Well, Mr Zimmer has been pretty busy, but he too seems to use Nuendo AND Cubase AND Ableton Live AND, well, you get the picture.

Last time I made a major equipment decision, I phoned up someone I know who owns a Soho post-prod house and asked him how he was getting on with the box in question. He has to pay for his stuff, so what he has to say counts.

I do not support or praise any one system. As far as I am concerned, they are all pretty nasty and each and every one of these boxes / packages / whatever has its good points and its bad points. They are a brave attempt to get all the functions of a recording studio into a word processor.

But I do see what people do with these things and what comes out at the other end. I cannot speak for Logic as I only get to see it being used in anger if someone brings it here - which is not often. Soundscape is very, very fast, but it ONLY does audio, no MIDI tracks. Also it (along with most others except Logic and PT - as far as I know) does not do variable MIDI mapping. Also Soundscape is far more stable than any of the others, including PT. Our system has never ever had even a minor glitch. Every other PC-Mac system has failed to be 100% at one time or other.

I like the World of hardware and I do not like to be told by some prat with adenoids that the Auto-Spong function is under the Dweeb section of the Machine-Function / Spong / Configuration / Auto-Dweeb pull-down menu. They then usually like to tell you that it is mentioned on page 1532 of the on-line manual, though you will need to download the new pdf-reader 12.3 with two flash players and a ferret and ftp bulk-load and Spong plug-in to read the damn thing.

And that's the problem. All these boxes waste your time. They all grew out of the enthusiast's market. They all grew out of a home-recording, new-toys, "Ooh, isn't this fun!" market place where time was not money and the user thought it was great to solve interrupt problems.

The ProTools generation only fled to their bedrooms to play with their new ProTools sample editor, to get away from the sound of their fathers going on about Radio Caroline, the Emperor Rosco's real name and how much ballast the Ross-Revenge had to carry to to balance a 100m mast. "You know Son, they were using a vertical bird-cage construction . . ." and whoosh, junior has fled to his bedroom, trembling at the sound of his father, who has now taken off his anorak to sing the Caroline theme tune.

As those first ProTools pops and clicks helped to drown the sound of his father's falsetto, it all seemed such a welcoming noise. But today all these systems betray their amateur origins.

Time for something new . . .

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

I hear you loud and clear. I dont agree with you but I respect your views. I respect your knowledge and experience as it has helped me on numerous ocaisions as well as many other Sound on Soundees!

The fact that Hanz zimmer uses many different apps as well as Nuendo is proving my argument, in a sense.

They're just tools to get the job done.

My only pet hate, when I go to some and not all studio's is when idiot engineers tell me "oh you need pro-tools. Only that will do"

"HUH - - - How can that be. I've just been listening to the Beatles on the way over here. No pro-tools in site"

So I repeat. The pro's do not only use pro-tools. They use tools. And some prefer Nuendo and some prefer Pro-tools. But they both get the job done in the right hands.

Having Nuendo or Pro-tools does not make you a pro. And not having them does not make you un-pro either.

My last words on this and in key with the original post. The price hike by Didgidesign may well lose them their crown. Becasue there are lots of professionals and none pro's who realise you CAN achieve the same results with a different program if you know what you're doing.

Paul

Edited by Paul Blenn (02/03/06 06:31 PM)

I just have to say this:

Pro Tools is for pro tools.

Not because I know, but because it's funny.

While we're on comparisons, have any of you big shots tried out Ardour?

--------------------
Signature (up to 200 characters). You may use UBBCode in your signature

Edited by Paws (02/03/06 09:00 PM)

Paul,

I have never ever seen you whinge before - but it seems that in this particular thread your moaning. I dont know why. I rather suspect that if you had pt you'd be touting how thats the best.

ALL this s/w is practically the same -as you well know. Some have some facilities, others dont. As i mentioned before - i need both. So i use both

You also seem to be talking in this thread as if none of the people here mean anything. I dont get it! Wheres the animosity come from ! There are a few people on this forum whose sales number in the millions mate... so chill and start showing a little bit of respect, like you usually do !!

--------------------
Battenburg to the power of 20 - said by Richie Royale in a moment of genius. 4pm. Wed 16th Nov 2011. Remember where you were....

