What can Pro Tools do that Logic can't?

[groovejam]

Why is it that one hears so much about pro tools and digidesign when logic seems to be jsut as cable with better hardware options?

Is this all hype and marketing? Is it becuase they pay recording schools and studios to use pro tools?


Could anyone elaborate?

[brianrost]

Originally Posted by groovejam

Why is it that one hears so much about pro tools and digidesign when logic seems to be just as capable with better hardware options?

For one thing, Pro Tools will run on a Windows machine. When Apple bought Logic, they dropped Windows support.

Pro Tools got established as the professional program years ago and has retained that cachet despite heavy competition.

Digidesign also sells their own hardware while most of the competition only provides software (Apple doesn't sell audio interfaces and control surfaces). That reduces the surprises that arise when trying to get the hardware working with the software.

[deaf pea]

Originally Posted by groovejam

Why is it that one hears so much about pro tools and digidesign when logic seems to be just as capable

Originally Posted by brianrost

Pro Tools got established as the professional program years ago and has retained that cachet despite heavy competition.

Like Brian said, the MAIN reason is because PT has been around for SO LONG . . . Digidesign designed the 1st professionally-accepted digital-audio recording/editing software over 25 years ago! And they have led the way, since the beginning, with advances in practicality AND in sound quality . . .

Originally Posted by brianrost

Digidesign also sells their own hardware...That reduces the surprises that arise when trying to get the hardware working with the software.

I think that's a PLUS, although there are many disatified users that wish that the software would work well with ANY interface (as in A CHEAPER ONE).

[groovejam]

Can you use pro tools with non digidesign interfaces? I didnt think you could

[Benjamin Strange]

You can use PT with certain M-Audio devices, and that's only if you get the M-Powered version of the software.

What can Logic do better? MIDI. Not only does it have vastly better MIDI control functions, it also comes with some really kick ass software plugins. It will also work with third party stuff like Reason and others.

The downside of Logic is that it seems to have a steeper learning curve for the novice than PT. I adapted quickly to it, as I've been a long time PT user and even longer Mac user, but I've heard of others having much more difficulty.

Ultimately, buying software is just like buying a bass - you find one that works best for you and go with that.

[stz]

PT's has that "build a machine with this spec and this hardware and we guarantee a stable recording environment" thing going on. When you are laying down tracks you want something which never ever goes crazy and loses data. Other packages do some excellent things which PT's can't do, midi support to, but PT's is supposed to be the standard due to reliability and due to the amount of people using it.

"Everyone uses Protools, wouldn't you rather goto a studio that uses Protools?"

"Hey, get Protools, it is an investment but then session data from other studios can come right over, you could get some work doing post processing, the mastering engineer will be able to take it from you in that format, you'll get more work all around by having what everyone else has"

[TheButler]

I think the major thing with both is, they are not Sonar 6 YEs, i have recently purchased the the producer edition, i needed to upgrade from SX3

[jeff schmidt]

I think it's important to distinguish between "host based" systems - where ALL the processing is done by the computer processor - and ProTools TDM systems - where all the plug-in/mixing processing is done on seperate processor cards.

There is no comparison between those 2 worlds and ProTools TDM wins hands down for power and reliability.

But for comparing host based systems, I believe the digi performance advantage vanishes. I think you'll find most of those systems will do everything you need.

[groovejam]

Well

I am going to recording school and I just bought a Macbook
I am trying to decide what software and interface I want for my personal projects. The school Im going to is mostly Pro Tools but also offers logic certification. I dont like the idea having to have the hardware with you to use to program.

[lamarjones]

with studios in the area and what not, there is some advantage of having a pro tools based interface. Many good studios can provide you with PT sessions so that you can doctor up outside of the studio. Great for tracking midi on the side and other things that don't require great preamps and mics, unless you got them.

i got a macbook and a digi 002. Also got a macki onyx 800r, bringing my simultaneous tracking ability to 16.

[derrico1]

Will Pro Tools be industry standard 10 years from now? Maybe not. Will you run into it everywhere in a year or two once you finish your training in a year? You bet. My advice is that you might as well start working on your Pro Tools chops now.

