 |
|
|
 |
No Left Turn
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: San Francisco
|
|
i've used it for recording bands, post-production, sound design... never really for electronic music production cuz it's midi engine eats a big one. summing buss sounds like a monkey's butthole though.
|
|
Dec-01-2005 07:46
|
|
|
 |
 |
Storyteller
Supreme tracneaddict

Registered: Feb 2005
Location: The Netherlands
|
|
|
Dec-01-2005 11:24
|
|
|
 |
 |
Sangel
Junior tranceaddict
Registered: Nov 2005
Location:
|
|
I've heard the difference between a Cubase SX3 track and Pro Tools track and the difference is minimal. I use both because im studying sound engineering and i do feel that its all about preference. If you start with cubase you will love cubase, vise versa.
Only MY opinion.
Sangel
___________________
F*CK CD's, Keep Vinyl Alive
|
|
Dec-01-2005 12:23
|
|
|
 |
 |
Limit
AKA:STEVE QUADRA
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: A State of Trance
|
|
Best thing soemone ever said to me once was
"Protools was 15 years ago almost basically same as it is today and was really only pro way to record music.Editing was easier than in 24 track analog tape machines.
24 analog tapes and machines costed fortunes and so did protools hardware.
I think basic 32 track version with some farm dsp cards did cost something like 20 000$
But it was ONLY way to record music with normal MAC.
So since 1990 most studios sold analog tape machines and turn to digital protools was first only option and after 2000 when you got possibilities to buy Nuendo+UAD dsp cads+Powercore dsp cards+"cheap"killer PC machine it was used by all pro producers and studios so its got so big advantage to be so long the first and only name in business.
But if you really compare things and not go for the brand then there is nothing more to protools than most other DAWs.
One advantage is to studios is that if you run comercially studio its good thing that you have most standard gear what every client and producer can use,and protools is so known program.Also many studios record material and then producer wants to take it another studio for mixing so if most studios use protools its easier to transfer sessions"
and that got me off the hype!!
|
|
Dec-01-2005 22:31
|
|
|
 |
 |
No Left Turn
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: San Francisco
|
|
it's biggest selling point is the hardware/software bundle. so when it comes to recording based projects, it will usually outsell cubase/logic. but yea... nowdays i'm finding myself using cubase for post too and only using pro tools at work.
|
|
Dec-02-2005 00:09
|
|
|
 |
 |
WirelessEyes
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Washinngton D.C
|
|
I own Pro tools and Logic. I used to use PT as my main sequencer, but then switched to Logic for a lot of reasons. Pro tools gets the job done, but its just personnal preference. I am sure you can make a kick ass track in Cubase or Digital Performer and so could anyone else but in Logic or PT.
I personnaly have forgotton about Pro tools. I am sucked into Logic and all the other apps and plug ins etc. Back in PT 6 days, 6 didnt utilize both of my processors. I could only run maybe 12 plug ins and 22 tracks in OSX (w/ Mbox)
When i used the Mbox in Logic, I had dual proccessor support, the g5 processor rocked the house.. a lot more plug ins and tracks - no latency!
Also. I would recomend bailing Digi hardware and going M-powered if you decide to go Pro tools.
|
|
Dec-02-2005 01:39
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:19.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|