We are getting into one of those debates so I'll just say this:

Paul I TOTALLY agree with you that there are a lot of pro's who dont use PT and that it is by no means a must for a great result. I dont look down on any studio which doesn't have it and I wholeheartedly look up to those who are still running tape!

We ALL have a problem with digidesign's corporate 'plan' and I for one would love to see the applecart rock a little more. At the moment it isn't for me but thats JUST my opinion.

Respect to Nuendo (and all other native systems) and all who sail in her!


J

i think its time for a group hug...

Quote narcoman:

---

Paul,

I have never ever seen you whinge before - but it seems that in this particular thread your moaning. I dont know why. I rather suspect that if you had pt you'd be touting how thats the best.

ALL this s/w is practically the same -as you well know. Some have some facilities, others dont. As i mentioned before - i need both. So i use both

You also seem to be talking in this thread as if none of the people here mean anything. I dont get it! Wheres the animosity come from ! There are a few people on this forum whose sales number in the millions mate... so chill and start showing a little bit of respect, like you usually do !!

---

Ok ok ok! LEt's chill a second. The problem with the written word is the emotion is missing. I am certainly not whinging. I promise. Frustrated - yes! Why?

Because not once have I knocked pro-tools. Not once have I dissed it at all. Yet a few people I have respect for have been a little less courteous than they need to be. Hence my posts have degraded into frigging frustration.

So forget the "he said this and I said that crap" and I will nail my colours to the mast. This will be my last word for I fear danger of being labled a crank.

I think pro-tools is a wonderful piece of software. Genuinely. But it is NOT the only piece of class out there capable, in the right hands, of class results!

So back in keeping with the original post. Pro-tools' £700 hike may cost them their crown - because a lot of industry accepted professionals are turning to Nuendo. FACT! And others are waking up to the fact the NUENDO can achieve the same results, for less, than Pro-tools. Mine and lot of other peopels opinions.

Now - please understand me. I have no problems with a disagreement on this but please do respect my opinions on this and back up your disagreement with facts. No more of the utter nonsense of "ah but Nuendo cannot track 24 channels and do overdubs and punch ins" when it clearly can - and has been able to since Version 1.0 over 5 years ago!

peace - truly - my word and heart I mean it!

Paul

Edited by Paul Blenn (02/03/06 10:29 PM)

There's no need to feel frustrated Paul - after all, it's still the boy or girl operating the software that makes the difference in the end...

--------------------
Imagination is more important than knowledge - A. Einstein

Quote Andi:

---

For all that I keep hearing about how people love the workflow in Sonar it doesn't often appear to be listed as a professional option? I'm not asking the "which is better " question, I love the idea of Sonar and I'd use it tomorrow, but I really do prefer Cubase, I just wonder why it doesn't get into the "pro list".

A.

---

Sonar can do this stuff too. It can easily record dozens or even hundreds of tracks at the same time. As with Nunedo and Cubase the limitation is the hardware, not the software. (No limitations at all on the software actually. Unlimited record/playback tracks, unlimited sends, unlimited busses etc). It can do realtime or automatic punch ins etc.

As far as routing is concerned, I prefer the implementation of Sonar over Cubase/Nuendo. It has a "Universal Bus Architecture" which means that things are either a track or a bus. If you need an AUX send, just right click on a track or a bus and create a new send to an existing or a new bus (On the fly during playback or recording). If you want a "group track", use a bus. Is you want a bus, use a bus. The distinction used in other apps isn't relevant these days any more.

It has other advantages over both Nuendo/Cubase and ProTools like the waveform preview in busses and instruments. It creates and shows you waveform of the bus with anything above 0 in red. It also shows little flags of the peak level in any track or bus. This makes tracking down overs very quick. This is what it looks like: http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/waveform.htm

As far as as recording stems is concerned, just create a bus and bounce down faster than real-time. (Faster than realtime bouncing is one area where PT can't compete due to the TDM architecture).
Some things in ProTools and Logic are better than Nuendo/Cubase and Sonar like the built in side-chaining. There are work-arrounds but this is something that both CakeWalk and Steinberg need to address.

