Any experience with the new Pinnacle Studio Plus 11?

I have used studio 8 on my P4 2.8 and it would crash continually. I have heard that up to Studio 10 the load times and crashing had not been solved but with 11 it is supposed to be way better.

The only reason I specifically want to know about Pinnacle is that it seems this software is directly marketed toward HDV users that desire to put HD-DVD on standard dvd's.

Any help....I would prefer to hear some reviews before dropping $100.

I think they have a MIR going on right now too....$30 off!

TIA

The Amazon reviews for Studio 11 (Ultimate) are not very good... sounds like the crashing problem is still not solved. The product manager is even in there defending it.

What software are you using Mark? Thanks for any help.

The free VirtualDub for simple cuts/resizing/transcoding, and (admittedly old) Premiere 6 and DVD Workshop 2 for SD editing/authoring. I'm in the market for an AVCHD editing solution but will probably need to upgrade to a new machine for that (apparently anything less than a Core2 Duo is considered weak for HD editing).

Sounds like my P4 2.8 might be getting dated. I guess I can dedicate to another HTPC and upgrade my main rig. I was seriously considering an iMac just for video editing. Are they pretty simple to use with HDV?

The only reason I am leaning toward Pinnacle is because it directly states features that I want. Ulead Studio sounds good too but the features aren't specifically inline with what I was wanting. Not to say it can't do it, probably can, but just felt more comfortable when it specifically says it supports things.

I just got Pinnacle Studio 11 Ultimate (comes with a green screen cloth plus some extra filters). I also probably have to at least add more memory for it to HD and AVCHD better. No, it couldn't render the GO HD footage properly either but the solution I found was to use VLC for that. I haven't played with it that much and it installed alot of stuff probably more than needed. I haven't seen it crash yet though which is saying something but I also haven't played with it that much.

I still like the multitrack right to the frame editing I can do in MSP 7 and other higher end NLE programs. But sometimes that isn't necessary.

So it actually comes with a green screen cloth, huh? How big is that...that could provide some fun for awhile!

What is your hardware setup so that I can gauge what I need to upgrade?

I was thinking about springing for the ultimate package as well since they have a $30 MIR to take the Ultimate down to the Plus regular price.

greg

The cloth is about 6 x 6 feet. I currently am running a P4 3.4 ghz with 1 GB ram. The box says 2.4 ghz Core Duo or higher required and 1.5 GB for AVCHD. I don't have an AVCHD camera (the closest being the GO HD) but a Sony HC1. If you go to Vista then you'll need 2 GB for AVCHD but you need about 1 GB anyway for Vista to run decently. I do have a Vista notebook with a Core Duo processor but the only speed up I noticed on it was with Dr. Divx 2.0.

Fry's also has a deal this week on Ultimate (actually was also on last week too as that's where I got it) at $60 after rebates.

Darn, then I definitely need to upgrade then ( ;) ). Thanks. Let me know once you get to using the software some more.

Pinnacle doesn't allow any trial usage do they?

There is no trial available yet but that doesn't mean there might be in the future. Version 10 was a huge download and I suspect they are working on a way to demo 11. Demos do help sell products as well as making the manuals available so you can see how features work or don't work. You can download the manual.

I was actually considering upgrading to a Mac Pro just for video editing but since they are basically intel boxes, I figured I could configure my own for cheaper and have better access to software titles.

I am currently considering the following software packages:

Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0 (downloading trial version)
Pinnacle Studio Ultimate (trial version not currently available)
Ulead Visual Studio 11 Plus (downloading trial version)
Nero 7 Ultra Edition (???)
Ulead Movie Factory 6 (try to download trial)

Anything else I should be considering. I have read through quite a few pages of the HD-DVD authoring thread but want to keep it to as few programs as I can if possible.

oh man, I am trying to burn the HD-DVD folders in Ulead Video Studio Plus for only 50 seconds of video from the HV20 and it has been rendering for about 5 minutes and it is only about 20% done. :eek:

I wonder what helps more....quad core or 4 gb ram??

I was checking out some velocity micro comps and they seem pretty nice for the price.

Are these programs running faster in Vista??

I wonder what helps more....quad core or 4 gb ram??

A quad core... XP can't use 4gig ram anyway.... 3 is about XP's max


Are these programs running faster in Vista??

