Paul P


I think we've sacrificed quality for change.

For example, if Cakewalk announced that for 300$ we could either buy a bugfree version of X2 or buy X3, which would we choose ?

I think we've become slaves to change. We get bored too easily. We don't really want to do anything, we just want things done to us.

I would have bought X2 if it was bug free and worked with all of my stuff properly out the box. It doesn't so I switched DAWs but I wouldn't mind going back because I miss mixing and I hate learning new shortcuts

BlixYZ


minus avid or digidesign hardware- i find tracking in PT to be unworkable.  I would probably be a pro tools guy if tracking wasn't so screwy.    
But then again, I'm a latency free- direct monitoring guy, and protools doesn't preserve that route (not even pt10!!)   subsequently, I don't use it much.   I absolutely do enjoy mixing in PT, however.

 
You have to do this using a hardware split while tracking. It can be done. Cakewalk has the same issues. There is always latency unless you foldback to a headphone system then you have eliminated the problem.
 
Regarding the bug situation, as companies mature accountants take over and entrepreneurs leave. The number crunchers just want the product out the door at a specific time. The Designers and quality control people are overruled based on acceptable risk. Look at Microsoft, same thing happening there.
 

I did some side buss Comp and Harmonix flavors in Pro Tools 10 ,,,, and the phasing problems were endless ........I did the same thing in Sonar X2 and it was smooth and natural . That right there sold me on Sonar. I use alot of side buss textures like I used to on my old console. I remember  hearing reports of Pro Tools not doing  a usable side Buss .  That has kept a few old dogs to their hardware in the big league.

This not so crazy thread,has informed me,of a few things I was wondering about,when it comes to,a comparison of the wild 10K or so investment,of PT HDX,compared to Sonar X2 64bit,plus 3rd party VST effects.

It seems[ATM] I cho$e wisely after all.

I'm always intrigued,to hear the opinions of those,who own,and actually use both,especially,when the cost factor between them,is so extreme[intiallly,until one starts forking out for 3rd party interfaces,FX.]
Bob

xabiton, I'm not at all sure what your response has to do with my comment.    I'm not commenting on quantity or quality- I'm talking about functionality.  Something that is easily done in Sonar which makes tracking with clients smooth and trouble free is problematic in PT unless you have digi003 or something similar.

Middleman, I have PT10 and Sonar and I use the Profire 2626 + octane.  This interface, like many others, includes a software mixer that allows   for hardware monitoring.  ProTools doesn't properly support it- you can do it, but you can only hear the sources (the person in the booth/drum room) when you are actually recording!  otherwise there is just silence.  They can't hear themselves in the phones as they sing or play along up to a punch point and there can be no conversation between takes.  
The alternative is to use software monitoring which necessarily introduces latency.   I have been to the PT forums and I'm not the only one who finds it a dealbreaker. 

I can use additional hardware (mixer) to work around this, but I shouldn't have to.
The profire software mixer allows for aux sends and multiple headphone mixes in addition to true hardware monitoring.  Every DAW can utilize these capabilities except for PT.

This, along with lack of VST, lack of delay compensation, lack of off-line rendering- these are all legitimate beefs.

It always depends on the context and your needs. 

If your host is the very core of your studio and/or you need it to run virtual instruments, work w/ loops, do extensive midi work and need a self-contained all-inclusive solution, Pro Tools probably isn't the best option.

For some people, the absolute best solution will be Ableton Live. For others, Mainstage on a laptop. For others it'll be Sonar or Cubase or Reaper...  

For me, MIDI and sampling + creating sampler instruments is crucial - and nothing even comes close to Logic and EXS-24 in that department. I do own Pro Tools (native), and while I like mixing in PT, overall, it isn't the right app for me. Same for Cubase and Studio One.

Though Avid did try to get their share of that swiss-army knife market, Pro Tools just isn't the best tool for that, imho.

OTOH, it has its strengths - it has to. Which is why it's still in virtually every major league studio.