PT is much better than Sonar for audio post-production and working to film. On the other hand Sonar is fully 64 bit audio and is a much better composition tool.

So each have advantages and disadvantages. Why is Sonar mentioned so rarely? History I guess. Personaly I think it beats anything else in its price class. But that is just my opinion.

UnderTow

OK, just to lob a megaton hand grenade into the works, I have just, for fun, tried doing real time punch ins in Logic. I last tried this (gave up on it, to be honest) in about version 5.

Suffice to say that in 7.1 it works fine, every time.

Next!!!

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Thanks Undertow

I have used Sonar and was hugely impressed by the flexibility of its busses. Jury seems to be out on the real benefit of the 64 bit architecture but it has to to be the way to go; unfortunately I just don't like the product as much as I do Cubase. According to the ads, Cakewalk / Sonar is THE best selling DAW software in the USA, which is why I'm puzzled that it is so often treated as a poor cousin in the "pro" discussions. If you look at the music tech school ads in SOS it's nearly all PT, Logic, Nuendo (and so by inference Cubase) but rarely Sonar. I have Logic (PC version and I do mourn the passing of that one), SX and have used a time limited full function eval version of Sonar, and they are all, against my very limited requirements, excellent.

Perhaps in the Pro world it'snot cool to use something from a company that has a good reputation for customer care?

Thanks


A.

--------------------
Andi, www.thedustbowl.net Mixing, Mastering, Audio Editing at The Dustbowl Audio

Quote Andi:

---

Thanks Undertow

I have used Sonar and was hugely impressed by the flexibility of its busses. Jury seems to be out on the real benefit of the 64 bit architecture but it has to to be the way to go; unfortunately I just don't like the product as much as I do Cubase. According to the ads, Cakewalk / Sonar is THE best selling DAW software in the USA, which is why I'm puzzled that it is so often treated as a poor cousin in the "pro" discussions. If you look at the music tech school ads in SOS it's nearly all PT, Logic, Nuendo (and so by inference Cubase) but rarely Sonar. I have Logic (PC version and I do mourn the passing of that one), SX and have used a time limited full function eval version of Sonar, and they are all, against my very limited requirements, excellent.

---

Well to be honest, even though the audio engine and routing is excellent, there are reasons why it isn't considered pro: It doesn't generate SMPTE timecode. It doesn't have serial 9 pin remote control. CakeWalk havn't partnerd with a high-end control surface or audio interface manufacturer. That type of thing.

Quote:

---

Perhaps in the Pro world it'snot cool to use something from a company that has a good reputation for customer care?

---

LOL. Indeed. CakeWalk have the right attitude. If they would really decide to try and tackle the high-end market, I'm quite sure they could. But they need to add all the bells and whistles first. Maybe they will and have been concentrating on getting the audio engine right first. I don't know ...

UnderTow

I think Digital Performer is also with PT and Nuendo one of the best tools..the guy who owns this outboard gear tracks with dp for example

Youch! That's a VERY pretty & expensive wall.
I've got all that in my "word processor"...

Paul B.

Sorry mate. I was in a mood. just had one of those stupid phonecalls preciselyt in the direction i described - y'know. Made to feel like we dont know [ ****** ]. Took it out on ya

sorry.

--------------------
Battenburg to the power of 20 - said by Richie Royale in a moment of genius. 4pm. Wed 16th Nov 2011. Remember where you were....

Quote Paul Blenn:

---

Because not once have I knocked pro-tools. Not once have I dissed it at all. Yet a few people I have respect for have been a little less courteous than they need to be. Hence my posts have degraded into frigging frustration.

I think pro-tools is a wonderful piece of software. Genuinely. But it is NOT the only piece of class out there capable, in the right hands, of class results!

So back in keeping with the original post. Pro-tools' £700 hike may cost them their crown - because a lot of industry accepted professionals are turning to Nuendo. FACT! And others are waking up to the fact the NUENDO can achieve the same results, for less, than Pro-tools. Mine and lot of other peopels opinions.

Paul

---

Paul, the trouble with all this, is that after checking your website, it's apparent that on a regular basis, you don't have (and probably never have had) experience of a recording situation in which ProTools excels.

You probably never record more than a couple of channels at a time, so the audio on top bug which has plagued Nuendo & Cubase for years won't be too much of an issue for you will it?

