So... you upgraded from 9 to 10 because of crashing and then to 11 for the same reason and you still thing it is a software problem?

It's true that all version of Vegas between 9 and 13 had serious issues.
I paid for all those upgrades but only used 10 under protest for when I needed OFX plugins.

So far 13 seems very stable, certainly worth a trial.

PPro is a different beast to Vegas. For elbow editing it's way better than Vegas but for what I mostly do Vegas is a better fit which is why I've stuck with it.

Bob.

I know how you feel, I will be frustrated as well on this.

For me in my computer System #1 (click my name above to see), Vegas Pro 12 and 13 are more stable than previous version.
You may want to share your computer system as well.

Something I keep in mind to keep Vegas Pro as stable as possible now, I reinstall whole system, Windows OS, install only the needed applications.
In Vegas Pro, I set dynamic RAM (Preferences>Video tab) to 0 (zero), because it is one of the culprit.
Turn Windows update off, especially the driver, including video driver - if possible, whether you are using Nvidia or ATI, find out the best driver version, keep with it.
After making sure whole system working and I got all required application installed, I backup and create image of this Windows system, so I can restore the system back if the system gone frustrating again later.

You may want to try download VegasPro 13 trial and see how it goes in your current system before you decide to move to Premiere Pro...

Set

Okay, I'll bite. What is elbow editing?

It seems to me that editing with my elbows is certainly possible but it would really slow down my workflow.

Aside from all that, I think that if you had crashing with V9 then something else is going on. I use V9 and it is very stable.

Elbow editing? Me, too. Want to know.

I've never had crash issues with 10. Unless something was wrong with the system/OS. Besides that, it's never been a Vegas issue.

[I]"Elbow editing?"[/I]

I'm certain it means different things to different editors. To me it means going through many, many hours of already edited footage shot by others, finding all the bits that might be useful to then cut together to make a punchy promo that's only a few minutes long. The biggest part of the task is just elbow work, finding and cataloguing clips before you even start assembling the final cut(s).

Bob.

Can you open multiple instances of Premiere Pro at the same time like Vegas? .. To me that is the best way of dealing with a large volumes of footage.

With PP, you just open a new Sequence which gives you a new timeline.
All of your sequences and assets are visible in your Project window.

What is very cool is that say you have an edited Sequence that you want to apply CC to in one go, you nest it in a new Sequence and apply your CC to the whole sequence.
You can then open that Sequence in a new (or existing) larger sequence and still dive back in at any time and make changes to you edit and or CC and have them reflected immediately in your master project.
So what, you say, we can do that with nested vegs in Vegas.... True, but every time you update a veg and go back to your master project in Vegas you have to wait for an sfap file to be built which can hold you up from a min to sometimes 5min or more for a 2hr project. Maddening when in a hurry.

But with PP if it crashes you loose ALL your sequences. With multiple instances of Vegas, if one crashes the other keep going and going and going....

Each program has it's advantages and I've got a workflow that favors multiple instances. Might be because for over a decade multiple instances was a standard with software and I got used to it.

I've been using 13 since it came out, 8 for many years before that. I have had one crash in 13, and that because I did something dumb when saving my project and exiting the program. It appears to be rock solid, even with multiple instances running simultaneously.

Jack

Thanks for the replies. In response to questions: I haven't run all these versions on the same computer. I've run them on different computers with some overlap. Right now, I've got it installed on two computers, my main workstation and my laptop for "coffee shop" editing.

The main reason for updating is because they stopped supporting previous versions and I hoped the next version would be more stable. However, I did go from 10 to 11 because of the supposedly better cuda rendering (which has its own problems).

My main machine right now is an HP z15 workstation on my desk. It's an i7, 16gb ram, ssd for OS and another 7200 HD for media files. It also has an nvidia quadro k2100m 2gb video card. It's also pushing 3 other monitors for all my various editing windows

My laptop is a Lenovo w530 with similar specs but a k2000m graphics card

I will check out the dynamic ram. I know i had upped it to try to prevent crashes. Never thought of disabling it.

I will also check out the demo of v13 to see if it is any better.

"1. Is Vegas Pro Edit 13 any more stable than previous versions of Vegas Pro?"

For me, Vegas Pro 13 is still a little less solid than Vegas Pro 12 build 770, but most of the issues are fairly specific rather than general instability (closed captions, crashes when renaming files, frameserver issues etc.). So glad I bought a licence for 12 while I could, and that VP13 projects are backwards-compatible to VP12. I generally find myself opening VP12 rather than VP13 for my day-to-day work.

Based on following the forum, rather than using it, VP11 was the low point, mainly because of GPU-related issues. I'm confident that VP13 is more stable than VP11.

VP10 was mostly stable but had the "replaced media" horror bug.

