|
Post by popmann on Dec 4, 2018 14:19:40 GMT -6
I think YOUR answer should be ProTools and buy an Avid IO, which should solve all your reported problems.
Cubase positives: MCU=WAY better. I wouldn't even USE a controller over one channel with PT. MIDI/VI work= light years better on a number of fronts-I'd call ProTools UNUSABLE for articulation switching VIs. Hardware IO compensation AND PDC is tighter. Actually--you can only speerate that one way--you can have tight PDC without full IO...but, you literally can't have hardware inserts without sample accurate CONSISTENT PDC behind it, as it's all the same compensation engine--if you take a minute to think about it--if your IO is compensated properly, but a plug throws the whole mixer off...is the hardware actually compensated properly? Answer:no.
Avid positives: Session exchange YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR WORKFLOW
Don't jump into a fire because you're afraid someone will push you later. If you've really decided you want a NEW workflow...entertain options. I'm totally happy with the greenest code in Mixbus I've ever used, because it does what I need--it sounds good, and keeps sample accurate recording compensation--even has a built in loopback tester to verify and recalibrate as needed. For MIDI, I've spent equal time in my 30 years in Performer, Logic, and Cubase. Cubase "wins", though, the new articulation mapping in Logic, if they get the glitchiness gone, may change that some. And the Logic Drummer, and (great) auto tempo mapping...on top of killer transparent flextime audio quantization says Apple's "ahead" in digital content creation. They're most likely to make those new Studio Strings and Horns "play along" first...with AI arranging like the Drummer...if you ever wished Band In a Box wasn't a lame sounding crapfest, because that would be cool--Logic's your guy. It will be ready for their multitouch gesture based stuff on Day One of the new AppleOS…
I dunno--I've been less than impressed with the direction of Cubase as of late. I don't AGREE with the direction Apple's going as the audio corksniffer I am...but, I SEE the value...Cubase seems to me to have been SO far ahead they've just sat for a decade implementing some nice little UI tweaks and not innovating anything more. Luckily--the MCU and end to end compensation was mature that long ago, and while I didn't rigorously test the IO, it seems to still be intact from back I the day.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 4, 2018 14:49:51 GMT -6
I think YOUR answer should be ProTools and buy an Avid IO, which should solve all your reported problems. Cubase positives: MCU=WAY better. I wouldn't even USE a controller over one channel with PT. MIDI/VI work= light years better on a number of fronts-I'd call ProTools UNUSABLE for articulation switching VIs. Hardware IO compensation AND PDC is tighter. Actually--you can only speerate that one way--you can have tight PDC without full IO...but, you literally can't have hardware inserts without sample accurate CONSISTENT PDC behind it, as it's all the same compensation engine--if you take a minute to think about it--if your IO is compensated properly, but a plug throws the whole mixer off...is the hardware actually compensated properly? Answer:no. Avid positives: Session exchange YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR WORKFLOW Don't jump into a fire because you're afraid someone will push you later. If you've really decided you want a NEW workflow...entertain options. I'm totally happy with the greenest code in Mixbus I've ever used, because it does what I need--it sounds good, and keeps sample accurate recording compensation--even has a built in loopback tester to verify and recalibrate as needed. For MIDI, I've spent equal time in my 30 years in Performer, Logic, and Cubase. Cubase "wins", though, the new articulation mapping in Logic, if they get the glitchiness gone, may change that some. And the Logic Drummer, and (great) auto tempo mapping...on top of killer transparent flextime audio quantization says Apple's "ahead" in digital content creation. They're most likely to make those new Studio Strings and Horns "play along" first...with AI arranging like the Drummer...if you ever wished Band In a Box wasn't a lame sounding crapfest, because that would be cool--Logic's your guy. It will be ready for their multitouch gesture based stuff on Day One of the new AppleOS… I dunno--I've been less than impressed with the direction of Cubase as of late. I don't AGREE with the direction Apple's going as the audio corksniffer I am...but, I SEE the value...Cubase seems to me to have been SO far ahead they've just sat for a decade implementing some nice little UI tweaks and not innovating anything more. Luckily--the MCU and end to end compensation was mature that long ago, and while I didn't rigorously test the IO, it seems to still be intact from back I the day. Those positives for Cubase are hard to ignore.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 4, 2018 15:33:23 GMT -6
I should balance that with Cubase 9.5 crashed literally hourly during the 30 day demo on the MacBook. I'm over them on OSX. Maybe one day I'll try them again when I have some haus fast Mac...hell--maybe I'll hack the new desktop...but, they've burned me too many times on that specific front in the last few years.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 4, 2018 15:35:54 GMT -6
Cubase 9.5 here, has been working great on OSX on an older cheese grader Mac tower.