No.

But if I got a quad core would it make sense to spring for the extra 4gb ram? I was looking at velocity micro's workstations.

This month's DV magazine did some speed comparisons between running video editing apps in XP and Vista. Vista was considerably slower!

On my Toshiba notebook Vista boots up fairly fast to the login screen just about as fast as the login comes up on my Ubuntu machine. But then, unlike Ubuntu, I have to wait another few minutes while Vista slowly does all the other things like it does before you can actually use it. This of course includes downloading the latest virus definitions "of the hour -- which used to be once a day" and this mind you on with a 6 mbps broadband connection. And after all this you're still lucky if a dialog doesn't pop up saying that updates have been installed and you need to go through the whole process again because your computer needs to be rebooted. Windows is become less and less useful each day. Let's see more companies move to Linux like MainConcept who has made their editor available on Linux.

And there are big bugs in Vista. Last night when I wanted to delete some large files that I had rendered to Divx it told me that I didn't have the rights to delete them! But I have administrator rights. If I tried different methods of deletes and if they disappeared and I left the folder then returned there they were again! After rebooting and waiting and waiting to use the machine again they were finally gone. IOW, someone at MS screwed up they way they read the directories after deletes. BTW, I've seen reports from other users of the this bug too along with the yet unexplained "insufficient quota" bug which occurs when you try to move large files across a network.

Last I checked there is no Vista section on the microsoft support newsgroups. Wonder why? Bet it would be overloaded.

But if I got a quad core would it make sense to spring for the extra 4gb ram? I was looking at velocity micro's workstations.

I have a quad core (the Q6600) and it's pretty dam fast! But it is not the cpu that directs the memory... it is the operating system, and XP has a 3gig limit... what ever extra you put will not get used.

Vista does NOT have this limit so it WOULD make use of 4gig ram. However, if you are going to the expense of a quad core then I would hang on to XP for at least another 8 or 9 months, or until the 64bit systems become a bit more stable, then switch to Vista 64bit. 64 bit programs are JUST beginning to appear... Sony vegas for example will have a 64 bit editor out (they say) at the end of the year.

But switching to Vista (32bit) is IMO, nothing but a side-step from XP. (I have vista 32, BTW)

Cool that makes sense.

Other issues are whether the developers of the software you want to use actually take advantage of the duo or quad core. If they don't it's not worth it. I also note that a lot of the "Vista compliant" software I have been running runs slower on XP than its predecessor on XP. I am going to have to read through those developer docs that MS put out for Vista development to see if they want you to put in things that actually slow down apps.

It stinks that Vista is cheaper than XP. I have built a "mock" upgrade system for some review here. What do you think?

(x1)Rosewill R604-P BK 120mm Fan ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail - $34.99

(x2)Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 ST3500641AS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard rive - OEM - $199.98 ($99.99 each)

(x1)GIGABYTE GV-NX85T256H GeForce 8500GT 256MB GDDR2 PCI Express x16 HDCP Video Card - Retail - $84.99

(x1)COOLER MASTER eXtreme Power RP-650-PCAR ATX from factor 12V V2.01 650W Power Supply - Retail - $89.99

(x2)A-DATA 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model ADQVE1A16K - Retail - $167.98
($83.99 each)

(x1)GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3R LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail - $129.99

(x1)Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80562Q6600 - Retail - $515.90

(x1)Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 SP2b - OEM
Item #: N82E16832116171
Return Policy: Software Return Policy - $109.99

Total with shipping from Newegg - $1350

This is considerably cheaper than a comparable system I built with velocity micro. The case isn't as nice and the chip is a bit different.

Of course I need to add another $100 for a video editing solution yet to be determined.

I suppose I could save myself $84 and just go with 2 gb RAM to start with since I went with windows xp.

Thoughts?

Vista 32 bit has the same memory limit as XP 32 bit. You will get somewhere between 3 and 3.5GB if you place 4GB RAM in the PC. If at anytime you switch to 64 bit and enable memory remap in the BIOS you will see 4 and higher.

Quad core CPUs are not as useful as hoped yet due to the fact that multi-threaded programming is not where it should be. You will always get a benefit with dual core as at the very least, OS functions will utilise a second core whilst your application uses the other. For that reason I strongly recommend dual core.

