Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Pro-Tools vs. ???

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 12:54:57 AM

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

Hey! Just learning the ropes WRT audio - I've started doing freelance video
work. (corporate promo, music gigs etc)

A good friend of mine is a studio musician (bass guitar, electric cello)
with a degree from Boston's Berkeley School of Music.

He's choosen to stay with MacOS for a while citing Pro Tools as the reason.
I understand it's available cross platform now though. Any platform
limitations?

How does Adobe Audition compare?
I'm going through Google searches on this as fast as I can but figure you
folks will have some excellent views on this.

Thanks,
C.j

More about : pro tools

Anonymous
May 8, 2005 12:54:58 AM

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

Hi,

I use Ableton' s Live for sequencing and highly recommend it. It's
very intuitive, and extremely versitle. Everyone I know that uses it
differently. Some big name DJs (like Sasha) use it exclusively while
performing, as do many more conventional musicians who compose with it.
I haven't heard of Adobe Audition, but if one if serious about making
music on their computer Live, Cubase, Pro-Tools, Digital Performer, or
Logic are the way to go. They are pro level programs, and if one were
to buy them (or get a cracked version) it would be time/money well
spent.

Peace

SP
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 12:56:45 AM

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

Pro Tools is cross platform (Mac/WinXP), both in the native version
(PTLE) and the more powerful dsp-card based version (PTHD).

Logic used to be cross platform, but when Apple bought out parent co.
Emagic, Win support was dropped and new editions are Mac only.

Cubase and its pro-audio oriented cousin Nuendo are cross platform.

RP
Related resources
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 1:47:37 AM

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

Pro Tools LE has worked great in windows for me. Check out the link.
There is a running topic for what computers work best and worst for it.

I am sure there are other DAW programs that work great too. I'm very
happy with PTLE though based on my experiences. PTLE for windows:

http://duc.digidesign.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=UBB32
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 2:11:52 AM

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

FWIW, I understand Adobe acquired Syntrillium's "Cool Edit Pro" which is
what Audition is based on. Familiar with that one?

I've heard of Cubase and Logic Pro but, again, I don't know enough of the
ins and outs to know even what questions I should be asking. Any or all of
these cross-platform? Thanks for the input.

C.j



<shenpendawa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115517263.012219.307210@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I use Ableton' s Live for sequencing and highly recommend it. It's
> very intuitive, and extremely versitle. Everyone I know that uses it
> differently. Some big name DJs (like Sasha) use it exclusively while
> performing, as do many more conventional musicians who compose with it.
> I haven't heard of Adobe Audition, but if one if serious about making
> music on their computer Live, Cubase, Pro-Tools, Digital Performer, or
> Logic are the way to go. They are pro level programs, and if one were
> to buy them (or get a cracked version) it would be time/money well
> spent.
>
> Peace
>
> SP
>
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 2:45:11 AM

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

"C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote

> He's choosen to stay with MacOS for a while citing Pro Tools as the
> reason.
> I understand it's available cross platform now though. Any platform
> limitations?

Do I understand correctly you DON'T want to use a Mac? Too bad. Apparently
Apple has some new software the video guys I work with say is even better
than ProTools. I've heard there were quite a few cross platform issues with
ProTools for PC, but it appears from the other responses here those issues
may be worked out now.


> How does Adobe Audition compare?
> I'm going through Google searches on this as fast as I can but figure you
> folks will have some excellent views on this.

Cool Edit is my favorite audio editing program ever. Audition is virtually
identical in editing features. It's not my favorite audio mixing program
for albums, but for radio it's just peachy. Might be fine for video work
and lots simpler than ProTools. Audition has way more features designed for
video than Cool Edit ever did. The demo that came with my recent purchase
of Audition is mostly all about how cool it is for video. It looks like
Adobe is trying heavilly to cut into ProTools market share. How well they
succeed I really can't tell you.

Julian
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 1:19:39 PM

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

> Cubase and its pro-audio oriented cousin Nuendo are cross platform.

althought make no mistake - cubase is a pro application too in the 'SX'
versions - its aimed squarely at music production, whereas nuendo is aimed
more at post/film and media. cannot be beaten for sound flexibility, or just
good old german thinking and engineering (i'm english btw...)
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 9:02:01 PM

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

Howdy again all!

I spoke with the friend I thought was using Pro-Tools.
Turns out that wasn't his reason for sticking with the Mac...

