Yeah, I've got PT, which I only use for importing and exporting stuff when that's a requirement. It's fine, I don't hate it or anything, but there's nothing special about it.

I started learning audio with Pro Tools and quite liked it, but then again that probably had a lot to do with the novelty factor of using a DAW in the first place and the fact that I'd never used the likes of Sonar, Cubase, Live etc. My main problem with it was stability and the fact that I ended up having to ReWire Reaper into it to host VSTi's because Pro Tools kept crashing. Having spent a good year or so with Sonar I can say without doubt that Sonar is far superior, however if there's one thing I miss about Pro Tools it's the clip library. Having all clips at hand in a convenient list is a major organizational bonus, especially if you take a clip-based approach to arrangement (especially for electronic styles). 

Ryan Munnis [Cakewalk]

Chrishubb2448
I think that the new Pro Tools 11 update could be worth all the trouble that is may cause. A LOT of the new features are great on 11. It finally has many features that all engineers have been waiting for. Pro Tools 11 redefines professional music and audio production for today’s workflows. From all-new audio and video engines and turbocharged 64-bit performance, to expanded metering and new HD video workflows. Pro Tools 11 also has 64-bit performance. This means much more accessible RAM to boost performance and you can creatively take your music and audio production to a whole new level, while handling bigger mixes with thousands of clips, take advantage of larger VI sampler sizes, and enjoy more system headroom. Pro Tools 11 is the dedicated low-latency input and playback buffers. This allows you to monitor record inputs on native systems with ultra-low latency — without sacrificing plug-in performance. To me, one of the best features of Pro Tools 11 is that you can now speed up delivery with offline bounce. With faster-than-real-time offline bounce, you can speed up your final mix or stem deliveries, up to 150x faster. Those little add-ons from Pro Tools 10 makes 11 better already. There are a ton more things that Avid has added and Im sure that you can read that on their website. One of my main things was the offline bounce, and I am finally happy that it is in 11. I have never used SONAR but I think that Pro Tools is still going to be the best recording software out there. 
 
- Chris Hubbard
 
 

You should try SONAR. You found your way to our site after all! I use both as well and prefer SONAR personally. Most of the kids I show it to at Berklee are amazed at what SONAR can do :)
 
Free 30 day trial is available if you're interested in checking it out: http://www.cakewalk.com/p...s/sonar/web-trial.aspx

I love it when someone says they have never used something but declare something else better. Very objective opinion. And yeah, faster than realtime bounce is very cutting edge.

Royal Yaksman
All the studios I've been in recently have had icons for Pro Tools, Logic, Sonar and Cubase sitting on their desktop. Some even had Reaper as well as a few of the usual post production editors Wavelab, Soundforge, Audition etc. I would put it to anyone who thinks pros only use PT? That in this day and age, it would be far more beneficial to cover as many bases of compatibility as possible. This is the same principle applied by those with massive plugin collections. They ammass the collection not so they can use all 1000 (plus?) VSTs in every project. But so they have compatibility with whoever they work with. It would be a potentially damaging business decision to turn away clients solely based on the fact that they do not have the program that you prefer to use.

Speaking to a couple of guys that run their own studio recently. They both remarked at how difficult it had become to remain viable and that learning multiple DAWs and having them available in their studio, was key to their current success. As it was stated much further back in this thread, the music is more important than the tools. Telling a potential client, who has some great songs, that they can't work with me until they port their project to PT? Probably means a higher likelihood of losing their business to a studio that's prepared to be flexible.

Yes, the time used to exist where a lot of studios would stand arms folded, shaking their heads at you if you couldn't provide them with a PT session. But thanks to the many (smaller & mid sized) studios offering multiple platforms and the tsunami of bedroom producers breaking through to the airwaves? The days of adapt or die have arrived. In recent years I haven't had a single issue dealing with studios when using projects from Cubase or Sonar. As such my copy of PT8 hasn't been fired up in about two and a half years.