To the OP, if the VP13 trial crashes on your system then don't upgrade and move over to Premiere if that's more stable and you can work with the interface. I don't believe in hanging on to software that doesn't work on my system. Fortunately VP 13 pretty stable for me.

The card on that HP laptop is slower than the minimum recommended Hd 5700. Try vegas on a system that exceeds Vegas's system specs, and see if that is better for you. Something like a Gen4 i7, 32GB RAM (non overclocked), SSD, and a R9 290x, then see if vegas still sucks for you. 13 has been one of the most stable builds of vegas I have used in several versions.

@astar, I'm not seeing that graphics card recommendation on the Vegas pro system requirements. Based on the minimum system requirements on sony's site, my computers both far exceed the minimum required.

Glad to hear that everyone thinks that v13 is more stable. It still stinks that Vegas wont fix old versions and wants people to pay more money to fix problems (buying upgrades).

I'm on Vegas 13 it crashes every now and then but nothing to really complain about.

When I first bought my computer I ordered it overclocked, Vegas was crashing every few minutes. I called the company that I bought the computer from and found out how to reset the computer back to normal settings, that
fixed the problem.

I then tried playing around overclocking ram and the more I over clocked ram the more Vegas crashed.

From my experience keeping my motherboard CPU and RAM clockied at normal settings fixed my crashes for the most part.

Hope this might be of help.

Jerry K.

@jeff92k7

Sony used to publish rated cards for vegas 11 or 12, back then they specified the AMD 5700 for general use, and the V5800 for the 30bit color pipeline. That info appears to have been taken down. Compare the compute configuration, and performance specs of the k2100m to even the lowly specs back in 2009, you will see where that quadro card fails.

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2429/quadro-k2100m.html


That quadro is a mobile chip which is gimped from the start for heat and power reasons. That card is pretty much a color accurate photoshop card.


The following video is from AMD showcasing w9000 editing 4k on Vegas



If you do some deductive reasoning, you will see that Sony used to recommend an AMD Juniper XT chip with 12 compute units. AMD has now showcased Sony editing 4K on a Tahiti XT chip with 32 compute units, and newest flagship Firepro w9100 processor is a Hawaii XT chip with 44 compute units. The R9 290x runs an Hawaii XT chip with almost the same compute, memory bandwidth, and pixel rate performance as the w9100. The R9 290x is basically the same hardware minus pro display port hardware, some pro end latency feature, and maybe Geometry Boost. The quadro k2100m is mobile chip, only has 7 compute units, and almost half the memory bandwidth of the 2009 standard. The k2100m is GK106 chip that is equivalent to GeForce 660, which the 600 series chip is considered the "skip it" chip from NVidia and go for the 700 series.

Here is an excel spreadsheet that I pulled together while researching the topic:
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=6B1B1D78F12EDDEF!81891&authkey=!ANhFm9zQ0FzUNwc&ithint=file%2cxlsx

I do not really care beyond this post. Both AMD and NVidia make it really hard to decipher video card marketing BS. Premiere is optimized for NVidia and so given the system specs you have it might be better choice. The k2100m hardware in that laptop might be gimped even under Premiere standards. You do not get compute power and system optimization because a system has a quadro or workstation label.

@astar,

Thanks for the informative reply. I appreciate it.

While I agree that there are much better graphics cards out there, changing the graphics card in a laptop is pretty near impossible, so I'm pretty much stuck with what I have. Buying a whole new desktop system just to get a nicer video card isn't in the budget. I haven't noticed any real performance lag with the NVIDIA Quadro cards that I have. Even the K2000M (about half the performance of the K2100M) in my Lenovo laptop runs fine with Vegas. I've run GPU monitors to see real time GPU load and rarely is it ever pegged when using Vegas. I would bet that the primary benefit to a beefier graphics card would be render speed. I'm not doing any 4K stuff and have no plans to any time soon. I'm mainly doing full HD stuff from my DSLR and Camcorder for various personal/family/school (kids) projects.

You're right about the Photoshop influence on those cards. In fact, Photoshop was a big reason I bought the Lenovo. That machine also has the fancy color balanced screen and it works great for photo editing as well as color grading in Vegas. besides, the HP is a company machine, so I really can't complain about the hardware.

My main concern is the stability of Vegas and not so much the performance/speed. NVIDIA seems to make good drivers and I don't think I have a graphics driver issue causing the instability. I keep pretty close tabs on drivers and I never install drivers until other people have had a chance to use them and report on any possible stability issues.

simply dl the trial and give it a whirl.... if it works, jolly good, if not hello ppro.

i've found 13 very stable. gpu is still a mess, but hey, with a reasonable cpu it's no big deal turning off gpu forever (imho).

... and if PPro crashes, then set about fixing your system. And once that's done, give V another whirl !

geoff

The only thing I remember that worked well in Premiere was the credit roll. Otherwise 5 times slower. Maybe more than that.
JJK