gt2004
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 313
- Joined: 2006/02/10 20:16:16
- Status: offline
Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
I have never used any pro tools and i was wondering how does it compare to X1. Is there anything about pro tools that makes it better or worse ? just curios if anyone here uses it
i wish they had a demo to try it out.
DUAL Processor XEON W5590  INTEL 160GB SSD G2 INTEL 80GB SSD G2
INTEL 80GB SSD G2 24GB ECC RAM EMU-0404 Xboard 49 KRK Rokit PR5, Mackie HR824 Sonar X1 64 Bit Windows 7 64Bit Pro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGhEm5oqdgE
|
jerry@macwood.com
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 324
- Joined: 2004/12/03 02:07:13
- Location: Redondo Beach
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/14 21:13:51
(permalink)
I just like any other other Daw just more expensive. The quality of sonar is better due to the ability to 64bit end to end. But yo must remember that technical awesomeness and having the best equipment does not equal a great song or performance. Sonar has proven superior in the aspect of getting teh job done qickly and with little down time. that being said I am really enjoying the beta version of X! and X1A. It is going to be awesome when they finish it!
|
gt2004
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 313
- Joined: 2006/02/10 20:16:16
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/14 22:00:26
(permalink)
i thought that pro tools 9 is 64 bit
DUAL Processor XEON W5590 INTEL 160GB SSD G2 INTEL 80GB SSD G2
INTEL 80GB SSD G2 24GB ECC RAM EMU-0404 Xboard 49 KRK Rokit PR5, Mackie HR824 Sonar X1 64 Bit Windows 7 64Bit Pro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGhEm5oqdgE
|
HumbleNoise
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2004/01/04 12:53:50
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/14 22:29:42
(permalink)
Humbly Yours Larry Sonar X2 x64 MAudio 2496 Yamaha MG 12/4 Roland XV-88 Intel MB with Q6600 and 4 GB Ram NVidia 9800 GTX Windows 7 x64 Home Premium
|
giankap
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 387
- Joined: 2011/01/13 15:57:47
- Location: DreamLand
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/14 22:32:42
(permalink)
i thought that pro tools 9 is 64 bit
no my friend, it's not. It's 64bit compatible but not true 64bit operation. It was a real hit on the head for all pro tool users out there.
sincerely, Ioannis Windows - some Dual Core CPU - a little bit of RAM - not so bad soundcard - i think it's called Sonar - a silver mixer with colorful knobs - black speaker monitors - my ears some work
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/14 23:17:55
(permalink)
no my friend, it's not. It's 64bit compatible but not true 64bit operation. It was a real hit on the head for all pro tool users out there.
Finding out PT9 was a 32Bit app was a major downer... (one of those head-scratchers  ) If you use multiple RAM based soft-synths that have large libraries (Superior 2.0, etc), you can munch up 4GB pretty quickly. You can work around the 4GB limitation using VE Pro (to host soft-synths)... but it shouldn't be necessary. As to PT9, it has some nice features... but I don't find it all that exciting. Its strengths are more in the tracking/editing/mixing realm (rather than composition). That's not to say you can't compose with PT. I just think Sonar, Cubase, Logic, etc are more conducive to the creative process... likely because they started as sequencers rather than audio recording/editing apps.
post edited by Jim Roseberry - 2011/02/15 00:06:08
|
cryophonik
Max Output Level: -28 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4724
- Joined: 2006/04/03 17:28:17
- Location: Elk Grove, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/14 23:51:43
(permalink)
Jim Roseberry
As to PT9, it has some nice features... but I don't find it all that exciting.
Its strengths are more in the tracking/editing/mixing realm (rather than composition). That's not to say you can't compose with PT. I just think Sonar, Cubase, Logic, etc are more conducive to the creative process... likely because they started as sequencers rather than recording apps.
I use both PT9 and Sonar X1 (also a former Cubase, Live, and Studio One Pro user) and I'd say that Jim pretty much hit the nail on the head here. I definitely find Sonar (X1 and earlier versions) and the others to be far better equipped for composition, particularly if you use much in the way of soft synths. That said, PT9 is more than adequate to get the job done, but I find that Sonar et al. are much more intuitive for sequencing/arranging. 64-bit vs 32-bit aside, there's no denying PT9's exceptional audio tracking, editing, and mixing power, though.
