Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

pro tools compatible programs

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
July 22, 2004 7:01:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
and sequencing program. I was looking at sonar, cubase, & nuendo. I
currently use logic to sequence songs using it mainly for midi & the
softsynths. Logic is too hard to use for audio for me, the other
programs look easier to get around in.

What I wanted to do is set up a PC (I have a fast one all ready to go)
just for recording the output from my synths and samplers into to
compose my songs so I have total recall of the individual parts, and
also be able to record vocals in the same file and be able to tweak
levels, ect. I think I would need a program & a sound card capable of
giving a 48 track playback count with 'low cpu' using FX plugs on most
of the tracks without sweating. Am I dreaming or is this possible?

Anyone have any soundcard (anything in the $200 - $400 range) and
program suggestions (nuendo, sonar, ect)? The program would have to
be able to save files (export) in pro tools format and import pro
tools files without a lot of hassle. If I did take a science course
and learned logic audio capabilities (PC version) could I get what I'm
looking for? Anyone using Logic to do this skipping the Pro Tool
move? Anyone working on music without Pro Tools but able to deliver
your music in pro tools format? If so How?


Thanks for any suggestions & advice!
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 3:30:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

ghostdog69 wrote:
> My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
> master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
> thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
> i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
> and sequencing program. I was looking at sonar, cubase, & nuendo. I
> currently use logic to sequence songs using it mainly for midi & the
> softsynths. Logic is too hard to use for audio for me, the other
> programs look easier to get around in.
>

Logic has an object orientated design and is consequently very powerful.
Cubase on the other hand tends to have the common things 'hard coded'.
For example, in Cubase there are midi effects such as delay ready for
you to use but, in Logic, you could 'make' an effect such as that by
dragging things around and joining things up in the environment.

As you suggested, Cubase is easier to use but Logic is more intricate
and flexible, particularly for midi programming. Sounds like you ought
to download the Cubase demo. By virtue of it's design, I think you'll be
able to quite quickly suss out how it works and decide if you want to
pursue it. Same goes for Sonar whereas, I suspect most people would have
to defer to manual to understand how Logic works.

--
***My real address is m/ike at u/nmusic d/ot co dot u/k (removing /s)
np:
http://www.unmusic.co.uk
http://www.unmusic.co.uk/Top_50_Films.html - favorite films
http://www.unmusic.co.uk/amh-s.html - alt.music.home-studio
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 3:30:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

Do some research on whether the programs that interest you can do an
OMF export,
an export protocol that ProTools can take in and turn into a PT
session. The conversion is fraught with problems, but in recent years
it has started working between Digital Performer, Nuendo and other
programs and PT. Check in with the webboard/user forum
of the software you like and ask about converting sessions to ProTools
sessions--it is a problem that many many people have to deal with.
You can also ask on the ProTools
DUC--many knowledgable people there.

Philip Perkins
Related resources
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 9:22:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ghostdog69 wrote:
> My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
> master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
> thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
> i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
> and sequencing program. I was looking at sonar, cubase, & nuendo. I
> currently use logic to sequence songs using it mainly for midi & the
> softsynths. Logic is too hard to use for audio for me, the other
> programs look easier to get around in.
>

If your work load is on the rise (and will be staying there) then you should
look into some better gear. If your making money you can justify a grand or
even a bit more. Digital Performer is a good thing to look into, MOTU and DP3
or 4 will run on PC (but works better on a Mac) MOTU has lots of interfaces to
consider, so you can look around a bit and may be able to fine a used unit for
under $1000.00 US.
July 23, 2004 9:22:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Raymond wrote:

> Digital Performer is a good thing to look into, MOTU and DP3
> or 4 will run on PC (but works better on a Mac) MOTU has lots of interfaces to
> consider, so you can look around a bit and may be able to fine a used unit for
> under $1000.00 US.

DP only runs on a Mac. The MOTU interfaces are cross-platform, but the
software is not.

