Cubase vs. Pro Tools

Totally agree.  The bang for your buck with Cubase is nothing short of a modern miracle.  Built in tuning, midi instruments, and on and on.  As time has gone on I have a lot of third party plug ins, but with Cubase there's always a fallback, such as it's own envelope shaper etc.  Its' true that Cubase also tries to appeal to the amateur and part timer too with some of it's features--I don't think I'll have a need for the chord track for instance.  But that doesn't diminish it's quality.  Honestly, I'm often hearing my Pro Tools friends whine about AVID and their latest head scratching move--makes me want little part of it.    
Actually what surprises me is that Steinberg/Yamaha doesn't market a high end interface to match the level of their DAW.  They have the history and clout to do it.  I'm not putting down the MR816--it's a remarkable mid level piece of gear.  But I am curious why Steinberg doesn't take on Apogee, UAD etc.    

Why pay 11k for an 8x8 system when I can have just as much horsepower on a native system with a Symphony I/O and Cubase for 3500? And like you, I've never had to calculate a hardware delay once either.  Cubase does it for me.

Yep.  I get it.  I'm glad I didn't get sucked in early.  Been with Steinberg since 95.  Avid seems to have a way of breaking it off in the customers who built the company.  The HDX (AAX) thing is proof.  I can't really understand the "buy this because we no longer support that" thing.   

Some call that progress.  I think of it as greed.  Just my opinion though.  Not trying to change any minds here.

Used PT 8 for about a year, then tried Cubase 5 for about a week and never looked back. Years later, decided to upgrade to 7 but tried ST1 v2 and really liked the workflow and how quick I learned to use it. Cubase is still on rotation when a client wants me to work in it, so they can use the same session.
It seemed crazy to me to spend tons of money to have more tracks on my sessions (PT) and use only their interface (Digi003). "What would happen if they decide to cut support next year?", those kind of thoughts were what kicked me out of Avid.
I still use PT10 in a friend's studio and its fine.
Haven't paid attention to the sound of each DAW, sorry for not comenting on that. But I've heard top notch results in each one of those DAWs.

PT 11 Native here. Looking for a way to get a legit copy of HD software that I can register in my iLok account w/o having to buy an Avid interface.

Apologies in advance for veering off topic, but IMHO the value of a product is about more than ease of use.

When I got into serious audio production almost two years ago it seemed that PT was the "standard", so I went with it. Why not, I didn't know any better, and PT had a solid reputation - from what I read. But Avid is making me regret the decision. Their marketing strategy - if you want fully unlocked software, pay $4K and get a nice hardware dongle too - is elitist and tells me that they are not interested in "hobbyists" like me, who don't do audio as their day job but but consider it their main avocation and a spend significant portion of discretionary income (OK, all of it, and then some) on audio gear and related software. Some people have Jet Skis, I have a recording studio. Avid should understand customers like me, and have a way to identify us, and sell things to us. Things that we need and are not forced to buy. Truly, I do not understand why they don't offer a CPTK for PT 11, it makes no sense. I would buy it instantly.

Now, full membership in the PT world is $199 per year for Native, $599 for HD. An iconic software brand has been reduced to the level of a subscription service. What a shame. Like the management at Waves, they have failed to understand that making registered users effectively re-buy the software over and over again just to get continued basic support is not going to be popular with the user base and ultimately damages the brand. It's this little thing called competition, and it has a tendency to hurt businesses that make short-sighted decisions. Drive customers away, and they almost never come back.

Of course, they have a right to come to market as they see fit. Conversely, I have a right to not buy the things they sell, and move on. This is the question that PT owners should not be asking, IMHO, if Avid would only wake up and see the potential endgame. If I sold a product, I would not want my customers considering other options, particularly over a marketing decision I made.

All companies need a continuous revenue stream (and Avid has struggled to generate such of late), so maybe they should offer a tiered support model like that of many other software vendors: provide basic support (bug patching) for free, and offer feature enhancements and additional professional support as optional value-added services. This is a time-honored and successful way of doing business. I don't get it, that Avid doesn't get it. They must be desperate for revenue of any kind. Their latest numbers are abysmal.

Yeah, I know I am just echoing the sentiment of the Avid community at large, but in this case there is truth in the chorus of dissent. There usually is, if enough voices are heard. I still fear for the future of Avid as a company, even though they recently stated earnings for 2012 and have been re-listed on the NASDAQ (or are working on it) .

To get back on topic: increased instability at Avid would be the one thing that would make me move off of PT to Cubase. When the Levee Breaks, Mama You Got To Move.

Now please excuse me while I step down off my soapbox and close the vent.

Haven't read the whole thread because I use Logic, so I'm only mildly interested. Way back Drbill said "it's all ones and zeros", well.. I have heard that tune before. 15 years back in my audiophile days, I'd get into huge online arguments regarding this. I claimed jitter was an important factor in sound quality, I'd get the ones and zeros comeback, until I said it's also the spacing of the ones and zeros that matters, and posted some really serious scientific studies that were hard to dispute. Time passed, I was proven right, and now jitter is commonly looked at and accepted as an important consideration when judging digital playback. But man, you wouldn't believe the vitriol over something that was supposed to be a hobby. I'm glad I left that and moved over to music production. 

Personally, I've never used Cubase or Pro Tools at home, so I can't speak to the topic here, but I do wonder if there's something similar going on here, maybe there are factors that are not so obvious affecting sound quality in subtle, but noticeable ways?

I'm curious, how does Cubase stack up to Logic X?

I noticed a slight improvement using X instead of Logic Pro 9.

And that's exactly my situation in reverse--started early with Cubase and it grew as I grew.  I think the only reason to take the few months needed to really learn another DAW is if you become dissatisfied with the product or the way they do business.  As for the question does one sound better than the other, I've yet to hear anyone actually prove that PT sounds better than Cubase.  If it actually did sound significantly better I'd probably make the switch.  But at this point one has to wonder if DAW's will ever take a leap up in sound quality--they've probably reached that plateau.  It's like folks keep trying to make a better acoustic guitar but the zenith was reached in the mid 20th century.  The differences in DAWs now are mostly features, workflow, and cost of operating.  I say use what you love and try to refrain from defending that choice by demeaning other products that you have little experience using.  (not you Jcoutu, but other PT elitists out there)

Yeah - let's try to avoid the demonstrative statements like "it sounds better..." I think his thread is more about workflow, feature sets, upgradability and cost. I have absolutely zero idea whether daw's sound different, but to me - if you feel that deep in your bones, it absolutely works for you, whether it's a placebo effect or not. I really think everything we talk about comes back to workflow and how that workflow benefits your creativity. If you are making killer demos on a tascam 4 track, then by all means, stay on that tascam 4 track! There are things about PT's that I feel like slows down my creativity. Now that I've been out of cubase for a while, the learning curve makes that an issue too. But it might be time to bite the bullet.

Are you talking key commands or what?  All of Cubase is designed to make your own preferences just the way you like them.  I keep mine on a flash drive and I can go to another Cubase studio, load my preferences in and bam, I'm set.

R

Key commands as well as just generally how things operate. Knowing which tool does what? Where the different things are, etc. I'm currently happily running PT11, but that could change depending on how the next upgrade process looks.

The very first thing I miss from pro tools is the smart tool. Being able to do everything without any key stroke is genius and I don't know why other daws don't implement it. I guess it's not a big deal to hit a key and change tools, but to me it's def slower. Takes and comping doesn't feel as logical in cubase to me. Now, that's just my opinion and could be one of those "I've used PTs so long" things. Also - I don't know where the hell everything is!

i'm still trying to figure out why dithering is unimportant?