....it was "Digital Performer."

I have no issue with either Mac or PC BTW and have access to both. After a
dozen Macs, I found WindowsXP to do a great job with the type of work I do
these days and my newest system is an XP notebook.

It's helpful to know what's available and works best for each platform so I
can tailor my workflow to fit.

Thanks to all who've replied so far! Very informative.

C.j

"Julian Adamaitis" <nospamJulianPA@Access4Less.net> wrote in message
news:117r9r9fq1nlkd5@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote
>
>> He's choosen to stay with MacOS for a while citing Pro Tools as the
>> reason.
>> I understand it's available cross platform now though. Any platform
>> limitations?
>
> Do I understand correctly you DON'T want to use a Mac? Too bad.
> Apparently Apple has some new software the video guys I work with say is
> even better than ProTools. I've heard there were quite a few cross
> platform issues with ProTools for PC, but it appears from the other
> responses here those issues may be worked out now.
>
>
>> How does Adobe Audition compare?
>> I'm going through Google searches on this as fast as I can but figure you
>> folks will have some excellent views on this.
>
> Cool Edit is my favorite audio editing program ever. Audition is
> virtually identical in editing features. It's not my favorite audio
> mixing program for albums, but for radio it's just peachy. Might be fine
> for video work and lots simpler than ProTools. Audition has way more
> features designed for video than Cool Edit ever did. The demo that came
> with my recent purchase of Audition is mostly all about how cool it is for
> video. It looks like Adobe is trying heavilly to cut into ProTools market
> share. How well they succeed I really can't tell you.
>
> Julian
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 1:59:08 AM

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

"C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote in message
news:bKOdnZNVaMLD_uDfRVn-rQ@rogers.com...
> Hey! Just learning the ropes WRT audio - I've started doing freelance
> video work. (corporate promo, music gigs etc)
>
> A good friend of mine is a studio musician (bass guitar, electric cello)
> with a degree from Boston's Berkeley School of Music.
>
> He's choosen to stay with MacOS for a while citing Pro Tools as the
> reason.
> I understand it's available cross platform now though. Any platform
> limitations?
>
> How does Adobe Audition compare?
> I'm going through Google searches on this as fast as I can but figure you
> folks will have some excellent views on this.


Sony Vegas. Best of both worlds (audio/video)

Free demo so you can decide for yourself:
http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/products/vegasfam...

geoff
May 9, 2005 1:59:09 AM

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

Vegas is fantastic for video, but its audio editing functionality leaves a
lot to be desired. If you do any cut 'n' paste, you will be soon frustrated
by Vegas. However, Vegas is faster than Pro Tools (more efficient use of
computer), and far more compatible with a wider variety of hardware. It
also doesn't crash nearly as often.

I say all this as a user and fan of Pro Tools. I use a Digi-002 Rack on an
Athlon64 3500+ system I built. (Note that to get PT to run on an AthlonXP,
you need to disable the on-chip virus protection feature; there are articles
in the DUC that tell you how to do this.) The Digi-002 Rack has four nice
preamps, and plenty of ins and outs for what I do. It runs just fine in
Windows (in fact, just before the G5 came out, Pro Tools was MUCH faster on
PC hardware than Mac hardware).

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote in message
news:427de2ea$1@clear.net.nz...
>
> "C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote in message
> news:bKOdnZNVaMLD_uDfRVn-rQ@rogers.com...
>> Hey! Just learning the ropes WRT audio - I've started doing freelance
>> video work. (corporate promo, music gigs etc)
>>
>> A good friend of mine is a studio musician (bass guitar, electric cello)
>> with a degree from Boston's Berkeley School of Music.
>>
>> He's choosen to stay with MacOS for a while citing Pro Tools as the
>> reason.
>> I understand it's available cross platform now though. Any platform
>> limitations?
>>
>> How does Adobe Audition compare?
>> I'm going through Google searches on this as fast as I can but figure you
>> folks will have some excellent views on this.
>
>
> Sony Vegas. Best of both worlds (audio/video)
>
> Free demo so you can decide for yourself:
> http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/products/vegasfam...
>
> geoff
>
>
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 1:59:09 AM

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

I use a Mac running Digital Performer for one reason: I absolutely LOVE
the MOTU 828 interface. It matches the way I work. I'm one of those
"weird" guys who loves to record with a software-based system and does
use plug-ins on a regular basis...BUT...I also am just "old school"
enough to have a bunch of vintage hardware signal processors that I
like to use, and the MOTU interface I have is not only a great A/D
converter and a fairly decent mic preamp, but it also acts as an
excellent signal router and "virtual patchbay" for all of my outboard
gear. I have all of my vintage hardware patched to it, and everything
works flawlessly.