--
Eric

Practice Your Mixing Skills
Multi-Track Masters on CD-ROM
www.Raw-Tracks.com
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 11:27:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

"ghostdog69" <ghostdog69@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2480a1fd.0407221401.371143a@posting.google.com


> Anyone have any soundcard (anything in the $200 - $400 range)

Right now the Delta 1010LT in the low $200 range for 8 analog channels of
really pretty good quality record and playback seems to be a value leader.
The Terratec DMX6fire at $200 for 6 channels might be close.
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 5:36:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

I use Cubase SX 2 on an Athlon XP 3000 with 1.5 Gb RAM. Amazingly I can pull
over a hundred tracks off the machine with an IDE drive and still be able to
run software synths and a load of plugins (though forget reverbs!). I love
the thing. I've tried a lot of others (Logic, Cakewalk, Nuendo etc) but
Cubase is the most intuitive and possibly the most powerful. And if you
don't want the expense of a MAC Logic is not an option anyway. On saying
that All of the big sequencers are much of a much these days and unless your
a poweruser you won't use a 10%th of whats on offer feature wise.

Nuendo is almost the same software though a lot more expensive. Though it
does possibly have better options for bringing projects into PT. As far as I
know though, unless the PT system your importing your projects has the
optional OMF plugin for protools (which is a serious amount of cash for what
it is....nice one Digi), I hear OMF either doesn't work or doesn't work
well.

good luck,

Martin

"ghostdog69" <ghostdog69@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2480a1fd.0407221401.371143a@posting.google.com...
> My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
> master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
> thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
> i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
> and sequencing program. I was looking at sonar, cubase, & nuendo. I
> currently use logic to sequence songs using it mainly for midi & the
> softsynths. Logic is too hard to use for audio for me, the other
> programs look easier to get around in.
>
> What I wanted to do is set up a PC (I have a fast one all ready to go)
> just for recording the output from my synths and samplers into to
> compose my songs so I have total recall of the individual parts, and
> also be able to record vocals in the same file and be able to tweak
> levels, ect. I think I would need a program & a sound card capable of
> giving a 48 track playback count with 'low cpu' using FX plugs on most
> of the tracks without sweating. Am I dreaming or is this possible?
>
> Anyone have any soundcard (anything in the $200 - $400 range) and
> program suggestions (nuendo, sonar, ect)? The program would have to
> be able to save files (export) in pro tools format and import pro
> tools files without a lot of hassle. If I did take a science course
> and learned logic audio capabilities (PC version) could I get what I'm
> looking for? Anyone using Logic to do this skipping the Pro Tool
> move? Anyone working on music without Pro Tools but able to deliver
> your music in pro tools format? If so How?
>
>
> Thanks for any suggestions & advice!
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 5:36:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

