Slau, Let me drop some of the interveneing stuff and continue.
You can see my comments mixed in below. I gather that the people you will speak with aren't the ones who could provide any assistance on the testing issue at all. If they did have a suggestion as to a course to pursue in the testing realm I'd be much appreciative of the information. Thanks for the continued out reach to Avid on your part. Best, J. R. > -----Original Message----- From: Slau Halatyn > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 9:32 PM > To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: Another problem with Pro Tools and ML > > HI J. R., > > Let me say something at the outset that you should keep in mind as you read on. I will say things that you and others will probably quarrel with so I'm saying this up front so that you understand my personal position. > > I think everything on earth should be accessible to blind people. I think everything in the world should be accessible to wheelchair users. Universal access is something that affects us all at one time or another. Believe me when I say that I experience this keenly and on a daily basis. > > Now, that said, we need to accept the fact that accessibility is not anywhere near a priority for Avid. Like it or not. Historically, we've been fortunate to have their cooperation in making Pro Tools accessible, at least in part, not only once but twice. No matter how much work is put into Pro Tools to make it accessible, guess what? It'll never be fully accessible because there will always be a demand by someone that something needs to be changed to make it easier for a blind person to use. Further, no matter how accessible Pro Tools itself is, there will always, always, always be obstacles in the world of audio technology as it concerns blind users. Before you hit me with a Kurzweilian Singularity glimmer of hope, I'm referring to our lifetime and not 60 years from now. No matter how much progress there is, we will always encounter an obstacle somewhere along the line because we lack a significant, dare I say, the most significant sense there is and that is sight. > > There will always be some area of Pro Tools that will remain inaccessible for one reason or another. The video timeline, for example, will simply never be usable by a blind person. Well, what if I want to use it? Tough. That's the long and the short of it. One might argue that there must be some work-around to use the video timeline, some alternative way, some way to incorporate keyboard shortcuts, surely there must be some way to make it accessible. Yes, it's possible but not at all likely, not in the least bit. Why? That should be obvious but I'll say it anyway: blind users are a fraction of a fraction of the user base. Yes, there are dozens of users but, I assure you, it's the smallest portion of the user base. Further, the most important clients to Avid are the people in the broadcast industry. There's no question about that. They'll say it themselves. Music production isn't even a priority. If you doubt that, look at what's going on with their dropping M-Audio, AIR, etc. There are clear priorities. > > As for students testing Pro Tools, I don't know how to put this in any other way but, Pro Tools was never developed to be a simple program to use. It's clearly not GarageBand. It was designed as an environment for audio professionals. beta testing by less experienced users is, I'm sure, not at all what Avid has in mind. You might think it's a good idea but I assure you, that's not what Avid is looking for. Why stop at college students? Why not have high school students beta test? Hey, why not have kids beta test? Surely, it'll make for a more user-friendly experience, right? Hmm, I'm afraid not. [J. R. W.>] Now, you are getting a bit carried away. LOL This was an officially sponsored class from a Avid training partner. It also just happens to be part of the university course list. I spoke with the PT people personally and they were the ones that suggested that I might want to talk with the beta testing group. They gave me an email address to which I sent a message and explained my position and why I felt I might be a reasonable fit. I fully explained to them that I was new to PT but had done A LOT of beta testing in the past. I didn't even receive the courtesy of a return email saying "go to hell' "thank you for your interest" or anything. That to me shows a severe lack of customer focus on someones part. I was perfectly happy to live with whatever they said in a response. I figured I could live with it because while I'm not a Professional like others on this list I have been around the world a bit and there was this list of professional folks who shared my desire to do things audio related. As I said in the beginning, this is not kicking anyone on this list but maybe venting a bit of frustration with the maker of the product. > > All that said, Avid has a vehicle for product feedback. They always have. All users can make suggestions. Beta testing is something entirely different. Hopefully, that explains that. > > You might think I have a negative attitude about the whole thing but I certainly don't. I'm optimistic. Otherwise, I wouldn't be flying out to San francisco next month to meet with folks at Avid. To be clear, while I'm optimistic, I also have a realistic outlook on the situation and I know that there's a long road ahead. There always will be, always. [J. R. W.