back to Sadie, not sure why, I've been a post guy for 18 years mainly on commercials and I still can't work out what they do!

Anyway, my point is, I'm still the only one of two of the regular users here, and the reason no one else will switch from Sadie to Pyramix is the lack of waveform drawing on record and being able to edit on the fly. With the huge amount of long form voice recording we do (days and days...) which is a big part of our business, I can see their point. This is the only thing that prevents the migration across, and there is even talk of ditching Pyramix for Sadie. I do hope they don't though, from my experience Pyramix is rock solid and far more intuitive than Sadie.

I've had calls from other studios in the UK asking me my views on Pyramix, and my reply is always positive, but the question I always get asked is have I looked at Sadie. From what I can make out, it's the 'waveform/editing on the fly' topic that is the biggest issue, and when discussed with Merging, there's always a surprised reaction from them and the question 'why would you want to do that?'; although they're clearly being asked many times. Merging's attitude may have changed now but I think they should put this at the top of the list. In the meantime it looks as if I'm going to be the only person here using Pyramix and the other guys will continue using our 5 Sadies, and I'll probably end up using Sadie myself.

[Mark Lemaire]

I also would like to see the waveform as I record, and I'd like to be able to edit the take I'm currently recording. And I know that this isn't quite the same thing, but I CAN easily edit and work on previous takes already on the timeline while recording more...

I wonder if there is some technical reason particular to PMX that makes the 'draw as you record' function hard to implement?

ML

[Dominique Brulhart]

Dear all,

First, may I, on the behalf of Merging, thank you all for your nice comments... then apologize to those who may have felt that Merging is not taking seriously the request for Waveform drawing while recording.

We indeed perfectly see the benefit of this feature both in term of confidence and productivity in starting editing immediately while recording.

In fact this feature is only in second position in our priority list as we've considered until now that it was not 100% necessary for Post-Production, Mastering or Multi-track recording (our main markets), where we've put major efforts in other features.

By reading your comments we now better understand that this feature can be important for everybody and we'll put it in the first priority list...

...the problem is that in the first priority list, we already have dozens of items, where in the second priority list we only had half-dozens

We'll do our best anyway.

Thanks for your patience and understanding

Best regards,

Dominique

[stephanc]

First or second in priority, I like to see waveforms as well during the recording. But it must be 150% ensured that this won`t interfere with the overall stability of the system during the recording, even with a multitude of large tracks, DSD or DXD, background saving or other processes on the Windows system side...
Stability first! Then comes stability. The third important thing then is stability...

Best regards,

Stephan Cahen

[Julian Gough]

Stability first! Then comes stability. The third important thing then is stability...

I agree completely with Stephen, though I do think he refers to the Holy Grail of Software writer everywhere, especially when writing on the Windows platform.

I am sure Dominique will have this in mind as his team work towards implementing this feature. By the way, thanks Dominique for your comments on this subject.

Regards,

Julian