|
gt2004
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 313
- Joined: 2006/02/10 20:16:16
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 00:07:39
(permalink)
wow 32 bit still that's pretty lame if you ask me. make the nice i7 look like a Pentium 3 lol
DUAL Processor XEON W5590 INTEL 160GB SSD G2 INTEL 80GB SSD G2
INTEL 80GB SSD G2 24GB ECC RAM EMU-0404 Xboard 49 KRK Rokit PR5, Mackie HR824 Sonar X1 64 Bit Windows 7 64Bit Pro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGhEm5oqdgE
|
siris1977
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 187
- Joined: 2010/12/10 07:07:25
- Location: Alabama Roll Tide
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 03:07:31
(permalink)
I am pretty sure the dual quad core is the only pc fully supported PT. I'm fairly new to the pro tools agony. i'm taking a digital recording class in PT on the mac pro and it's pretty sweet. Sonar is the "goto" daw for getting your ideas down quickly. Sonar has just as high quality synths as PT and is faster and easier to use.
If you are wanting to do "studio" recording I'd take PT and a bottle of tums. It's not the standard by chance.
Im lovin the mbox 3 pro firewire. It lets me bounce from Pt to X1 without resetting the interface.
Phenom Quad core, 8gb ram, 3.5tb of Fine Music Storage Vault Under Armed Guard w/ UAV support (air-hog chopper), set of MA-15D, Delta 10-10 pci w/interface, m-box 3 pro, projectmix I/O, Metal Pop Filters, Two SKB cases Full of Suck Removal Buttons, Cedar Walls, Stripper Pole (helps with mastering & block priceing) more stuff i'm to lazy to add. ;) P.S. good Memory foam is freakin awesome.
|
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12010
- Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
- Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 03:31:24
(permalink)
Pro Tools pre Version 9 with all the hardware DSP probably didn't need to be 64 bit.
now that its not tied to hardware anymore being 32 bit only is a big drawback because without the DSP working for you you really need the RAM that only 64 bit can give you.
Its a shame because I'd jump today if PT9 was 64 bit
Mike V. (MUDGEL) STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64, PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz. Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2. Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub. Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX. Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor. Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
|
Katie_Katie
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 557
- Joined: 2010/12/20 08:44:26
- Location: Maryland near DC
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 06:16:30
(permalink)
cryophonik
Jim Roseberry
As to PT9, it has some nice features... but I don't find it all that exciting.
Its strengths are more in the tracking/editing/mixing realm (rather than composition). That's not to say you can't compose with PT. I just think Sonar, Cubase, Logic, etc are more conducive to the creative process... likely because they started as sequencers rather than recording apps.
I use both PT9 and Sonar X1 (also a former Cubase, Live, and Studio One Pro user) and I'd say that Jim pretty much hit the nail on the head here. I definitely find Sonar (X1 and earlier versions) and the others to be far better equipped for composition, particularly if you use much in the way of soft synths. That said, PT9 is more than adequate to get the job done, but I find that Sonar et al. are much more intuitive for sequencing/arranging. 64-bit vs 32-bit aside, there's no denying PT9's exceptional audio tracking, editing, and mixing power, though.
+ 1 to the above. If audio is all you are working with, PT is as solid as they come. Probably THE most solid. If you are going midi and working with some synths (NI is a good example, so is Miroslav), it will start using up the PT's ram quickly with many instruments (unless you can external serve). RTAS will start coughing and die as well. Cakewalk 64 is golden when it comes to synth integration. For me, Cakewalk's strength has always been midi and synths, and with 64bit, more so. I've yet to have Sonar cough on a full-rack of NI or Miroslav instruments. Side-by-side, PT can't touch the Sonar's synth integration.
|
Guest
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4951
- Joined: 2009/08/03 10:50:51
- Status: online
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 07:57:37
(permalink)
mudgel
Pro Tools pre Version 9 with all the hardware DSP probably didn't need to be 64 bit.
now that its not tied to hardware anymore being 32 bit only is a big drawback because without the DSP working for you you really need the RAM that only 64 bit can give you.
Its a shame because I'd jump today if PT9 was 64 bit
Yeah, 32 bit is a major limitation for Pro Tools. It's probably why no one uses it. 
|
ProjectM
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3941
- Joined: 2004/02/10 09:32:12
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 08:07:14
(permalink)
I have worked a lot in Pro Tools over the years, not so much in PT9 but I've had a look at it. It's a fantastic piece of software. But I agree with Jim here, Pro Tools is not so much for the creative bit IMHO. It can't beat Sonar (or some of the other DAWs) when it comes to MIDI editing etc. Pro Tools still has too much of the "Tape Machine emulating" behavior going on. However, for mixing Audio it's kick ass. My opinion of course. It's just very, very expensive compared to many other DAWs.