Before I bought my recording rig, I went back and forth, wondering if I
wanted to go with ProTools or Digital Performer. The ability to patch
in vintage outboard gear was the real sticking point with me. I
actually had the opportunity to talk to a DigiDesign consultant. I
asked him, "Once and for all, CAN I USE MY VINTAGE HARDWARE WITH
PROTOOLS?" He squinted and said, with great hesitation,
well...yeah...sort of." That did it. I knew that ProTools couldn't
easily give me what MOTU could. MOTU seemed to have designed the 828
interface specifically for folks like me who don't want to live in
"plug-in land" all the time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not downing
ProTools...it's a great system, and is the industry standard. But for
the way *I* work, DP is the one, and in my opinion, based on how I
work, the MOTU 828 beats the Digi 002, hands down, no contest.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 2:51:17 AM

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

The friend that uses Digital Performer also has a lot of audio hardware,
though I don't know if he interfaces it with the computer.

On a personal note, he's the most even-keeled guy I know, a fellow I've
trusted with my life on many occasions and who's judgement I trust
implicitly.

I figured if he was using DP on a Mac, there was a darn good reason and
you've obviously pointed to a number of them.

Thanks very much for this.




"EADGBE" <hwbosshoss@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1115601690.935809.55170@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I use a Mac running Digital Performer for one reason: I absolutely LOVE
> the MOTU 828 interface. It matches the way I work. I'm one of those
> "weird" guys who loves to record with a software-based system and does
> use plug-ins on a regular basis...BUT...I also am just "old school"
> enough to have a bunch of vintage hardware signal processors that I
> like to use, and the MOTU interface I have is not only a great A/D
> converter and a fairly decent mic preamp, but it also acts as an
> excellent signal router and "virtual patchbay" for all of my outboard
> gear. I have all of my vintage hardware patched to it, and everything
> works flawlessly.
>
> Before I bought my recording rig, I went back and forth, wondering if I
> wanted to go with ProTools or Digital Performer. The ability to patch
> in vintage outboard gear was the real sticking point with me. I
> actually had the opportunity to talk to a DigiDesign consultant. I
> asked him, "Once and for all, CAN I USE MY VINTAGE HARDWARE WITH
> PROTOOLS?" He squinted and said, with great hesitation,
> well...yeah...sort of." That did it. I knew that ProTools couldn't
> easily give me what MOTU could. MOTU seemed to have designed the 828
> interface specifically for folks like me who don't want to live in
> "plug-in land" all the time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not downing
> ProTools...it's a great system, and is the industry standard. But for
> the way *I* work, DP is the one, and in my opinion, based on how I
> work, the MOTU 828 beats the Digi 002, hands down, no contest.
>
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 12:12:57 PM

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

"EADGBE" <hwbosshoss@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Before I bought my recording rig, I went back and forth, wondering if
> I wanted to go with ProTools or Digital Performer. The ability to
> patch in vintage outboard gear was the real sticking point with me. I
> actually had the opportunity to talk to a DigiDesign consultant. I
> asked him, "Once and for all, CAN I USE MY VINTAGE HARDWARE WITH
> PROTOOLS?" He squinted and said, with great hesitation,
> well...yeah...sort of." That did it. I knew that ProTools couldn't
> easily give me what MOTU could.

Is it possible your consultant didn't understand the question? The
reason I ask is that the correct answer is "Yeah, no problem. Wanna see
how easy it is?" It's actually stupid simple to use outboard with Pro
Tools. Total no-brainer. We used to do it all the time.



> in my opinion, based on how I work, the MOTU 828 beats the Digi 002,
> hands down, no contest.

I obviously have no problem with your opinion, but I'm wondering why you
feel so strongly about it? They look roughly equivalent to me. There
are a couple really minor feature differences, but nothing significant.
What's the big deal maker/breaker for you?

