x
anonymous 30 October 2011

Looking at Pro Tools 9 or 10, is this worth it (Complete Production Toolkit 2)? I've tried to get detailed information on Avid but the page it points to goes 404 not found.
Avid | Complete Production Toolkit
avid.com/US/products/Complete-Production-Toolkit-2/features

Pro Tools session expansion for music and post production

Create even larger sessions and get many of the same features of Pro Tools|HD* systems with the Complete Production Toolkit, a powerful expansion option for Pro Tools 10 software. Have the flexibility to work on studio-created sessions anywhere using just your computer or Pro Tools mobile rig. Get the same high Pro Tools|HD track counts, full session compatibility, and support for all track types, including VCA groups. And enhance your production with 7.1 surround mixing, advanced editing and automation tools, and more.

  • Exchange sessions with Pro Tools|HD users without ever losing session information
  • Create huge mixes with up to 256 simultaneous audio tracks** on playback—768 total
  • Get highly responsive recording and playback performance with the extended disk cache
  • Get full VCA mixing capabilities and support for up to 64 video tracks
  • Mix in up to 7.1 surround, with as many surround tracks as Pro Tools|HD
  • Speed up your workflow with advanced automation, audio, and video editing tools

* This toolkit is not intended for Pro Tools|HDX, Pro Tools|HD, or Pro Tools|HD Native system users, as Pro Tools HD software already includes the features in this package.
** Track counts decrease with higher sample rates

How many people actually create 256 tracks?

Do you have it? What is different from Complete Production Toolkit and Complete Production Toolkit 2

Cheers!

Tags

Comments

BobRogers Sun, 10/30/2011 - 14:28

Yeah, until the disk cache I didn't see any reason for me to buy the CPTK. And I've never really had performance problems for my sessions, so I don't see that as a big feature for me. I think that it's for someone who needs complete compatibility with an HD system, I don't so I'm fine with the cheaper PT9 (and probably PT10 in a month.)

TheJackAttack Sun, 10/30/2011 - 17:23

Chris, I would hold off on PT for a year or so still. What you have is quite righteous. If you add PT back in right now I think you'll just get pissed off and ranting again. PT will finish catching up to the rest of the DAW world in the next year or two and then it would make sense to maybe have a copy for studio to studio compatibility-OMF export/import.

BobRogers Sun, 10/30/2011 - 18:52

I think it depends on how much you are going to use it over the time between now and when PT11 comes out. (A year? call it X) You have to guess what PT10 and PT11 will cost you together and then figure if getting the PT10 features for X is worth the difference. For me, it's a $300 upgrade from PT9. Upgrading from earlier versions is $500. When PT11 comes I'm guessing that there will be some sort of discount like that for those upgrading from PT10 vs. PT9. I'm also guessing/hoping that the sooner PT11 comes out, the bigger the discount. So I figure it's going to cost me something like $200 to use PT 10 for a year (er.. X). Maybe less, maybe more. No more than $300. Since PT is my only DAW I'm pretty sure I'll do it after I finish with the current CD in three weeks. (I haven't heard or anyone having problems converting sessions from PT9 to PT10, but it doesn't seem worth it to take the chance.)

TheJackAttack Sun, 10/30/2011 - 19:56

Bob, I think you have a lot of valid points. I just don't see Chris being happy with PT yet even as an auxiliary DAW. It's taken him years to even get to the point to consider PT as a useful option for gosh sakes!

I myself don't need PT either but I'm curious enough that I'm guessing I'll opt into some version of PT in the future just to keep on top of things. I never really hated PT other than the interfaces and limited restrictive atmosphere and of course the Digi attitude towards it's customers. That last bit was really why I jumped ship in 2002.

As far as the original question as posed, I'm in agreement with Bob and Dave. The reason for the addon/upgrade would be for disk cache. PT limits the cache primarily to make sure the temp folder doesn't overreach what the DAW can actually process smoothly. My guess is that Avid feels home users with consumer grade laptops and desktops really aren't geared for high track counts and VSTi's and edits ad nauseum and that anyone willing to shell out cash for the toolkit probably has a dedicated computer of whatever variety (Apple or Windows).

BobRogers Mon, 10/31/2011 - 07:46

You are probably right about Chris. But while there are a number of people in his (and your) situation of using PT as a secondary DAW, I'm guessing that most of the people weighing the PT10 decision are considering it as their primary DAW. My post is mostly aimed at them. I think that you guys have to make the same calculation but that the answer is more likely to be "no."

hueseph Mon, 10/31/2011 - 21:44

As for the difference between CPTK and CPTK 2 is that CPTK came out last year and CPTK 2 is the new version with the new features. Owners of CPTK who buy PT10 now will get an amnesty upgrade to CPTK2 which is why many people are saying that CPTK users are getting the best deal of all. For the rest of us it might be cheaper to actually buy an HDX License even if you don't have the hardware. You can still run the software on your comp just without the advanced AAX plugins and track count.

I can wait another year. PT9 works fine for me. It could work better and I could probably find the functionality in another DAW but that would be stepping out of my comfort zone right now. Weird yes I know.

x

User login