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Dec 4, 2018 16:10:13 GMT -6
Recently moved back to Cubase with the release of 10. Before that I was using Logic for song writing /PT for recording bands. Cubase 10 is working great with MacOS.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Dec 4, 2018 16:27:20 GMT -6
I used Cubase with hardware inserts and Avid Artist Mix as well at one time. Never had a problem. That being said, if I started with Pro Tools first and knew the editing shortcuts I'd probably stay with Pro Tools. Since mixing is so edit intensive today, getting editing done quickly is paramount. As far as hardware recall, I used 8 hardware-some mono, some dual mono/stereo- inserts and it took about 5 minutes per session for recall and then, if I made changes, 3-5 minutes. Unless you are so incredibly busy that you can't spare the time, I see no reason why you'd choose plugins over hardware if you have good hardware.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 4, 2018 17:04:24 GMT -6
Jesse gave me a heads up that my PT EDU license upgrade is on sale for $79, ends today though. Damnit. Money might rule the day. Might see how long I can stay on OSX 10.11 and PT12.5. I’m reaching the tail end of compatibility if I want to install any new software, though.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 4, 2018 22:11:41 GMT -6
For quick audio editing (not talking about beat detection or audio quantizing here) I'd say PT is best. For everything else I prefer Cubase. Once you get the hang of it I think its far easier than PT. Also, native versions of PT have always been the last to adopt very standard DAW functions: everything from midi implemintation, track folders, recording/comping lanes, automatic plugin delay compensation, track count, offline rendering etc etc. It seems AVID/DIGI have always dragged their feet when it comes to catching up with Logic and Cubase. How is Cubase for beat detection and audio quantizing? I find pro tools better for both of those things.
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Dec 5, 2018 3:38:21 GMT -6
How is Cubase for beat detection and audio quantizing? I find pro tools better for both of those things. Does anyone here slip edit their drums instead of BD? AFAIK only cubase has this workflow. The drum midi editor in cubase is a huge time saver as well. Although S1 and Superior 3 have now integrated the same type of editor.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 5, 2018 8:48:25 GMT -6
Well, I let it slide for now. The discount was really only about $20 off, so not a super big deal. I want to think about it some more. Of the opinions I've been reading (comparing recent versions of Cubase and Pro Tools), there seems to be a very big consensus that Pro Tools lags behind Cubase and most other DAWs. It seems like Pro Tools is the NS10's of DAW's. People use it because that's what you use in a studio, but most don't actually like it.
I kind of want to give Cubase a shot. I had a hard time finding anyone saying that Pro Tools is better than Cubase.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Dec 5, 2018 8:55:26 GMT -6
The only reason that I've stuck with Pro Tools is because I know it and don't want to spend the time learning something else.
|
|
|
Post by mcirish on Dec 5, 2018 9:02:38 GMT -6
If I worked with other studio and needed to swap files around, I would seriously think about Pro Tools. As it is, most of my work is with a handful of artists and no one cares what I work on as long as it gets the job done. Sometimes I think mixing in pro Tools would be good as I like the way they handle volume settings on clips. But I think it would be much slower during the creation process. Whichever way you choose, just pull the trigger and get on with mixing and making music. Both DAWs are just tools to get the job done and become a huge time sink-hole if we let them. Whatever works for you is the right choice. It shouldn't matter what other people use, as long as you are happy with the workflow. Only us audio engineers care about the tools. the audience only cares about the end results.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Dec 5, 2018 9:10:10 GMT -6
The only reason that I've stuck with Pro Tools is because I know it and don't want to spend the time learning something else. Same . . . plus all the investment in hardware and plugz. Some day, I'll have a pile of cash waiting to be burned, and then I'll consider a massive lateral shift.
