You are here

Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

All about the tools and techniques involved in capturing sound, in the studio or on location.

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby EnlightenedHand » Wed May 07, 2008 12:38 pm

It's really astonishing to me how many people are still advocating one sequencer over another for what I consider less than practical reasons. Pro Tools is fine for most audio tracking, mixing and even for MIDI these days. Nuendo/Cubase are also, so is Logic and so is Samplitude and Pyramix and perhaps a few others as well.

As has been stated many times before by many different sources these days any of the major sequencing platforms can get the job done. Pro Tools is a useful one to learn because many studios use it so it makes it easy to work with them and open projects with them. Other than that it's a matter of preference, not quality really. With computers like the Mac Pro there's not much argument against native systems anymore either.

Liz
EnlightenedHand
Frequent Poster
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:00 am
Location: United States

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby chris... » Wed May 07, 2008 1:17 pm

narcoman wrote:recording large ensembles or acts or live performance or religious broadcasts


Ah, so PT is good for religious broadcasts then.

I'll stick to Cubase and Logic.
User avatar
chris...
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2723
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 1:00 am
Location: Sunny Glasgow

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby desmond » Wed May 07, 2008 1:54 pm

By definition, ProTools cannot be "pro" because it has the word "pro" in it's name.

The same is true for Logic Pro. And Sonar Producer. And MOTU Proformer, Steinberg Proendo and Probase, Samprotude, Sequoproia, and many others.

The only one obviously not even slightly Pro is Ableton Live. Which means of all the un-pro DAWs, Live is the only one non-pro enough to be actually Pro.

desmondo (pro)
User avatar
desmond
Jedi Poster
Posts: 8650
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:00 am

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby narcoman » Wed May 07, 2008 1:58 pm

Chris Edwards wrote:
narcoman wrote:recording large ensembles or acts or live performance or religious broadcasts


Ah, so PT is good for religious broadcasts then.

I'll stick to Cubase and Logic.


you laugh at your own peril (:D). that industry is worth tens of billions of dollars a year.

no worries - you do know that Religious broadcasting is where the biggest money is? SSL and Neve sell more consoles into this arena than anywhere else. Lots of work here, well paid and it wont go away!...I'd go so far to say as its the biggest single area....FAR bigger than the movie industry and the straight ahead rock n pop industry.
narcoman
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3439
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am
Battenburg to the power of 20 - said by Richie Royale in a moment of genius. 4pm. Wed 16th Nov 2011. Remember where you were....

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby chris... » Wed May 07, 2008 2:29 pm

narcoman wrote: you do know that Religious broadcasting is where the biggest money is?


I feared it might be ;)
User avatar
chris...
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2723
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 1:00 am
Location: Sunny Glasgow

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby Bossman » Wed May 07, 2008 2:31 pm

EnlightenedHand wrote:Pro Tools is a useful one to learn because many studios use it

I think thats the main reason why Pro Tools is so popular in bigger/pro studios... Because its industry standard!

As has been said, if your working on your own (or with other people that use the same software) then it really doesn't matter which software you use... they all produce good results!

the fact that Pro Tools is used in the big studios means that anyone wanting to work in said studio will have to learn and work with Pro Tools.

If you want to start work in one studio and then transfer your project to another studio, then this is made easy if both studios use the same software.. The studios choose Pro Tools because it allready is the standard and the other big studios are using it, not becuase it is better!

I think the reason it became the standard was because it was the first software capable of recording audio (before Cubase and Logic anyway, can't remember what other software was available at the time!).. People started using Pro Tools for digital audio way back when Cubase and Logic were MIDI only. And it took a long time for Cubase and Logic to catch up with the audio processing capabilities of PT. Also, the DSP cards helped make it possible to process digital audio when native processing was a bit slow.

Also the word "Pro" in the name may have had something to do with it ;)
User avatar
Bossman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 12:00 am
Location: UK

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby desmond » Wed May 07, 2008 2:44 pm

Bossman wrote:I think the reason it became the standard was because it was the first software capable of recording audio (before Cubase and Logic anyway, can't remember what other software was available at the time!).. People started using Pro Tools for digital audio way back when Cubase and Logic were MIDI only.