"Martin Quinn" <mquinn@eircom.net> wrote in message news:<pD7Mc.5351$Z14.6602@news.indigo.ie>...
> I use Cubase SX 2 on an Athlon XP 3000 with 1.5 Gb RAM. Amazingly I can pull
> over a hundred tracks off the machine with an IDE drive and still be able to
> run software synths and a load of plugins (though forget reverbs!). I love
> the thing. I've tried a lot of others (Logic, Cakewalk, Nuendo etc) but
> Cubase is the most intuitive and possibly the most powerful. And if you
> don't want the expense of a MAC Logic is not an option anyway. On saying
> that All of the big sequencers are much of a much these days and unless your
> a poweruser you won't use a 10%th of whats on offer feature wise.
>
> Nuendo is almost the same software though a lot more expensive. Though it
> does possibly have better options for bringing projects into PT. As far as I
> know though, unless the PT system your importing your projects has the
> optional OMF plugin for protools (which is a serious amount of cash for what
> it is....nice one Digi), I hear OMF either doesn't work or doesn't work
> well.
>
> good luck,
>
> Martin
>
> "ghostdog69" <ghostdog69@lycos.com> wrote in message
> news:2480a1fd.0407221401.371143a@posting.google.com...
> > My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
> > master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
> > thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
> > i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
> > and sequencing program. I was looking at sonar, cubase, & nuendo. I
> > currently use logic to sequence songs using it mainly for midi & the
> > softsynths. Logic is too hard to use for audio for me, the other
> > programs look easier to get around in.
> >
> > What I wanted to do is set up a PC (I have a fast one all ready to go)
> > just for recording the output from my synths and samplers into to
> > compose my songs so I have total recall of the individual parts, and
> > also be able to record vocals in the same file and be able to tweak
> > levels, ect. I think I would need a program & a sound card capable of
> > giving a 48 track playback count with 'low cpu' using FX plugs on most
> > of the tracks without sweating. Am I dreaming or is this possible?
> >
> > Anyone have any soundcard (anything in the $200 - $400 range) and
> > program suggestions (nuendo, sonar, ect)? The program would have to
> > be able to save files (export) in pro tools format and import pro
> > tools files without a lot of hassle. If I did take a science course
> > and learned logic audio capabilities (PC version) could I get what I'm
> > looking for? Anyone using Logic to do this skipping the Pro Tool
> > move? Anyone working on music without Pro Tools but able to deliver
> > your music in pro tools format? If so How?
> >
> >
> > Thanks for any suggestions & advice!

Ok, after reading the responses a better ? it seems is will something
like a digi 001 or digi 002 system (used I hope) be able to give me
the amount of tracks (w/ plugs) I'm looking for (at least 32 tracks
of audio)? I do hip hop, urban & pop music instrumentals and will be
recording vocal projects. I can't have any problems with Pro Tool
file conversions so I guess I should roll with Digidesign. I can
sequence with Logic and record the output into the pro tools system
right? I'm a bit mystified about pro tools and how it works, any
suggestions on reading on the actual process of how one puts a song
together with it? Anyone using any of the DIGI set ups? IF so how
many tracks are you getting at once? I'm a PC user.

Thanx again!
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 9:48:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Raymond wrote:

> Digital Performer is a good thing to look into, MOTU and DP3
> or 4 will run on PC (but works better on a Mac) MOTU has lots of interfaces
to
> consider, so you can look around a bit and may be able to fine a used unit
for
> under $1000.00 US.

>DP only runs on a Mac. The MOTU interfaces are cross-platform, but the
>software is not.

Sorry about that, was it Audio Desk (comes with most all of MOTU interfaces)
that will run on PC? Don't know for sure.
July 23, 2004 9:48:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Raymond wrote:

> Sorry about that, was it Audio Desk (comes with most all of MOTU interfaces)
> that will run on PC? Don't know for sure.

Audio desk is Mac only as well.

--
Eric

Practice Your Mixing Skills
Multi-Track Masters on CD-ROM
www.Raw-Tracks.com
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 4:22:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