Sorry for being a bit harsh on you here, but you've set yourself up for it. If you'd ever had much experience of recording anything with 10 or more tracks at once, then you'd understand one of the great strengths of ProTools - and the real reason it's in all the big studios.

The routing and side chain shortcomings of Nuendo are a big mixing issue. Yes there are ways around them (I know, I've also mixed several albums in SX) but it's limiting. Again, as you probably use lots of pre-recorded loops it's probably not much of an issue to you. However, plenty of your big name users have complained about them on the Nuendo forums.

However, not only are you preaching from high about something you have little or no experience of, but you have the gual to put Digidesign down on price issues! This comes from someone who has spent £1200 on Nuendo. You've spent £800 more than the cost of SX, for a few additional timecode & sync options that are pretty much only applicable in the post world! You certainly have no use for them!
Well maybe you really do need those couple of extra crossfade curves.......

I'll get off my pulpit now!

Quote narcoman:

---

Paul B.

Sorry mate. I was in a mood. just had one of those stupid phonecalls preciselyt in the direction i described - y'know. Made to feel like we dont know [ ****** ]. Took it out on ya

sorry.

---

Thank you Narcoman. Very big of you to say so. I would graciously accept but I dont think it's neccesary for you to apologise.

Again though - thank you!

Paul

Quote Vinylizor:

---

Paul, the trouble with all this, is that after checking your website, it's apparent that on a regular basis, you don't have (and probably never have had) experience of a recording situation in which ProTools excels.

You probably never record more than a couple of channels at a time, so the audio on top bug which has plagued Nuendo & Cubase for years won't be too much of an issue for you will it?

Sorry for being a bit harsh on you here, but you've set yourself up for it. If you'd ever had much experience of recording anything with 10 or more tracks at once, then you'd understand one of the great strengths of ProTools - and the real reason it's in all the big studios.

The routing and side chain shortcomings of Nuendo are a big mixing issue. Yes there are ways around them (I know, I've also mixed several albums in SX) but it's limiting. Again, as you probably use lots of pre-recorded loops it's probably not much of an issue to you. However, plenty of your big name users have complained about them on the Nuendo forums.

However, not only are you preaching from high about something you have little or no experience of, but you have the gual to put Digidesign down on price issues! This comes from someone who has spent £1200 on Nuendo. You've spent £800 more than the cost of SX, for a few additional timecode & sync options that are pretty much only applicable in the post world! You certainly have no use for them!
Well maybe you really do need those couple of extra crossfade curves.......

I'll get off my pulpit now!

---

WOW!!!!! You gleaned all this just from my website? You can tell my entire recording career, succes and failures, my experiences and skills and lack of them just from my home studio setup? Jesus even Sherlock Holmes would have nothing on you - accept to maybe get it right!

Vinylizor - I take no great offence at your generalisation but it's way off the mark.It's also very very arrogant to presume all that by website. Maybe you should introduce yourself here and let us all know exactly why it is you know all this. Incidentally all the big studio's do have pro-tools. I agree. But alot also have a studer 24 track 2" (or similar) some have radar as well and some use Nuendo. These are just tools - like multiple microphones. Pro-tools is NOT the only software to get the job done.

Firstly I am not a sound engineer I am a producer but I can engineer. No Steve Albini or Bob Clearmountain but still get good results. My recording experiences are very extensive, as mainly as an artist and later a producer and basic engineer. I have been in a few situations where Pro-tools, 24 track 2" machines and Nuendo rigs have all been employed as well as smaller studios using Cakewalk and logic setups as well.

I set my home studio setup to do my production work. Not to be a commerical studio. Although I sometimes hire it out as such for extra pennies. We all know the massive costs a large studio charges by the hour and plenty of that work can be done at home far cheaper other than live drums, orchestral or anything else needing large tracks counts or quality rooms.