I like to make stuff in Sonar and take it to a PT studio to mix with a PT engineer who knows it in and out. Two different DAWs for slightly different jobs - IMO
(Sonar Platinum - Win10 x64) - iMac and 13" MacBook - Logic Pro X ++ - UA Apollo Twin DUO - NI Maschine MKII - NI Komplete Kontrol S61 - Novation Nocturne - KRK Rokit 6 SoundcloudNegative Vibe Records
|
Guest
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4951
- Joined: 2009/08/03 10:50:51
- Status: online
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 08:12:19
(permalink)
PT kills Sonar for straight tracking, comping and mixing. It isn't even close and for those things 64 bit really isn't important.
post edited by 10Ten - 2011/02/15 08:13:32
|
LANEY
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1350
- Joined: 2010/12/11 20:27:13
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 08:42:14
(permalink)
I agree with Katherine. I put half the stuff on my projects in Protools and it started chocking. Also it is very Square looking. I found I was mixing songs in protools, until boost 11 came out then I went to doing everything in Sonar. My favorite Daws 1. Sonar 2. Logic 3. was Protools, now Record by propellerhead.
i7/16GB ram Win 7 x64 SONAR Platinum Producer x64 VS-700 C&R Octa-Capture and VS-100 for live recording
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 13:26:23
(permalink)
mudgel
Pro Tools pre Version 9 with all the hardware DSP probably didn't need to be 64 bit.
now that its not tied to hardware anymore being 32 bit only is a big drawback because without the DSP working for you you really need the RAM that only 64 bit can give you.
It doesn't really work that way. You don't need more RAM if you have less processing power. The two are somewhat related but not in that way. And another thing, a modern Intel CPU actually gives you more power than the TDM DSP cards do. Only when you get up to something like a HD7 does the DSP beat the native CPU. Its a shame because I'd jump today if PT9 was 64 bit
What do you think having PT IN 64 bit give you more than the way it is currently? If I wanted to use PT 9 with RAM heavy synths (and maybe even just with CPU heavy synths) I would use Vienna Ensemble Pro. This removes the ram limitation and allows you to use VST plugins. UnderTow
|
guitartrek
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2842
- Joined: 2006/02/26 12:37:57
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 21:54:51
(permalink)
So PT9 forces you to evaluate which ram heavy synths you want to use based on if they work in 32bit? I love Superior drummer 2.0, but not in cache mode. I have some larger kits and they work perfectly when I load them completely into my 64bit memory. But they didn't work well in the 32bit environment. I was seriously thinking about getting PT9 someday. However if I have to change softsynths to accomodate it, that's a major stumbling block. Even if Vienna Ensemble Pro works perfectly in PT9, why should a DAW limit your choices? To me that's a major stumbling block. I'm glad this was brought up.
post edited by guitartrek - 2011/02/15 22:39:07
|
Lanceindastudio
Max Output Level: -29 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4604
- Joined: 2004/01/22 02:28:30
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/15 22:11:23
(permalink)
If you're working with audio only, Sonar is a rock-
What I do with sonar is pretty much exploit it lol( I do a lot more with sonar than most PT users do with PT). And it works good most of time still, DSP omitted.
Asus P8Z77-V LE PLUS Motherboard i7 3770k CPU 32 gigs RAM Presonus AudioBox iTwo Windows 10 64 bit, SONAR PLATINUM 64 bit Lots of plugins and softsynths and one shot samples, loops Gauge ECM-87, MCA SP-1, Alesis AM51 Presonus Eureka Mackie HR824's and matching subwoofer
|
timboe
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 760
- Joined: 2004/01/07 09:01:29
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 06:13:30
(permalink)
Despite the other limitations of PT9, the real / effective show stoppers for most non-PT users are:-
- no fully native x64 version <- this is very important
- no native VST support <- important but can use the FXpansion wrapper
- no track specific input monitoring on/off control <- are they serious ?
- no MCU Mackie Mode Control Surface Support - it only has HUI and HUI does not utilze the Jog Wheel of a MCU or any other controller <- very limiting / annoying
Check the PT9 forums and the above " issues " are all big-ticket items.
Having said that, Avid is now actively listening to its customers and have already stated pulically on their forums that all futrue developments will be based on user demand / feedback - " the sleeping giant has finally awoken ".
That being the case, I have no doubt that once it goes native x64, there will be a major "switch" from non-PT users to [ at least ] very seriously try PT9.