Incidentally I am running Pinnacle Studio Ultimate. Thus far, I have had zero crashes and no problems with it at all. I am running Vista 32bit, 4Gig (see 3.2) DDR2 800, Nvidia 8600GTS with 256MB, E6600 core 2 duo. There is a bug that means that Dolby 5.1 codec which should be free with ultimate isn't. But a quick call to support fixes that as they will provide a key.

Jonathan

Quad core CPUs are not as useful as hoped yet due to the fact that multi-threaded programming is not where it should be.
Jonathan

I have a quad core. I also have Pinnacle studio, Avid liquid, Sony Vegas, and MSP8. All 4 programs will use all 4 cores quite nicely. If there was a problem... it would be MSP8... doesn't use 4 cores past 25% capacity.

My quad core is pretty new... before this I had a 950 dual core. There is a HUGE difference in speed between the 2 and HIGHLY recommend skipping right over the dual core chips and go for the quad core.

I would say that "Quad core CPUs are not as useful as hoped yet" is just plain untrue. The worst that can be said is that most programs are not quite as in tune with a quad core as they could be.

Here's a Sony Vegas thread comparing cpu speeds in a render test. Take note at the speeds of the quad cores relative to others:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=529752

I have a quad core (the Q6600) and it's pretty dam fast! But it is not the cpu that directs the memory... it is the operating system, and XP has a 3gig limit... what ever extra you put will not get used.

Vista does NOT have this limit so it WOULD make use of 4gig ram. However, if you are going to the expense of a quad core then I would hang on to XP for at least another 8 or 9 months, or until the 64bit systems become a bit more stable, then switch to Vista 64bit. 64 bit programs are JUST beginning to appear... Sony vegas for example will have a 64 bit editor out (they say) at the end of the year.

But switching to Vista (32bit) is IMO, nothing but a side-step from XP. (I have vista 32, BTW)

bigbarney, 64 bit is a non starter in the world of Vista. Microsoft will not allow any application use for than 1 gig of memory in a 64 bit app. There is talk on the web that they may ramp it up to 4 gig but that is a big if! if you want true 64 bit computing you need to go to linux. Right now, Visita 32 bit will only allow 1 application to use 32mb of memory even if you have 4 gig of memory. Vista is going to keep using the paging file system using the HDD just like XP did.

You have to remember that Microsoft makes software for everything and while Video does seem to be moving to the fore front, it still is taking a back seat to everything else.

I have a quad core. I also have Pinnacle studio, Avid liquid, Sony Vegas, and MSP8. All 4 programs will use all 4 cores quite nicely. If there was a problem... it would be MSP8... doesn't use 4 cores past 25% capacity.

My quad core is pretty new... before this I had a 950 dual core. There is a HUGE difference in speed between the 2 and HIGHLY recommend skipping right over the dual core chips and go for the quad core.

I would say that "Quad core CPUs are not as useful as hoped yet" is just plain untrue. The worst that can be said is that most programs are not quite as in tune with a quad core as they could be.

Here's a Sony Vegas thread comparing cpu speeds in a render test. Take note at the speeds of the quad cores relative to others:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=529752

Quad core are 5x better at crunching video than duel core. That is one of the few benchmarks where they really are much better.

1 Note though. None of the above applications are multy threaded. You are essentially crunching math using all cores at once doing the same task at the same rate.

1 Note though. None of the above applications are multy threaded. You are essentially crunching math using all cores at once doing the same task at the same rate.

Sony Vegas is multi threaded. In "preferences" in fact, it gives you an option as to how many threads you want to operate on.

bigbarney, 64 bit is a non starter in the world of Vista. Microsoft will not allow any application use for than 1 gig of memory in a 64 bit app. ........

You have to remember that Microsoft makes software for everything and while Video does seem to be moving to the fore front, it still is taking a back seat to everything else.


Due out this Fall:
http://www.uwdv.com/index.php/option/content/task/view/id/130

"A software-only solution like Vegas is perfectly positioned to take advantage of the increased memory and threading capabilities available in the 64-bit world.