I will not drop names cause that's just a crass thing to do but the last album I produced, and engineered extensively, was for a brand new singer songwriter who has just been offered a deal by Polydor and they're going with the album I recorded and produced. (all on Nuendo I may add - including live srums, more than 10 tracks at any one time - different studio but still Nuendo)

In the past when working in other studio's I have either used their pro-tools setup or hired in a engineer who has knowledge of it. I have seen that programme fall over on a few occaisions. Tape machines I love but are far too costly to buy, run and maintain so I went down the Nuendo route after seeing it in operation and work perfectly. (days before full PDC)

So I have been with Nuendo since pretty much very early on. Version 1.5 etc. I am well aware of it's shortcomings. And I have adopted my workrounds to suit. I still get to toy with Pro-Tools from time time and as I have said in my earlier posts, if you did read them all, is that's it's an excellent programme. However - and I restate my case - it is utter bollocks to beleive that it is the ONLY programme that can record multiple tracks simultaneaously and be able to do simple things such as punching in and out etc. NONESENSE.

Let me state this - do not judge me or Nuendo by my home setup. I have often been asked to produce acts at other studio's. Two of them I use regularly use Nuendo and SX. Never ever has this programme ever given me, their house engineer, or anyone else who has recorded there any grief resembling anything what has been proclaimed here. Nuendo can and does compete with Pro-tools in my studio, local studios and studio's all around the world.

So Vinylizor tell me which of those big names I mentioned who use Nuendo have complained on the Nuendo forum, or elsewhere, with regards to it's routing and audio on top bug?

How the hell do you know what my experiences are? What gives you the right to come and give anyone a hard time based solely on the home setup? Man how arrogant are you? And how can you proclaim all those big names I put on the list are must be wrong as well as little ole me?

Unbelievable!


Paul



Edited by Paul Blenn (04/03/06 11:30 AM)

Quote Vinylizor:

---

If you'd ever had much experience of recording anything with 10 or more tracks at once, then you'd understand one of the great strengths of ProTools - and the real reason it's in all the big studios.

---

It's probably in most, but by no means all "big" studios, however defined.

If you really believe it's the only way to record over 10 tracks, you need to get out more. I regularly run 20-plus in Logic and I'm sure I could do 50 if I wanted to, I've just never needed to. (I said in a post above I know of someone who regularly does 72 in orchestral work, using the same i/o - Motu - as I do).

By all means defend PT - it's a good product (if stupidly expensive for what it is). But don't invent facts to support your theory. Pretty well any properly set-up DAW package will track 24 plus without groaning these days.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

I dont know how you guys feel but I think we've sunk into a circular debate now.

We've all made decisions about what we want to use at work, and we all have our arguements and reasons, even if sometimes they might be mis-informed. Frankly 'because I feel like it' is as good a reason as any for choosing the tools you use.

I think the only remaining direction for this thread is that of personal attacks and misunderstandings.

It's been interesting and informative but maybe we should let it die now...??

J

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Quote Vinylizor:

---

If you'd ever had much experience of recording anything with 10 or more tracks at once, then you'd understand one of the great strengths of ProTools - and the real reason it's in all the big studios.

---

It's probably in most, but by no means all "big" studios, however defined.

If you really believe it's the only way to record over 10 tracks, you need to get out more. I regularly run 20-plus in Logic and I'm sure I could do 50 if I wanted to, I've just never needed to. (I said in a post above I know of someone who regularly does 72 in orchestral work, using the same i/o - Motu - as I do).

By all means defend PT - it's a good product (if stupidly expensive for what it is). But don't invent facts to support your theory. Pretty well any properly set-up DAW package will track 24 plus without groaning these days.

---

This little film should settle things: http://www.euphonix.com/video/system_5-mc_mc_profiles/john_ross_20.htm

UnderTow

Strangely enough I think these discussions ARE actually useful. The problem being of course that people are sometimes prejeduce in favour of their tool or against another without any meaningful perspective or real attempt to be objective.

I am a professional songwriter and programmer and producer, (yeah I know that means f-all) what it does mean is that I spend all day sat in front of a computer trying to make money and I often work on other systems. Which gives me a great perspective. I think.

Cubase and Nuendo are both incredible creative tools. In my experience they are stable powerful well designed bits of software. I prefer to use either of them for workflow and intuitive design. I dont know anyone who regularly uses Logic AND other tools that thinks Logic should actually be called Logic. In fact in one studio an old operator that no longer works there took a CD pen to the box and add IL to the letters on the box! It still sits on the shelf in the machine room!