The single biggest impact of PT9 has been to increase the pressure on all the other native DAW makers - Avid is a massive company with massive resources and unlike Roland, DAW software and hardware is their business - their focus is absolute - never has the " game " been so " on " as much as since PT9 arrived.
Tim
|
wintaper
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 464
- Joined: 2007/12/11 22:52:07
- Location: New Jersey
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 08:25:47
(permalink)
Using PT9 heavily these days - on the mac.
Most heavy synths, drums, trilian etc... have a memory manager feature which allows the plugin to run outside the host's memory space. That pretty much removes the need for 64 bit OS (I have 12GB and have used 8GB at once). Unlike windoze, 32bit Mac OSX sees all the ram and can manage more than 4GB in a machine (using PAE).
Intel i7 @ 3.60GHz, 12GB DDR3 1600MHz, Win7 / OSX 10.6.6, Sonar 8.53 / Pro Tools 9.0.1, RME RayDAT, UAD2-Quad, Focusrite OctoPre (x4), Euphonix MC Mix, Tascam US2400, Monette Ajna (x2), 15' Macbook Pro
|
Katie_Katie
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 557
- Joined: 2010/12/20 08:44:26
- Location: Maryland near DC
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 09:24:11
(permalink)
timboe
...The single biggest impact of PT9 has been to increase the pressure on all the other native DAW makers - Avid is a massive company with massive resources and unlike Roland, DAW software and hardware is their business - their focus is absolute - never has the " game " been so " on " as much as since PT9 arrived.
Tim
I'll agree that AVID is primarily a workstation (audio and video) developer and it is their primary focus - "their business" as you say. I will state that neither company is "massive" and actually both company employ similar number of people (about 3000) and their sales and assets are similar. Although Roland had a better past year than AVID, neither hit the 1B sales mark. Roland, up until the acquisition of Cakewalk, was primarily a manufacture of audio equipment. This is their first full venture with a DAW. I can only speculate how the Japanese centric business model melded with the boys and girls from Boston. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during those internal discussions. I also suspect, just a suspicion mind you, that the business model and Japanese business culture drove the release date of X1. In any case, it will be interesting to witness future synergy from Roland's majority interest in Cakewalk, and if they can bring a constructive feng shui (1) to beantown. (1) Yes, I know feng shui is Chinese, but the sentiment is apropos - so excuse the cross-culture ref.
post edited by Katie_Katie - 2011/02/16 09:39:44
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 09:34:43
(permalink)
"I also suspect, just a suspicion mind you, that the business model and Japanese business culture drove the release date of X1."
I don't regard Japanese business culture as being characterized by a tendency to rush product out on a fiscal schedule when it is full of bugs and non functionality.
It is a shameful practice and Japanese culture has a well established protocol for discouraging dishonorable business practice.
I imagine a vast disconnect between Roland Japan and Cakewalk.
best regards,
mike
|
Katie_Katie
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 557
- Joined: 2010/12/20 08:44:26
- Location: Maryland near DC
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 10:01:39
(permalink)
mike_mccue
"I also suspect, just a suspicion mind you, that the business model and Japanese business culture drove the release date of X1."
I don't regard Japanese business culture as being characterized by a tendency to rush product out on a fiscal schedule when it is full of bugs and non functionality.
It is a shameful practice and Japanese culture has a well established protocol for discouraging dishonorable business practice.
I imagine a vast disconnect between Roland Japan and Cakewalk.
best regards,
mike
Mike: Actually, things have morphed a bit regarding the dishonorable definition (or the influence of its meaning). There are others, but Toyota is a relatively new example (yes, there are more and other yen making companies). Fumio Matsuda, who is like the Ralph Nader of the Japanese world, has produced documents (and verified by the LA times), that Toyota knew of the problems, did nothing, and then delayed the corrective action. When I stated the above, I implied that the drive was yen, pure and simple, but with a Japanese management twist. Things have changed. Honor is not primary anymore.
post edited by Katie_Katie - 2011/02/16 10:03:12
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 10:17:03
(permalink)
I imagined you'd mention Toyota... I simply disagree that all of Japanese culture has gone the way of Toyota's recent travail.
It is noteworthy to mention that Japan's media* (*culture) eviscerated Toyota for it's inability to respond to the problem proactively.
best regards,
mike
|
mrkite
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7
- Joined: 2008/01/20 09:48:21
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 10:20:42
(permalink)
Katie_Katie
mike_mccue
"I also suspect, just a suspicion mind you, that the business model and Japanese business culture drove the release date of X1."
I don't regard Japanese business culture as being characterized by a tendency to rush product out on a fiscal schedule when it is full of bugs and non functionality.