--
"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
May 9, 2005 1:01:59 PM

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

I find vegas great for tracking, very light on the CPU, i can take in 8
tracks at once, take in 8 whilst playing back those 8, and again and
again.....My Cubase starts to fry when i do that, usually cos I'm
always trying to mix at the same time. I just can't do any mixing in
vegas, I don't like the EQ and hate having to clog up CPU by using an
EQ insert on every channel. I also agree the cutting and pasting just
isn't very good. When I split tracks up it shifts them all over the
place, I can't get good enough auto aligning for loops, Cubase is just
too easy when it comes to cutting up tracks, splitting, copying,
looping etc etc....

Geoff Wood wrote:
> "Lorin David Schultz" <Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote in message
> news:W_Efe.96389$3V3.54977@edtnps89...
> >
> > "Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote:
> >>
> >> WHAT ?!!! You must be doing it wrong , maybe trying to emulate
some
> >> PT way of doing things (?). Vegas follows the standard windows
> >> paradijm of copy/cut/paste together with the standard with
Shift/Ctrl
> >> functionality. Couldn't be quicker or easier.
> >
> >
> > It's been a while since I used Vegas, but my impression at the time
was
> > that it was better at emulating a tape machine than being an
editor. It
> > felt kinda clumsy. Maybe later versions are better.
>
> Always been pretty much the same. The quickest, most efficient and
> intuitive workflow of any audio (or video) app.
>
> geoff
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 8:55:13 PM

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

"Adam" <root@localhost> wrote in message
news:117t4vmes3ce3ce@corp.supernews.com...
> Vegas is fantastic for video, but its audio editing functionality leaves a
> lot to be desired. If you do any cut 'n' paste, you will be soon
> frustrated by Vegas.


WHAT ?!!! You must be doing it wrong , maybe trying to emulate some PT way
of doing things (?). Vegas follows the standard windows paradijm of
copy/cut/paste together with the standard with Shift/Ctrl functionality.
Couldn't be quicker or easier.

geoff
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 8:55:14 PM

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

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote:
>
> WHAT ?!!! You must be doing it wrong , maybe trying to emulate some
> PT way of doing things (?). Vegas follows the standard windows
> paradijm of copy/cut/paste together with the standard with Shift/Ctrl
> functionality. Couldn't be quicker or easier.


It's been a while since I used Vegas, but my impression at the time was
that it was better at emulating a tape machine than being an editor. It
felt kinda clumsy. Maybe later versions are better.

--
"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
May 10, 2005 3:09:00 AM

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

"Lorin David Schultz" <Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote in message
news:W_Efe.96389$3V3.54977@edtnps89...
>
> "Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>> WHAT ?!!! You must be doing it wrong , maybe trying to emulate some
>> PT way of doing things (?). Vegas follows the standard windows
>> paradijm of copy/cut/paste together with the standard with Shift/Ctrl
>> functionality. Couldn't be quicker or easier.
>
>
> It's been a while since I used Vegas, but my impression at the time was
> that it was better at emulating a tape machine than being an editor. It
> felt kinda clumsy. Maybe later versions are better.

Always been pretty much the same. The quickest, most efficient and
intuitive workflow of any audio (or video) app.

geoff
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 12:28:09 PM

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

"StraightEight" <straighteight@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115651998.778546.126140@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>I find vegas great for tracking, very light on the CPU, i can take in 8
> tracks at once, take in 8 whilst playing back those 8, and again and
> again.....My Cubase starts to fry when i do that, usually cos I'm
> always trying to mix at the same time.


Jeepers, I have no trouble recording 20 while playing back30+ on a 1G
Celeron

>I just can't do any mixing in vegas,

Why not ?

>I don't like the EQ and hate having to clog up CPU by using an
> EQ insert on every channel.

What makes you think you have to have an EQ on each channel ?

>I also agree the cutting and pasting just
> isn't very good. When I split tracks up it shifts them all over the
> place,

Only circumstance where splitting track will move something is if you
inadvertently drag it. Or is you split and delete a section with 'Auto
Ripple' tirned on. Cutting and pasting could not be easier.

>I can't get good enough auto aligning for loops, Cubase is just
> too easy when it comes to cutting up tracks, splitting, copying,
> looping etc etc....