Neither Pro Tools, or Logic can hold a candle to the design of Nuendo or Cubase in my view. But Steinberg cant hold a candle to the intergration, support and reputation of Digidesign, and in fact seem 100% intent on never doing so. Seriously the worst service and attitude towards their customers EVER. Compare their levels of open ness and communication to a company like Sydec (Soundscape) and its totally laughable.

In fact if there are any lasting negative perceptions towards Nuendo or Cubase particularly for being "less than pro" in camps where the tools hasnt actually been seen on use, I think you can place the blame squarely at Steinberg's door. Yeah you can drop in 24 tracks no problems, you can record substantially more than that at any one time and a Nuendo rig costing half as much as a TDM system can offer more tracking and DSP power. If you know what you are doing in terms of hardware config. BUT in the past its been common knowledge that the software has had fundemental problems and the users have been left hanging for quite a period suffering these problems. For instance, the current version suffers from a waveform redraw problem that means that the visual representation of the digital audio gets screwed up for quite a few users when the program is playing back. Meaning you have to press stop and you cant edit in playback up close. In the past we have had problems with clicks in crossfades and I beleive there was something regarding drops and the resulting lengths of the recording audio?...Go to the Nuendo website and check out some of the outstanding issues if you like. Steinberg seems fairly intent on its half hearted attitude towards updates (the last one was 6 months ago?). The prevailing attitude in the forum in question is worse than poor. Its assumed that any critisism of the product and the company will damage its reputation. Damage it more that the list of outstanding problems and the fact the users have to wait so long to get them fixed. Steinberg claim that support is adequate, but of course whats the point of the answer "....oh yes, thats a known issue". I'm afraid that the prevailing reputation of Steinbug rings too true. And only they can do something about it.

Of course we all know that software has bugs. But Pro Tools at least has an extremely strong position and only a product and company that is obviously better can approach that. Yeah, I prefer to use Nuendo, than to use Pro Tools, but that means nothing if I HAVE to use P.T if you get my meaning.

Pro Tools has a seemingly unattainable market position. And it has it for a reason. It may not be the best software for MAKING music from fresh, but if you buy it you are less likely to encounter compatibility issues, you are less likely to suffer machine issues, and its more of completely intergrated tool. I'd like to see more competition in this market, but hey...as above!...

On last note, I dont beleive that all those people use Nuendo exclusively. But its a good tool, there is no reason why you shouldnt record massive track counts and use loads of DSP. But its far more likely that Steinberg will release a version with a shitty bug and then leave you swinging with it for ages. We all know that, the industry knows it, my studio neighbour knows it, and thats why he bought PT.

--------------------
Musician / Writer / Programmer / Producer

Must confess that I don't quite get why people keep popping at Paul when all he has said at any point in this thread is that PT isn't the ONLY option. Why is there such a strength of feeling on the issue that a simple statement of fact and a clearly flagged statement of personal preference warrant vitriol?

--------------------
Andi, www.thedustbowl.net Mixing, Mastering, Audio Editing at The Dustbowl Audio

i think its because Paul has gone Nuendo-crazy that people are reacting the way they are. i thought Ihad stumbled into a Steinberg (or whoever owns them now) motivational marketing workshop for a second.

Isn't Nuendo just Cubase but 'repackaged' (i.e. £1000 added to the RRP) to 'appeal' to 'professionals'?

Quote Andi:

---

Must confess that I don't quite get why people keep popping at Paul when all he has said at any point in this thread is that PT isn't the ONLY option. Why is there such a strength of feeling on the issue that a simple statement of fact and a clearly flagged statement of personal preference warrant vitriol?

---

Thank you Andi. The support is appreciated.

Paul Blenn

Edited by Paul Blenn (05/03/06 01:09 PM)

Quote Gelled_Fringe:

---

i think its because Paul has gone Nuendo-crazy that people are reacting the way they are. i thought Ihad stumbled into a Steinberg (or whoever owns them now) motivational marketing workshop for a second.

Isn't Nuendo just Cubase but 'repackaged' (i.e. £1000 added to the RRP) to 'appeal' to 'professionals'?

---

Not so.