It is a shameful practice and Japanese culture has a well established protocol for discouraging dishonorable business practice.
I imagine a vast disconnect between Roland Japan and Cakewalk.
best regards,
mike
Mike:
Actually, things have morphed a bit regarding the dishonorable definition (or the influence of its meaning).
There are others, but Toyota is a relatively new example (yes, there are more and other yen making companies). Fumio Matsuda, who is like the Ralph Nader of the Japanese world, has produced documents (and verified by the LA times), that Toyota knew of the problems, did nothing, and then delayed the corrective action.
When I stated the above, I implied that the drive was yen, pure and simple, but with a Japanese management twist.
Things have changed. Honor is not primary anymore.
This is a bit off topic, but can you elaborate on what you mean by "Japanese business culture"? Japanese business culture is generally known for its incredibly (sometimes ridiculously) high standards in terms of quality. Anyone who has done business with a Japanese company knows this. Also, "feng shui" is indeed a Chinese concept. Somewhat simplified, it refers to the physical characteristics and dimensions of a location, typically a building, and how these properties affect the luck, prosperity and general well-being of people and businesses associated with the location in question.
|
Katie_Katie
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 557
- Joined: 2010/12/20 08:44:26
- Location: Maryland near DC
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 10:21:08
(permalink)
I knew that you would think that I would mention Toyota and I knew that you would mention that you knew I would mention Toyota.
Anyway, thanks for the conversation. I suspect that if we ever met face to face over a coffee or such, it would be a stimulating and elevated conversation - regardless of subject.
Thanks
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 10:35:55
(permalink)
Considering that Cakewalk have been releasing on a similar schedule for... maybe a decade? I see no reason to associate the release date with any Roland involvement.
UnderTow
|
Jimbo 88
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1828
- Joined: 2007/03/19 12:27:17
- Location: Elmhurst, Illinois USA
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 10:36:17
(permalink)
I composed recorded 11 songs in Sonar and I'm having a friend who is a pro-mixer mix the tunes. He is mixing in PT9 on a Mac and imports my music with OMFs i spit out from Sonar. I'll sit with him during mixes and I get to see 1st hand how PT9 works. I'll have to say what freezes up both PT and Sonar the most are the 3rd party plug-ins and not so much the actual DAWs.
Honestly, it is really hard to tell which program is best. We both seem to accomplish what ever we are trying to do on our own very quickly. He is using some plug-ins that are just killer sounding. I'm not sure if they are available to Sonar users, but personally i have no problems with my Sonar Plug-ins.
I think the person operating the software is a huge X factor.
I'm going to go with this...As a composer Sonar for me is easy. It handles 64 bit soft synths, midi is eaiser than PT, I use the freeze option and bounce to tracks to create OMFs to get mixes to my clients asap and handles the mixing I am capable of fine. If I was a pro-mixer like my friend, who mixes albums, TV shows and films, I would spend the extra $$ on a full blown Mac and I would own and master PT9. I do not want to be a mixer, I want to stick with composing.
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 12:16:53
(permalink)
Jimbo 88
If I was a pro-mixer like my friend, who mixes albums, TV shows and films, I would spend the extra $$ on a full blown Mac and I would own and master PT9. I was with you until you mentioned Macs. Most studios I work at have PT running on Windows. UnderTow
|
wintaper
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 464
- Joined: 2007/12/11 22:52:07
- Location: New Jersey
- Status: offline
Re:Anyone here tried Pro Tools 9 to compare to X1
2011/02/16 12:52:08
(permalink)
Running PT9 on a custom dual-boot Mac/PC. On the same exact hardware, PT is much more stable on the Mac. Also, if it does crash in Win7 - requires a reboot before you can run it again. On the Mac you can just re-open PT9.
Sonar runs midi-heavy projects better than PT - and since PT has no "freeze", once you're maxed out, that's it. Then again, on the Mac, most midi-heavy work is done in Logic.
Sonar's interface is far slicker and more mature. Its also more intuitive than PT.
PT9's routing, mixing and flexibility regarding audio projects is well known and deserved. I'm a big fan of latch mode automation vs Sonar's 'Write' mode.
Intel i7 @ 3.60GHz, 12GB DDR3 1600MHz, Win7 / OSX 10.6.6, Sonar 8.53 / Pro Tools 9.0.1, RME RayDAT, UAD2-Quad, Focusrite OctoPre (x4), Euphonix MC Mix, Tascam US2400, Monette Ajna (x2), 15' Macbook Pro
|