Even among the users of the same products, you'll have a tough time finding two people having the same workflow. I've used Cakewalk products for a decade and there are certain features which are crucial to other users which I've never even touched. Yet, users from every horizons and w/ every type of needs managed to bring project to completion in the same app.

There are some scenarios where a Fender twin is the absolute best option - who in their right mind would try to put it down simply because it doesn't offer 30 different amp models and effects like a Line 6 amp or a software amp sim? It always depends on the scenario...

Rain


It always depends on the context and your needs. 

If your host is the very core of your studio and/or you need it to run virtual instruments, work w/ loops, do extensive midi work and need a self-contained all-inclusive solution, Pro Tools probably isn't the best option.

For some people, the absolute best solution will be Ableton Live. For others, Mainstage on a laptop. For others it'll be Sonar or Cubase or Reaper...  

For me, MIDI and sampling + creating sampler instruments is crucial - and nothing even comes close to Logic and EXS-24 in that department. I do own Pro Tools (native), and while I like mixing in PT, overall, it isn't the right app for me. Same for Cubase and Studio One.

Though Avid did try to get their share of that swiss-army knife market, Pro Tools just isn't the best tool for that, imho.

OTOH, it has its strengths - it has to. Which is why it's still in virtually every major league studio.

Even among the users of the same products, you'll have a tough time finding two people having the same workflow. I've used Cakewalk products for a decade and there are certain features which are crucial to other users which I've never even touched. Yet, users from every horizons and w/ every type of needs managed to bring project to completion in the same app.

There are some scenarios where a Fender twin is the absolute best option - who in their right mind would try to put it down simply because it doesn't offer 30 different amp models and effects like a Line 6 amp or a software amp sim? It always depends on the scenario...

I've noticed,in the past Rain,youv'e expressed that,you use apple laptop's etc,do you run Sonar X1 or X2 at all?If so,are you using paralells or bootcamp to do so?


Just wondering.
Bob

When X1 came out, I had plans to wait until X2 came out and maybe run it on Bootcamp, but it never happened. The original Sonar line was closer to what I had in mind than the X-series incarnation.

I've started re-building the few older projects I wanted to re-work directly in Logic and it just work better for me, w/ the sampler and all. I don't feel it'd be worth the hassle...

I'm using Zeta, Dimension Pro and Rapture quite a bit though.

Ugggh my crazy browser didn't show your new post,till NOW,Thanks for answering Rain!
Cheers
Bob

BlixYZ


Middleman, I have PT10 and Sonar and I use the Profire 2626 + octane.  This interface, like many others, includes a software mixer that allows   for hardware monitoring.  ProTools doesn't properly support it- you can do it, but you can only hear the sources (the person in the booth/drum room) when you are actually recording!  otherwise there is just silence.  They can't hear themselves in the phones as they sing or play along up to a punch point and there can be no conversation between takes.  
The alternative is to use software monitoring which necessarily introduces latency.   I have been to the PT forums and I'm not the only one who finds it a dealbreaker. 

I can use additional hardware (mixer) to work around this, but I shouldn't have to.
The profire software mixer allows for aux sends and multiple headphone mixes in addition to true hardware monitoring.  Every DAW can utilize these capabilities except for PT.

This, along with lack of VST, lack of delay compensation, lack of off-line rendering- these are all legitimate beefs.

The monitoring you are looking for comes with the upgrade kit, it's not in the base PT10 package. You could do it, but you would have to spend more. I agree with your complaint however, I think many are hoping PT11 provides that function without the cost. I monitor externally so that feature is not critical for my studio.
 
Regarding VST, since I use Sonar for most of my midi work I generally still have VST capability, having that in PT is not critical. Also you can pick up a VST wrapper for Protools if you need that but the midi implimentation in PT is so bad, I have no interest in working on midi tracks in PT. For the most part though, most of the VST software I have also provides a PT version so I haven't lost any critical VSTs I might want.  Delay compensation, PT 10 has delay compensation. The new Audiosuite plugins in PT have offline rendering by the way. If you have PT10, check those out.