Firstly all I said to the original post and poster was "You can get Nuendo for £1200. And as there are plenty of very succesful pro's ditching pro -tools in favour of Nuendo. Maybe it's the beginning of the end for a very succesful and excellent but ageing product."

Then the anti Nuendo [ ****** ] started. I am not Nuendo crazy at all. It's just a product I chose to use. I knwo it's downfalls and I am ashamed of the Steinberg support mechanism. I am totally with Jake on this. However my frustration came with a)people who think olny pro-tools will do. and b) The lies about Nuendo.

Has anyone saw that film anger management? Where the guy is falsely accused of going nuts and it spirals into that person eventually going nuts and then they "go see - look for yourself". That's what I feel like in this thread.

Years I have contributed and benefited from this forum and never once ave I ever lost a professional grip and became a troll.

Please before anyone else accuse me of "nuendo crazy" or "you have asked for this" re-read the entire thread and see for yourselves how a honest comment spiralled into personnal chaos.

Paul

p.s. I stand by my priginal claim that PRO-TOOLS IS NOT the only software needed to achieve a professional job. It's always the person who operates it as being the most paramount ingredient. But Cakewalk, Sonor, Logic, Cubase, Nuendo, DP etc will all do the job very well indeed!



Edited by Paul Blenn (05/03/06 01:28 PM)

Quote Gelled_Fringe:

---

Isn't Nuendo just Cubase but 'repackaged' (i.e. £1000 added to the RRP) to 'appeal' to 'professionals'?

---

No. Nuendo has more post -production features such as Video import for film scoring etc.

Import and export of AAF (Advanced Authoring Format) integrates the most modern project interchange format which is currently supported by companies such as AVID, Apple, Digidesign, SADiE, Merging, Fairlight and Adobe and Steinberg.

The new Warp to Picture allows for quick matching of audio to picture, including tasks such as fine tuning dialog replacement or aligning music to picture, the new real-time audio stretch algorithm gets the job done quickly and easily.

Integration of Pinnacle Liquid video editing technology is guaranteed by implementation of the X-Send project import from Liquid video editing applications.

Nuendo 3 does not only introduce new features but also continues to improve existing functionality. The RS-422 control (9-Pin) has been further improved to cope with the huge variety of machines used in the market. New import and export options have been added to OMF, AES-31 and OpenTL. Also the Nuendo timeline has been extended to be able to handle projects longer than 22 hours that cross the 24-hour mark.

And more. But, for most, Cubase SX will do perfectly.

http://www.mi-7.net/gfx/items/pdf/Nuendo_Exclusive_Features.pdf

Paul

Edited by Paul Blenn (05/03/06 01:27 PM)

I think this one really has done the rounds for long enough now.

DAW preferences are much the same as religious beliefs. Same unshakable faiths based on ancient history, (regardless of the true modern facts). Same utter belief in there being only one 'best system' -- and it's always the one they use! Funny that!

In fact, the differences between current generations of DAWs are relatively small and mostly come down to ergonomics and working preferences rather than technical capability or inherent stability.

Systems based on separate DSP cards still have a slight performance edge over native systems, but that gap closes with every new generation of processor (PC or Mac), and native systems coupled with separate effects DSP cards are virtually as powerful.

The Pro Tools system has been around a very long time and so has an enormous user base. At one time (a long time ago) there wasn't much around that could match its capabilities but things have changed dramatically, and PT has lots of extremely strong competition. IMHO much of it is actually rather better than PT, but that's just my opinion...

The real argument is that markets that were once dominated with Pro Tools systems now have a far more varied collection of machines: Fairlight, Pyramix, SADiE, Logic, Nuendo, Cubase, and many, many more. And that's across all aspects of the industry, not just recording studios. Broadcast, location recording, TV post, film post, music production, mastering...

People are buying more intelligently these days, looking for more than just a familiar name. File exchange, workflows, integration between audio and MIDI, working with picture, cost-effectiveness of plug-ins, flexibility of I/O systems, support, user-interface, familiarity to freelancers, cost, and so on are all important considerations in different environments, and different machines are more suited than others to specific requirements.