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Dec 5, 2018 9:30:04 GMT -6
I find pro tools better for both of those things. Does anyone here slip edit their drums instead of BD? AFAIK only cubase has this workflow. The drum midi editor in cubase is a huge time saver as well. Although S1 and Superior 3 have now integrated the same type of editor. You can use elastic audio to drag/edit drum hits to the grid in Pro Tools but it messes with the sound in a way that BD does not.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Dec 5, 2018 9:37:21 GMT -6
Does anyone here slip edit their drums instead of BD? AFAIK only cubase has this workflow. The drum midi editor in cubase is a huge time saver as well. Although S1 and Superior 3 have now integrated the same type of editor. You can use elastic audio to drag/edit drum hits to the grid in Pro Tools but it messes with the sound in a way that BD does not. This is a really important consideration! I do minor time stretching on rushed sections some times, and i mean MINOR, and it seems to sound better - especially in very small doses/
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Dec 5, 2018 10:04:14 GMT -6
The only reason that I've stuck with Pro Tools is because I know it and don't want to spend the time learning something else. This could be said about a lot of us and not just DAW software, it’s easy to get lazy and even more important you get used to the methodology and mindset of a certain software. Learning a different software can make the familiar clumsy.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 5, 2018 10:17:20 GMT -6
The only reason that I've stuck with Pro Tools is because I know it and don't want to spend the time learning something else. This could be said about a lot of us and not just DAW software, it’s easy to get lazy and even more important you get used to the methodology and mindset of a certain software. Learning a different software can make the familiar clumsy. Where I’m at with it is this: when it’s time to update/upgrade, and that upgrade is going to cost me money, I am going to take some time to evaluate that decision. Do I keep giving my money to Avid, or is there a better tool for the job? I think that’s only fair. If the upgrade was free, then I might not think about it. Right now, I think I want a tool that emphasizes creativity. Pro Tools seems to be more about compatibility. I am familiar with Pro Tools and the thought of learning something new is daunting. The question then becomes, is that effort going to be worth the payout?
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Dec 5, 2018 10:47:09 GMT -6
Sometimes PT gets wonky with latency when using HW inserts. That's one thing that drives me crazy about PT. Been on PT for 20 years and have never experienced latency wonkiness.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 5, 2018 10:55:23 GMT -6
Of the opinions I've been reading (comparing recent versions of Cubase and Pro Tools), there seems to be a very big consensus that Pro Tools lags behind Cubase and most other DAWs. It seems like Pro Tools is the NS10's of DAW's. People use it because that's what you use in a studio, but most don't actually like it. I think that's a dangerous oversimplification. I sometimes wish that the net had a kind of context filter for opionions--like how many of those people use a lot of MIDI sequencing? ProTools has NEVER been up to snuff for MIDI, and if by "DAW" you mean native full function MUSIC PRODUCTION software, yes it lags WAY behind. But, if you mean actual Digital AUDIO Workstation, I don't know that any of the others are better. They are sometimes less expensive and can handle what some particular person NEEDS in a home system. If you leave out MIDI/VIs all together, I don't think ProTools is that lacking. Sure--you have to buy the REAL one...if you're not comparing HDX or HDNative...yes--it's "lacking" because ProTools has never really BEEN a software package. It's a turnkey "turn a computer into a DAW" package. But, this is only really an "issue" of a little money--it's not really a choice you need to make from listening to Douchenozzle857 on this forum. Like me. ...you will be able to demo Cubase for 30 days (soon likely for the new v10)...OR if you want to just jump in now, you can likely get a competitive crossgrade price, buy it, and if nothing else--you have the best MIDI sequencer/VI host you can get...for that purpose. Now that I'm saying that--you DO have to buy an eLicenser to demo, which--you might as well do the CC, since you wouldn't be a VSL user who already had one like I was!