((*Apologies if something like this has already been said, the thread was kind of doing my head in, so I skipped a bunch of pages*))

 
Thanks for this post. The days of slamming unfamiliar products in favor of what you have become comfortable with are pretty much over. The studios that will survive in the long run are those that are able to say yes when others are saying no.
 
That being said, PT11 currently runs like crap on my current DAW. I never thought I would say this but I'd rather use PT10...which also frustrated me to no end. My biggest issue with Pro-Tools is that it is very picky about simply starting-up, especially when dealing with higher sample rates. Once I can actually get a project loaded, my main focus is usually figuring out how to get the project exported as an OMF. Then it can be imported into SONAR, where I'm much more comfortable and efficient.
 
-e

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
I love it when someone says they have never used something but declare something else better. Very objective opinion. And yeah, faster than realtime bounce is very cutting edge.

Wow, is this saying that PT has never had fast bounce until now!!!?????  It is hard for me to imagine how professional studios could put up with that speed all these years, considering time is money and so on.
 
And what's with the "up to 150%".  With good hardware, fast bounce can go a lot faster than that.
 
I must be misunderstanding something basic here.

Who bumped this sloppy turd back to the first page?
 
Stahp!

Turning down work based on file formats strikes me as a basic lack of a key competence. You can either get sorted out to deal with whatever comes your way or work with the client to figure out how to pass stuff back and forth. It's not rocket science.
 

John T
Turning down work based on file formats strikes me as a basic lack of a key competence. You can either get sorted out to deal with whatever comes your way or work with the client to figure out how to pass stuff back and forth. It's not rocket science.
 

 Try telling that a Film Distribution company when you are going through deliverables.

cparmerlee

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
I love it when someone says they have never used something but declare something else better. Very objective opinion. And yeah, faster than realtime bounce is very cutting edge.

Wow, is this saying that PT has never had fast bounce until now!!!?????  It is hard for me to imagine how professional studios could put up with that speed all these years, considering time is money and so on.
 
And what's with the "up to 150%".  With good hardware, fast bounce can go a lot faster than that.
 
I must be misunderstanding something basic here.

PT has been WAY behind of MANY fronts over the years. They only implemented 64bit capability in recent versions. They refuse to support third party plugs or hardware that don't conform to their dinosaur hivemind. They charge WAY more than the market can bear.
 
They are basically "industry standarding" themselves out of business. Their efforts to reach out to the "consumer" market was laughable and failed miserably and from what I've heard they are returning back to their old, expensive, restrictive business model. They are losing partners and market share.
 
Now if you are running a pro studio and have tens of thousands of dollars to get all the hardware and everything set up properly, sure... it's probably a pretty sweet set up. The music world has moved on though and the average musician up to even pro studios are sick of their crap.
 
Like the big labels, movie and newspaper industries and many other monolithic ventures that refuse to adapt they will fail if they try to control the market.
 
What they should focus on and what they do seem to be focusing on is becoming more of a high end boutique type company that does what they did originally. Cater to the top end pros in the top end studios who can afford it. Trying to reach out to us plebes with inferior products after years of shutting us out of the market and treating everyone like moron pirates didn't work and will not work.
 
Avid... scale back and do what you do well. Custom installs for high end pros. The rest of us have more than enough options these days without your outdated business model. Maybe you can keep your company afloat.

Beep, I am a high end pro and all that jazz, but I still choose Sonar (btw great post)
 
As I have said, Avid are a Necessary EVIL.
 
I cant see the power balance shifting anytime soon, especially as Cakewalk have gone Tascam, Avid have Euphonix....Cakewalk went the right way with Roland but obviously that relationship didnt work out (much to my tears)..
 
Anyway, Sonar rules IS a creative DAW over PT. Using PT makes you feel like you are on the naughty step, it dictates YOU. Sonar is far more user friendly. Always has been and always will.