ghostdog69 wrote:
> "Martin Quinn" <mquinn@eircom.net> wrote in message news:<pD7Mc.5351$Z14.6602@news.indigo.ie>...
>
>>I use Cubase SX 2 on an Athlon XP 3000 with 1.5 Gb RAM. Amazingly I can pull
>>over a hundred tracks off the machine with an IDE drive and still be able to
>>run software synths and a load of plugins (though forget reverbs!). I love
>>the thing. I've tried a lot of others (Logic, Cakewalk, Nuendo etc) but
>>Cubase is the most intuitive and possibly the most powerful. And if you
>>don't want the expense of a MAC Logic is not an option anyway. On saying
>>that All of the big sequencers are much of a much these days and unless your
>>a poweruser you won't use a 10%th of whats on offer feature wise.
>>
>>Nuendo is almost the same software though a lot more expensive. Though it
>>does possibly have better options for bringing projects into PT. As far as I
>>know though, unless the PT system your importing your projects has the
>>optional OMF plugin for protools (which is a serious amount of cash for what
>>it is....nice one Digi), I hear OMF either doesn't work or doesn't work
>>well.
>>
>>good luck,
>>
>>Martin
>>
>>"ghostdog69" <ghostdog69@lycos.com> wrote in message
>>news:2480a1fd.0407221401.371143a@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
>>>master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
>>>thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
>>>i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
>>>and sequencing program. I was looking at sonar, cubase, & nuendo. I
>>>currently use logic to sequence songs using it mainly for midi & the
>>>softsynths. Logic is too hard to use for audio for me, the other
>>>programs look easier to get around in.
>>>
>>>What I wanted to do is set up a PC (I have a fast one all ready to go)
>>>just for recording the output from my synths and samplers into to
>>>compose my songs so I have total recall of the individual parts, and
>>>also be able to record vocals in the same file and be able to tweak
>>>levels, ect. I think I would need a program & a sound card capable of
>>>giving a 48 track playback count with 'low cpu' using FX plugs on most
>>>of the tracks without sweating. Am I dreaming or is this possible?
>>>
>>>Anyone have any soundcard (anything in the $200 - $400 range) and
>>>program suggestions (nuendo, sonar, ect)? The program would have to
>>>be able to save files (export) in pro tools format and import pro
>>>tools files without a lot of hassle. If I did take a science course
>>>and learned logic audio capabilities (PC version) could I get what I'm
>>>looking for? Anyone using Logic to do this skipping the Pro Tool
>>>move? Anyone working on music without Pro Tools but able to deliver
>>>your music in pro tools format? If so How?
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks for any suggestions & advice!
>>
>
> Ok, after reading the responses a better ? it seems is will something
> like a digi 001 or digi 002 system (used I hope) be able to give me
> the amount of tracks (w/ plugs) I'm looking for (at least 32 tracks
> of audio)? I do hip hop, urban & pop music instrumentals and will be
> recording vocal projects. I can't have any problems with Pro Tool
> file conversions so I guess I should roll with Digidesign. I can
> sequence with Logic and record the output into the pro tools system
> right? I'm a bit mystified about pro tools and how it works, any
> suggestions on reading on the actual process of how one puts a song
> together with it? Anyone using any of the DIGI set ups? IF so how
> many tracks are you getting at once? I'm a PC user.
>
> Thanx again!

If you have a relatively new PC(within a year or two), you should have
no problems getting that many tracks. PTLE is limited to 32 tracks, but
you can use AbletonLive(or any other prog that can be a Rewire slave)
and pick up another 16 via Rewire. I believe they are still giving the
software bundles when you purchase a new one. The 002r is going for
$1195, but I have seen them for as low as $1000. You may be able to find
a used one on eBay for less.
A lot depends on your PC. Be sure and visit Digis compatibility pages
and check yours out. If you need to upgrade, there is a thread in the
PTLE for PC forum titled "Best system for PTLE under $1000". The first
post is updated on a monthly basis. If you do need to upgrade, you
should be able to just swap out motherboard/processor, memory, etc., and
get there for well under a thou.
You will want to look for a Digi002 or 002r, since PTLE 6.4 is the last
release to recognise the 001. I personally like the 002r for its
portability, and I already have a control surface. If you need a control
surface, look at the 002. They are the same as far as ins and outs are
concerned, but you can use the 002 as a stand-alone mixer if you need one.
Sorry, can't help you with interfacing with Logic. I'm not very
MIDI-literate. I do think you will like working in PTLE. It is very easy
to learn, and there are a lot of things that just take one or two
keystrokes that are a pain in the ass to do on other programs.
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 12:25:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

In article <2480a1fd.0407221401.371143a@posting.google.com>,
ghostdog69@lycos.com (ghostdog69) wrote:

> My work load is increasing and I can no longer get away with 2 track
> master, pro's & semi pro's want pro tools files. I don't have the
> thousands you need for a proper Pro tools software/ hardware system (
> i need more than 24 tracks), but I can afford a top notch sound card
> and sequencing program.
[snip]
> Anyone have any soundcard (anything in the $200 - $400 range) and
> program suggestions (nuendo, sonar, ect)? The program would have to
> be able to save files (export) in pro tools format and import pro
> tools files without a lot of hassle.