>] I can't agree with you more. My experience while a bit frustrating was on the whole a great success. Will I take the tests? Yes I probably will. It will require some more study on my part but I'm willing to do that to get to the goal. > > Any successful audio professional will tell you, if you're thinking of audio as a profession, be prepared to sacrifice a lot because it's one of the most difficult fields to be in. It's competitive and it involves long hours, sometimes little pay and you should only be in it if you feel that there's nothing else you can see yourself doing in life. For a blind person, that statement should carry all that much more weight because it's doubly difficult. Let's be clear about something, there are blind musicians who just want to record their own songs and they want to do it in Pro Tools. There are blind audio engineers who have been trained to work in an industry where, currently, Pro Tools just happens to be a ubiquitous tool. Both deserve access, of course, but to those for whom it's a matter of their livelihood, it's especially urgent, naturally. Believe me, I fall squarely into both camps so I can appreciate all sides of any argument. [J. R. W.>] Unfortunately, I'm not a musician but I understand their side of the issue. I just like to take what they have done and help them make something really great. > > I get the impression that you feel that Avid have not done enough. Yes, it's not enough for us. It never will be. I do hope and I do believe the work will continue but, you know what? If it doesn't, I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. we'll all be crossing it in one way or another. It's the same story blind musicians and engineers have faced for decades and the wheels will continue to turn. [J. R. W.>] I don't think I'd go quite that far. I'm pleased at the progress that Avid has made. As a rule their customer service, front line, support have been great people to work with. That is also part of the reason that I have been willing to pay the fairly significant upgrade cost for Pro Tools. I'm a software engineer myself and I fully understand what development costs can be. Having said that I am in that case I guess a lover of audio production rather than one who would spend, at least at this point, my life doing that battle. I want to learn to do this well enough that I can help a few people I know to produce a great audio project. > > Cheers, > > Slau > > > > > > On Sep 4, 2012, at 8:31 PM, J. R. Westmoreland wrote: > >> Specifically I'm thinking of items that are in their course ware and >> can't be done by visually impaired users. >> This is not a kick at the few people I know who test with PT. I'm >> pointing the finger at Avid specifically. I feel that their beta >> program goes out of its way to exclude some valuable input from >> students in particular who are learning the system and would have >> some input that might help them in the realm of usability. Working >> through some of the exercises in the course I found that they loved >> to have you work with some of the really showy items, elastic audio, >> warping audio, pencil fitting, etc. These items are completely >> inaccessible and I believe there should be some way that we as visually impaired users of the product can do the equivalent things. >> >> Having said all that I also wonder if they might not benefit from >> some input on the testing program so the tests might be more >> accessible. I have an instructor who is willing to proctor the tests >> for me and make the accommodations necessary to take them but he will >> have to do some significant adjusting of the tests in a few places. >> Unfortunately he is only able to do the testing for PT101 and PT110. >> If I were to want to proceed further I'm not sure what could be done. >> >> As Mark put it, if you were to go to a studio and have a >> certification they would be much more willing to allow you to do >> things yourself. Also, having that cert could assist you in getting a >> potential job even as an entry level. For example, if I were to call >> you and say I would like to use your facilities to do a project and >> had that certification you'd feel much more comfortable in allowing >> me to do it. It would make you feel confident in my ability to not damage your facility. >> >> I would really like to see the certification process work for those >> who are visually impaired as well as the rest of the world. >> >> If I had the money to do so I'd have Kevin or someone like him fly >> here and go through the labs together working with Mark to adjust >> where necessary to make a final class that would produce a successful >> testing experience. I believe that at that point the class could be >> taken back to Avid and they would be willing to incorporate it in their curriculum. >> >> I'm trying to write quickly so I hope it makes some sense. >> >> J. R. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ptaccess@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.com] On >> Behalf Of Slau Halatyn >> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 5:29 PM >> To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com >> Subject: Re: Another problem with Pro Tools and ML >> >> >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 7:09 PM, J. R. Westmoreland wrote: >> >>> Hmmm. Maybe that is why some things don't fall to the top of the list? >> >> J. R., what specifically are you referring to that hasn't "fallen to >> the top of the list?" >> >> slau >>
