I have never used any other DAW/Software since I started using Sonar but I am just curious as to why "almost" every hit record/Album you look at today will give credit to Pro-tools as the DAW/Software used to record the abulm.

1. Is it because Sonar is exclusively PC based?
2. Is it because Cakewalk does not have hardware interface exclusively designed for Sonar?
3. Is it because Cakewalk products does not cost $200.000.00?
4. Is it because Cakewalk as a company is not giving/shoving free products down the throats of pro/engineers/producers?

What's your thought or reasons? Like I said I have not used Pro-tools exclusively but would like to understand.


Lets discuss people.

Patrick...Minnesota

This is an old thread from 2003.

I know of a few people who call any DAW "protools", it's kinda like people calling a vacum cleaner a "hoover"

anyway, a few reasons to answer your question...
Protools was the first to market as a professional solution, and it has grown in popularity (notoriety?) ever since
Protools offers insane expandability through DSP farms, large format integrated consoles like the Icon, or Venue.
It has become so prevalent that it is pretty much an industry standard
and when protools goes wrong, you phone one guy, not a load of companies who's products are assembled to build a DAW rig.
Protools can guarantee a particlar number of audio tracks for a given set-up.
Protools also have very low latency (VERY VERY low) monitoring, advanced synchronisation options, etc etc etc.

It has nothing to do with PCs Vs macs. Most big PT rigs I know of are PC-based. indeed, they're going to have to be now, because the new macs don't support PCI cards, which makes them completely and totally incompatable with current protools hardware!

However, I personally find the editing in it to be far inferior to sonar, which is why I mainly use a Sonar set up to edit our multitracks - however, we usually work with 12 to 48 tracks, not the hundreds and hundreds that can be accomodated on a PT system.

But - protools doesn't have delay compensation.

all that $$$$$ and you need to use sampleslide-type plugs ;)

:D

Kind regards

Dave Rich

anyway, a few reasons to answer your question...

I think you nailed it, ooble.

But - protools doesn't have delay compensation.

Protools LE does not have delay compensation but PT TDM does have that feature.

Because people are sheep!

Rico

Well, I wasn't making a statement with my post, I was asking questions. One thing I do agree with is the fact that when something goes wrong with your Pro-tools setup, you don't have to call bunch of companies, just Digidesign.

I heard that Pro-tools has a better sounding engine and better audio editing features, true?

Just about every hit record today, say most give credit to Pro-tools.

Sonar is okay but not as popular.


Is Pro-tools not a DAW? What is it "ooblecaboodle" please educate me.

Patrick....Minnesota

Is Pro-tools not a DAW? What is it "ooblecaboodle" please educate me.

I suspect that what ooblecaboodle may have meant by that was that Pro Tools have succeeded within a large sector of the market in identifying their brand name with the generic product - that many people see the terms "Pro Tools" and "DAW" as synonymous, like Hoover and vacuume Cleaner, or Biro and ballpoint pen or (cover your ears if offended!) Durex and condom (well here down under anyway).

Of course Pro Tools is a DAW, but not the only one. It's about hype, successful marketing in a largely uneducated market place. I still get some potential clients who ask me if I have a Pro Tools Studio, though not nearly as many as a few years ago. For years I have had a prehistoric PC with Win 98 and Pro Tools Free sitting on it that is kept purely so that I could truthfully answer "Yes" to that question and not lose the business at the first hurdle. Of course I don't use it ... and I've never had one that's eventually walked out the door dissatisfied with what we've produced with Sonar.

Best
Geoff

Dunno if it helps answer your question or not but the only times I've come close to jumping to PT (and there have been a few) have been due to hardware issues (not exactly CW's fault). The hunt for a fully functioning controller in Sonar is a struggle and we have to typically settle for emulation modes. Go to PT and you have a range of impressive and dedicated hardware solutions.

The strength of Sonar as an audio package over PT LE is I think now well established so it's time to get on with it and get a Mackie Control which I believe is certainly the most viable controller interface available with a view towards full functionality... but I can bet there will be 'some' limitations.

If there is a shortcoming from CW's side of the fence in this regard, it would be lack of support of the various controllers that we would all like to use (Radikal as an example). Maybe they are dreaming something up with Roland? Time will tell because it is an area they need to address I believe. The amount of Sonar users that spend time coding is staggering... a crazy diversion of creative time (even if it is enjoyable sometimes).

Cheers!

yeah, hand me a KLEENEX (tissue) to clean up the COKE (could be orange soda!) and dont getcher JOCKEYS (er..FruitoftheLooms) in a bunch. I agree w OODLE - they pulled off a great marketing techinique by naming their product the generic name of any Professional Tools. Years ago, Dbase a database system ,did a similar trick (sorry if there is any allusion to any other "profession"), and when they released their version 1.00 they simply called it dBase II. RESULT: MAD RUSH for all the clueless corporate executives to make sure THEIR company had the newest toys! Not to mention, they immediately had the largest installed/established customer base. Not to fear. IBM once stuck up their noses at the "personal computer". Is Bill Gates laughing all the way to the bank? SONAR has POWER/PRICE ratio that will keep it on the leading edge