You can buy an MBox based ProTools system for $450 any day of the week.
It's not ProTools compatible, it _is_ ProTools. The only downside to
this system as opposed to a 001 or 002 system is that you're limited to
two channels of input and output at one time. You can have many
internal tracks however and you can open sessions saved on much larger
systems without hassles.

It sounds like you're not going to need tons of inputs at one time (but
maybe I'm wrong) so there might not be any disadvantage to the MBox over
the 001 or 002.

The disadvantage of the ProTools LE systems (001, 002, MBox) is that
they lack a few features that most people don't need very often, such as
timecode, Beat Detective, snapshot automation and perhaps a few other
things I forgot about. If you need that, then a used TDM system might
work well for you.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire
monte.mcguire@verizon.net
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 12:55:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <monte.mcguire-20F8FD.04251324072004@news.verizon.net> monte.mcguire@verizon.net writes:

> The disadvantage of the ProTools LE systems (001, 002, MBox) is that
> they lack a few features that most people don't need very often, such as
> timecode, Beat Detective, snapshot automation and perhaps a few other
> things I forgot about.

From my limited exposure to ProTools users (including complainers) it
seems those are the most-missed features. Maybe those are the most
obvious missing features that people THINK they need so they bitch
about them being left out of the bargain basement version of the
program.

I don't know how many times I've seen reverse recording/playback
requested on the Mackie hard disk recorder forum, but does anyone
really actually use that any more? The only time I ever put a
multitrack tape on the machine upside down and backwards was to add a
count-off. But that backwards pencil tap on the microphone did sould
kind of cool.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
July 24, 2004 2:07:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

EricK <eric@Raw-Tracks.com> wrote in message news:<2mbmj2Flcvs9U1@uni-berlin.de>...
> Raymond wrote:
>
> > Digital Performer is a good thing to look into, MOTU and DP3
> > or 4 will run on PC (but works better on a Mac) MOTU has lots of interfaces to
> > consider, so you can look around a bit and may be able to fine a used unit for
> > under $1000.00 US.
>
> DP only runs on a Mac. The MOTU interfaces are cross-platform, but the
> software is not.

good point. in fact i would go even further and say motu interfaces
are "theoretically" cross-platform. I punted all of my motu gear when
I switched to PC, because none of it worked (and I am a good at
computer hardware). Many, many people have hardware conflicts, and
the problems continue to this day.

There are the lucky who have their Motu stuff work on PC, and they
will be quick to say "aw that's bs, motu works fine on pc". But they
are guilty of confirmation-bias. They some how forget or refuse to
witness all the people who regularly have irreconcilable hardware
conflicts between Motu and PC.

I would completely stay away from anything Motu on a PC. Digital
Performer does not run on PC, and from a hardware standpoint you can
buy from other manufacturers who have the knowledge and dedication to
write robust and stable drivers for the PC, and you can get really
good sound quality too at a decent price too.
July 24, 2004 2:14:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

sounds like digidesign is a good bet for you. look into a digi 001.

it looks like you are creating tracks and then will give them to a big
studio to mix? if that's the case, you don't need TDM effects, which
are part of the expensive ProTools setup. What you need is the
ability to have raw tracks, and then be able to give the files to the
big guys to mix on thier big setups.

That is exactly what the 001 is for. The raw audio files are meant to
be swappable between different ProTools studios. Just make sure if
you use an effect, to "print it" before you give it to the Big Studio.
Raw audio file tracks in one file should transfer fine. When you
start trying to transfer effects and automation, then the risk of
transfer conflicts increase.

Digi definitly has some sort of "open transfer" feature within the
Digi family. So if you are on an 001 running ProTools LE or ProTools
Free, "something" is guaranteed to be able to transfer to big Protools
setups, Mac Protools setups, etc. Just find out what that "something"
is. I'm certain basic audio files can transfer, but effects and
automation may be hit-or-miss.
Anonymous
July 29, 2004 3:48:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth (More info?)