Due out this Fall:
http://www.uwdv.com/index.php/option/content/task/view/id/130

Up to 1 gig. Vista will only allow a program to access 1 gig of memory using the 64 bit version. Linux will ramp up to a terrabyte if you configure it correctly. That is why hollywood uses Linux/Unix (Mac) and not Windows. There is a rumor that MS is going to ramp it up to 4 gig per app but nothing has changed as of yet. Being able to crunch numbers in memory is 300 times faster than using a paging file off the HDD!

I wish the folks at MS understood this!

Sony Vegas is multi threaded. In "preferences" in fact, it gives you an option as to how many threads you want to operate on.

I stand corrected!

Question
Do your programs take advantage of dual CPU's or Hyperthreading?


Answer
The latest versions of our software (shown below) do support both of these technologies. Our software is multi-threaded, so it will take advantage of using dual CPU's or Hyperthreading. The level of support varies in each program, but it is not going to double the speed of the software. Due to shared resources within Windows, even fully optimized software rarely maxes out both (real or virtual) CPU's. Both the Main Concept MPEG encoder and the Windows Media encoder are optimized for Hyperthreading, so there is a performance increase when rendering to those formats. Also, the DV encoder within Vegas is optimized for HT and dual CPU's, which gives a speed increase when rendering to DV AVI.

You can find more information about our software by clicking on the images below.


My interpretation of multithreaded does double the speed of the software.














http://www.custcenter.com/cgi-bin/sonypictures.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=933&p_created=1074182090&p_sid=fXSpMXEi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ 9MSZwX3Byb2RzPTAmcF9jYXRzPTAmcF9wdj0mcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHl wZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlYXJjaF9ubCZwX3BhZ2U9MSZwX3NlYXJjaF90ZXh0PU1 1bHRpdGhyZWFkZWQ*&p_li=&p_topview=1

The level of support varies in each program, but it is not going to double the speed of the software.

This isn't EXACTLY true... it does in fact DOUBLE the speed.

We've done render speed tests on Vegas... the Q6600 quad core is almost exactly 2 times as fast as the E6600 dual core.

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=529752

I should also add that when I render in Vegas, it's one of the few editors that I have that buries all four cores at about 98% from start of render right to finish..... it's pretty dam fast!!!

I am not sure what to make of your memory suggestion... I just picked up a copy of vista ultimate 64. When I install my present version of Vegas, the "maximum available preview ram" remains at 1 gig... BUT the default ram preview setting more than triples (form about 150 to 512).... I have no idea what this means, but obviously the vegas install has sensed more memory from somewhere.

This isn't EXACTLY true... it does in fact DOUBLE the speed.

We've done render speed tests on Vegas... the Q6600 quad core is almost exactly 2 times as fast as the E6600 dual core.

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=529752

I should also add that when I render in Vegas, it's one of the few editors that I have that buries all four cores at about 98% from start of render right to finish..... it's pretty dam fast!!!

I am not sure what to make of your memory suggestion... I just picked up a copy of vista ultimate 64. When I install my present version of Vegas, the "maximum available preview ram" remains at 1 gig... BUT the default ram preview setting more than triples (form about 150 to 512).... I have no idea what this means, but obviously the vegas install has sensed more memory from somewhere.

Windows Vista or XP control what an application can and cannot do with memory and how much it can use to complete its task. Premier Pro cannot acces more than what XP will allow.

I have a Linux Desktop that is 64 bit with 8 gig of memory. It will encode MPEG2 and use all of the available memory. The problem is that the PC can only work on that one thing and if I so much as move the mouse when its rendering, it crashes. Windows won't allow any given program to access that much memory. Windows is a bloated hog that is using a massive amount of the PC's resources just to function. I was hoping that Vista 64 bit will remedy that allow the use of more memory to crunch the numbers. I can tell you it is simple incredible to see an application do math from memory. It is unbelivable fast. By eliminating the Hard drive paging file, a celeron 1.2 ghz machine is even fast. The slow render times are caused by Windows, not the CPU. It looks like Windows is going to ramp up to 4 gig by the fall in a Service Pack. If that is the case and it stops crashing my other programs I use, I will reload it. I had terrible luck with it.
I've stopped using my linux system (I also had the Vista 64 Bit Loaded as well) because with Womble and Ulead MF6, it doesn't render anything so I don't need the extra speed.

I am not a big fan of Vegas but am really looking forward to hearing more about the 64 bit version.
I am glad it is working for you.