Try turning off 'snapping'.

geoff
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 5:39:29 PM

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

On Mon, 9 May 2005 16:55:13 +1200, Geoff Wood <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz>
wrote:

>
> "Adam" <root@localhost> wrote in message
> news:117t4vmes3ce3ce@corp.supernews.com...
>> Vegas is fantastic for video, but its audio editing functionality
>> leaves a
>> lot to be desired. If you do any cut 'n' paste, you will be soon
>> frustrated by Vegas.
>
>
> WHAT ?!!! You must be doing it wrong , maybe trying to emulate some PT
> way
> of doing things (?). Vegas follows the standard windows paradijm of
> copy/cut/paste together with the standard with Shift/Ctrl functionality.
> Couldn't be quicker or easier.
>
> geoff
>
>

Vegas appears to be intended to be used in conjunction with another audio
editor like Soundforge for detailed editing and processing. Adobe Audition
is a little like Vegas and Soundforge rolled into one (without the video).
That's the thing about many audio applications - they tend to be either
good at multitrack or at detailed editing but not both. Audition is about
the only one that does both.

Cheers.

James.
Anonymous
May 11, 2005 4:02:29 AM

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

In article <opsqj733bo8tjbad@news.nerc.ac.uk>, "James Perrett"
<James.Perrett@soc.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> On Mon, 9 May 2005 16:55:13 +1200, Geoff Wood <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Adam" <root@localhost> wrote in message
> > news:117t4vmes3ce3ce@corp.supernews.com...
> >> Vegas is fantastic for video, but its audio editing functionality
> >> leaves a
> >> lot to be desired. If you do any cut 'n' paste, you will be soon
> >> frustrated by Vegas.
> >
> >
> > WHAT ?!!! You must be doing it wrong , maybe trying to emulate some
> > PT
> > way
> > of doing things (?). Vegas follows the standard windows paradijm of
> > copy/cut/paste together with the standard with Shift/Ctrl
> > functionality.
> > Couldn't be quicker or easier.
> >
> > geoff
> >
> >
>
> Vegas appears to be intended to be used in conjunction with another audio
>
> editor like Soundforge for detailed editing and processing. Adobe
> Audition
> is a little like Vegas and Soundforge rolled into one (without the
> video).
> That's the thing about many audio applications - they tend to be either
> good at multitrack or at detailed editing but not both. Audition is about
>
> the only one that does both.
>
> Cheers.
>
> James

Vegas is pretty weak in the midi department compared to DP or Cubase or
Logic. DP feels the most elegant and it is the reason I would buy a Mac.
I love the clippings feature. Live and Acid are the way to go for loop
and audio sequencing-based material.

jf
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 2:44:48 AM

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

"jackfish" <jackfish@north.org> wrote in message news:jackfish-
>
> Vegas is pretty weak in the midi department compared to DP or Cubase or
> Logic. DP feels the most elegant and it is the reason I would buy a Mac.
> I love the clippings feature. Live and Acid are the way to go for loop
> and audio sequencing-based material.

Weak ? Vegas doesn't do MIDI at all. It is a multitrack audio and Video
NLE. If you need MIDI beyonmnd including a rendered MIDI audio file, then
Vegas isn't for you.

geoff
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 3:29:56 AM

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

In article <4281e21f$1@clear.net.nz>, "Geoff Wood"
<geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote:

>
> "jackfish" <jackfish@north.org> wrote in message news:jackfish-
> >
> > Vegas is pretty weak in the midi department compared to DP or Cubase or
> > Logic. DP feels the most elegant and it is the reason I would buy a
> > Mac.
> > I love the clippings feature. Live and Acid are the way to go for loop
> > and audio sequencing-based material.
>
> Weak ? Vegas doesn't do MIDI at all. It is a multitrack audio and
> Video
> NLE. If you need MIDI beyonmnd including a rendered MIDI audio file,
> then
> Vegas isn't for you.
>
> geoff


The newest version does.
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 2:45:36 AM

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

"jackfish" <jackfish@north.org> wrote in message news:jackfish-

>> Weak ? Vegas doesn't do MIDI at all. It is a multitrack audio and
>> Video
>> NLE. If you need MIDI beyonmnd including a rendered MIDI audio file,
>> then
>> Vegas isn't for you.
>>
>> geoff
>
>
> The newest version does.

Please elaborate. I can't find it in my Vegas 6.

Unless you are talking about MIDI synch or transport copntrol. The context
we are talking here is recording or playback or recpording of MDI files.

geoff
!