"xy" <genericaudioperson@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6c38b64b.0407240914.17bb9350@posting.google.com...
>
> Digi definitly has some sort of "open transfer" feature within the
> Digi family. So if you are on an 001 running ProTools LE or ProTools
> Free, "something" is guaranteed to be able to transfer to big Protools
> setups, Mac Protools setups, etc. Just find out what that "something"
> is. I'm certain basic audio files can transfer, but effects and
> automation may be hit-or-miss.


Everything transfers. The only time something won't play nice is if
you're using a plug-in the other facility doesn't have. This is the
same as doing a mix outside the box -- if you're using a Lexicon PCM91
and the other facility doesn't have one, you bring yours. You can do
that with Pro Tools too. That's the beauty of the iLok --
authorizations for after-market plug-ins reside on the key, not the host
computer.. Install the plug-in on the other facility's computer, plug
in your key and you're good to go.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
Anonymous
July 29, 2004 8:14:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:<znr1090665851k@trad>...
> In article <monte.mcguire-20F8FD.04251324072004@news.verizon.net> monte.mcguire@verizon.net writes:
>
> > The disadvantage of the ProTools LE systems (001, 002, MBox) is that
> > they lack a few features that most people don't need very often, such as
> > timecode, Beat Detective, snapshot automation and perhaps a few other
> > things I forgot about.
>
> From my limited exposure to ProTools users (including complainers) it
> seems those are the most-missed features. Maybe those are the most
> obvious missing features that people THINK they need so they bitch
> about them being left out of the bargain basement version of the
> program.
>
> I don't know how many times I've seen reverse recording/playback
> requested on the Mackie hard disk recorder forum, but does anyone
> really actually use that any more? The only time I ever put a
> multitrack tape on the machine upside down and backwards was to add a
> count-off. But that backwards pencil tap on the microphone did sould
> kind of cool.


I never record midi in protools anymore. Sampletank didn't cut it and
the new one was a little better. I loved the fact that when I do use
pro tools 6.4 now, besides some of the glitches, that I can use
powerful programs like reason to get some good sounding stuff in. The
digi oo2 is a very powerful tool for the money though.
Anonymous
July 30, 2004 7:55:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Dan wrote
>I never record midi in protools anymore. Sampletank didn't cut it and
>the new one was a little better. I loved the fact that when I do use
>pro tools 6.4 now, besides some of the glitches, that I can use
>powerful programs like reason to get some good sounding stuff in. The
>digi oo2 is a very powerful tool for the money though.

If the guy is wanting the better side of MIDI on a DAW he should look at DP3 or
4. I know (now) it will not run on a PC, if he looked around a bit he could
likely find an older Mac and MOTU rig with Digital Performer 2.7 for a steal.
I've still got all my old update disks and all the MOTU disks to, just
something to think about.
Anonymous
July 30, 2004 5:02:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

bruwhaha58097238@aol.com (Raymond) wrote in message news:<20040729235521.23846.00003011@mb-m28.aol.com>...
> Dan wrote
> >I never record midi in protools anymore. Sampletank didn't cut it and
> >the new one was a little better. I loved the fact that when I do use
> >pro tools 6.4 now, besides some of the glitches, that I can use
> >powerful programs like reason to get some good sounding stuff in. The
> >digi oo2 is a very powerful tool for the money though.
>
> If the guy is wanting the better side of MIDI on a DAW he should look at DP3 or
> 4. I know (now) it will not run on a PC, if he looked around a bit he could
> likely find an older Mac and MOTU rig with Digital Performer 2.7 for a steal.
> I've still got all my old update disks and all the MOTU disks to, just
> something to think about.



I'd take a G3 over any somewhat newer PC anyday (no offense PC
users)... just make sure you max out your ram, right?


Dan Powers
real brave audio
!