So rather than arguing about which is best, let's just recognise that they all have slightly different strengths and weaknesses and some systems are slightly better suited to some applications (and user requirements) than others. But the differences really are pretty small. Most projects can be performed on most machines with out any real difficulties given a knowledgeable and experienced user.

I was involved in an industry project to compare the capability of half a dozen leading DAWs to import location material from a similar number of different hard disk recorders and conform and mix the audio to an EDL generated after a video edit. All of the systems were able to do the job perfectly well, and they all did it in roughly the same time frame. There were a few issues with some systems not being able to import certain file types directly, but there were always workarounds.

Let's respect the views of others and recognise the validity of all the leading DAW systems, and stop drawing up utterly pointless battle lines.

hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

I second the view (which has probably been said already, but i only skim-read) that the argument is indeed a horses-for-courses one.

Some people like PT for the native hardware or the editing tools it provides. Personally, i don't find the editing very logical, but if i was ever setting up a studio for someone else, i'd set it up based on Pro Tools.

Then i'd stick a copy of Cubase/Nuendo on there for editing and such.

It all depends what you like really doesn't it? If you like PT, you're going to praise it. Same with any of the others.

Oh God, is this silly discussion still going around in circles?

I was sitting with another studio owner last year and we got to talking about this that and the other and the other included ProTools.

We baoth agreed that our industry would be better off if PT would just go away. But we both agreed on two things:

1. Customers want to use it, especially in post for TV and film.

2. Name one other editing system that can act as a tape recorder, does variable MIDI mapping, includes MIDI files and tracks, zooms in to sample depth, has a wide range of plugins like Sound Replacer and Beat Detective, as well as all the usual stuff like Autotune etc. and allows for quick and easy editing using a mouse.

And there is the problem (well, it's not a problem for DigiDesign!) There just is nothing else out there that covers all tasks.

Yes, Soundscape is far better as an editor, but no variable MIDI mapping and no MIDI tracks. Yes, Logic is better at MIDI, but as a tape recorder, it stumbles badly. Yes, if Radar did mouse-based editing and varaible MIDI mapping, it would be the only pro game in town.

So there you are! We are all waiting for somebody like Soundscape or iZ-Tech to finish building their systems.

Come on, hurry up!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

I made a post that didnt seem to show up, so I'll go again.

Aside from the lack of clarity that comes from extreme personal preference and loyalty however misplaced it could be, I think that threads comparing stuff like this is actually in principle quite useful.
In light of Hughs observations, in which I think he's absolutely right, I think the most pertinant discussion concerns what kind of service people think they are getting from their DAW developers.

As some may know I have strong feelings about the way mine treats its users, but I would welcome a poll into this to find out frankly if they are all just as poor or if there is someway of picking the best service, if all the software does the same thing.

?

Cheers
Jake

--------------------
Musician / Writer / Programmer / Producer

You are right but how can you do an empirical test? I've asked Emagic (Apple's predecessor owners of Logic) for support a few times and they were great - personal emails from the guys who wrote the code! Apple guys seem to need reminding that they now own Logic, then tell you it's not covered by Applecare except at vast premium prices.

But the point is I've never spent enough time with another sequencer to know if their support is better or worse. Anecdotally I hear that people are largely pleased with Digidesign support, and largely displeased with Steinberg. But it's all old wives' tales really.

Although at some level it penetrates my awareness. I don't think anything would now persuade me to buy a Steinberg product and that is solely because of their service and support reputation (I accept the products are good!). With me, at any rate, it would now take Steinberg a generation to build (rebuild?) any goodwill as a serious company.

Conversely my received wisdom about Digi is that one day I might just grit my teeth and buy the bloody thing! Pricing apart, they do seem to be there when their customers need them. And in a commercial studio with clients twiddling their thumbs, you cannot afford less.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Matcher:

---

I think Digital Performer is also with PT and Nuendo one of the best tools..the guy who owns this outboard gear tracks with dp for example

---

I've thrown the Rizla away. This pic works quicker and better.

--------------------
Samplecraze
Stretch That Note

so Byre.
You want it to go away but cant live without it?

bit like a wife.

--------------------
Battenburg to the power of 20 - said by Richie Royale in a moment of genius. 4pm. Wed 16th Nov 2011. Remember where you were....