Well, it was "Sound Tools" and 2-track only back in those days - basically, a simple wave editor.

And, though it was never released, a litle known fact is that the developers were playing with putting digital audio functionality in Creator/Notator on the Atari, well before Logic and Logic Audio.

It was never released, because the hardware really wasn't up to spec, but if you have an old copy of Creator/Notator 3 lying around, take a nose around with a resource editor to find the hard disk recording screens...

(Yes, I have an inquisitive nature...)
User avatar
desmond
Jedi Poster
Posts: 8650
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:00 am

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby Jack Ruston » Wed May 07, 2008 3:08 pm

The reason Pro Tools is so popular is because it's MUCH MUCH better than everything else and all of you who are fiddling around with other things don't stand a chance and are doomed. Utterly.











:)

Normally I wouldn't bother with the smiley because it's obvious that I'm not being entirely serious (not entirely anyway) but people get so fired up about their DAW's that it's probably a good idea!
Jack Ruston
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3731
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby Bossman » Wed May 07, 2008 4:44 pm

:round1:
User avatar
Bossman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 12:00 am
Location: UK

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby Tomás Mulcahy » Wed May 07, 2008 6:00 pm

Ya, feck it, who cares what it's called? It's just a tool. Something better will come along. In the meantime, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Native is very good these days, but it's only on the cusp of becoming stable. I use PTLE regularly, and Logic, and sometimes I want to throw the machine out the window. It gets the job done, sounds great, but compared to a HD system, it's not stable enough. I've yet to have a session interrupted because HD went belly up. Granted, it can be buggy to setup on certain configurations, but once it's set up, it just works. That's far more valuable than features. Sure, native will catch up, but not tomorrow.
User avatar
Tomás Mulcahy
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1668
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Cork, Ireland.
madtheory creations
Soundware Shop

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby EnlightenedHand » Wed May 07, 2008 6:32 pm

I suppose that would depend on what type of native setup you had and how you had it configured and operated. I don't think that there's any real disadvantage to a well designed native system at all. Also there are the many opportunities to use dedicated DSP with many third party products such as the UAD, Duende, Powercore, Liquid Mix and the Waves APA.

Combine those devices with today's super powerful computers like the Mac Pro,(which incidentally can get up to 16 cores of processing and 32Gigs of RAM if you ever needed to go that high and certainly the vast majority won't need to), and there's simply no lacking in power or stability with a well configured native set up.

Liz
EnlightenedHand
Frequent Poster
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:00 am
Location: United States

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby Jadoube » Wed May 07, 2008 7:01 pm

desmond wrote:Well, it was "Sound Tools" and 2-track only back in those days - basically, a simple wave editor.

I started out using a product by Hybrid Arts. Two track destructive editing using an Atari Mega something err other. It had Apogee converters and a 360MB SCSI drive as big as a house and as noisy as a drunk guitarist! Damn thing worked great... but eventually we went with Pro-Tools.

Pro-Tools is the standard because it was the first digital audio editor that had a critical combination:

  • Reliable multi (4 or more) track you could do real work with; i.e. post production.
  • Had working sync capabilities; SMPTE, Word Clock, Burst, etc etc
  • hit a price point most of the market could afford
  • ran on a platform with a future; Macintosh


It just worked... when a lot of others were struggling. You'll notice I said nothing about audio quality... :D
User avatar
Jadoube
Regular
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Calgary, Canada
David

Re: Pro Tools..Pro Tools..-why?

Postby Tomás Mulcahy » Wed May 07, 2008 8:12 pm

EnlightenedHand wrote:there's simply no lacking in power or stability with a well configured native set up.
OK. Maybe next week then :)
User avatar
Tomás Mulcahy
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1668
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Cork, Ireland.
madtheory creations
Soundware Shop

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ef37a