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Dec 5, 2018 11:03:58 GMT -6
Pro Tools is just fine as a full MUSIC PRODUCTION software. And the MIDI is totally functional for anything but esoteric stuff I wouldn't use anyway.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 5, 2018 11:18:24 GMT -6
Sometimes PT gets wonky with latency when using HW inserts. That's one thing that drives me crazy about PT. Been on PT for 20 years and have never experienced latency wonkiness. Right, but you use Avid interface, right?
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Dec 5, 2018 11:33:46 GMT -6
Been on PT for 20 years and have never experienced latency wonkiness. Right, but you use Avid interface, right? I’ve used 192’s, avid HD I/O, Burl, and Apogee with no problems. Same as drbill.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Dec 5, 2018 12:00:17 GMT -6
This could be said about a lot of us and not just DAW software, it’s easy to get lazy and even more important you get used to the methodology and mindset of a certain software. Learning a different software can make the familiar clumsy. Where I’m at with it is this: when it’s time to update/upgrade, and that upgrade is going to cost me money, I am going to take some time to evaluate that decision. Do I keep giving my money to Avid, or is there a better tool for the job? I think that’s only fair. If the upgrade was free, then I might not think about it. Right now, I think I want a tool that emphasizes creativity. Pro Tools seems to be more about compatibility. I am familiar with Pro Tools and the thought of learning something new is daunting. The question then becomes, is that effort going to be worth the payout? I get it, the Avid money drain pushes all my buttons, and I’m so sick of it! I have gone from my days of having to use and support every DAW, to PT24 TDM, to generic with a modded OO2, to Logic with a RAYDAT, to Generic PT with RAYDAT to HD, to Generic PT. I couldn’t get to a point with Logic where I was as comfortable as I am on PT, it’s now really just an editor, the RADAR is a far bettert tracking system. I stick to PT simply because I have had clients who demand it, it’s simple if they have problems I can walk them through it. Otherwise I would probably walk away from it. I get the education luv through the kids school, but I would rather not be paying every year ( it was the high cost and lack of education discount that kept me from HD native).
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 5, 2018 12:46:38 GMT -6
Interfaces....are not...converters. You can hook any TIME COMPLIANT third party converters to the Avid interfaces you want. Many people make these....Apogee, Lynx, Burl....and a lot of other--basically nearly anyone making multi channel CONVERTERS offer and HD jack to connect with an Avid interface to a computer.
That said....again....how much is an HDN versus what you're using now? As much as I think ProTools is patently the WRONG choice for someone wanting a native "use whatever IO or controller" workstation....and certainly if MIDI/virtual instruments is a big part of the equation....I also don't like floating this idea that it's inferior. Everything is inferior to everything in SOME specific ways....which is why really only you can answer this for you.
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Dec 5, 2018 13:15:11 GMT -6
Sometimes I think it is great that we have so many choices and sometimes having so many choices is a real distraction. I first moved to Pro Tools from Digital Performer when I bought the Digi 003 when it first came out. Since then in addition to Pro Tools I have become familiar with and own Logic, Studio One, and Mixbus 32C. I have fun with all of them and I know that a great recording can be made with any of them. For the singer/songwriter stuff I primarily track and mix, all of them work well but I keep gravitating back to Pro Tools because it works well for me, meets all of my needs, and I enjoy using it. I decided to make the investment last year and add the Avid S3 and Dock and they have worked perfectly and I fully enjoy using them. I say, everyone should go with what fulfills you artistically and motivates you to use it as long as it fits your situation.
|
|