Better yet, e-mail a couple of the instructors in the program you are entering and (briefly) ask them what they recommend, Logic or Pro Tools.

[KekChoz]

Originally Posted by deaf pea

Digidesign designed the 1st professionally-accepted digital-audio recording/editing software over 25 years ago!

It's not Cubase that was the first Sequencer software in the market, many years ago? I heard somewhere that it was...
What are the pros and cons between Cubase and PT? Me too i'm in a dilemma, but between Cubase and PT instead.

[deaf pea]

Originally Posted by derrico1

Will Pro Tools be industry standard 10 years from now?

I don't see PT losing it's lead for the pro users . . . it's the "de facto" standard for a PROFESSIONAL random-access digital audio recording/editing software in the pop music, classical music, film music (AND dialog AND fx) industries . . .
Maybe the "home studios" of the masses will gravitate towards other, less costly, solutions . . . but the pro's will continue working with ProTools TDM in it's vartous forms (HD, HD/ACCEL, or whatever comes next . . .(

Originally Posted by KekChoz

It's not Cubase that was the first Sequencer software in the market, many years ago? I heard somewhere that it was...

IIRC, "Texture" by Todd Rontgren's keyboardist (I don't remember his name - was it Roger something?) was the first midi-keyboard-based sequencing software that worked AND was popular. This was BEFORE windows OR Macs . . . it was in line-entry M-DOS!!!

Originally Posted by KekChoz

What are the pros and cons between Cubase and PT?

Cubase is a relatively good midi-keyboard-based sequencing software that also has some "limited" ability to record and edit digital audio.
PT LE is a relatively good random-access digital audio recording/editing software that also has "limited" midi-keyboard-based sequencing abilities . . .

Good luck . . .

[derrico1]

Originally Posted by deaf pea

I don't see PT losing it's lead for the pro users . . . it's the "de facto" standard for a PROFESSIONAL random-access digital audio recording/editing software in the pop music, classical music, film music (AND dialog AND fx) industries . . .
Maybe the "home studios" of the masses will gravitate towards other, less costly, solutions . . . but the pro's will continue working with ProTools TDM in it's vartous forms (HD, HD/ACCEL, or whatever comes next . . .(

Which was my point for the OP: if he's going to enter a program to learn how to become a studio professional, he might as well get used to the professional standard. Pro Tools might not be the standard forever, but it will be for the foreseeable future.

And I might be surprised, but I suspect that is exactly what his instructors will tell him.

[Charling]

Originally Posted by KekChoz

It's not Cubase that was the first Sequencer software in the market, many years ago? I heard somewhere that it was...
What are the pros and cons between Cubase and PT? Me too i'm in a dilemma, but between Cubase and PT instead.

Yeah, Cubase started out as just that, a sequencer for sequencing MIDI data. Later on audio support was added and over time it came to be pretty damn good at that too.

Protools started life as a digital audio workstation, with no MIDI, later on they added midi support and it too became proficient in both.

PT and Cuabse are pretty different, but in terms of what-they-do-for-you they are fairly similar! Cubase is purely software, it runs with pretty much any soundcard and does all the work through your computers cpu.

the reason to buy protools, if you really want the benefits of their system, is that it is a fully integrated hardware and software package. it isnt a program that runs with a soundcard, it IS the soundcard as well! its a full system where the protools hardware takes allot of the brunt of processing as well, meaning its reliable and can get great performance out of a normal pc.

a FULL protools system also has a fully automated mixer as well, once again, its not a program connected to a soundcard to a mixer, protools IS the mixer as well! and the software and hardware link seamlessly, you open a project in protools and your mixer immediatly sets itself to the correct settings etc.

Personally, unless you are wanting a very high end, no expense spared studio there isnt allot of need for a protools system.
TDM etc was very good ten years ago when even a good pc would struggle to run 40 tracks of audio, it suddenly allowed you to work in the wonderous way that digital audio promised.

now your average desktop can get to 140 tracks as well as plugins (my personal record ) for MOST uses I think cubase/logic/one of the others and a decent desktop is the answer, and it'll probably be a tenth of the price!

[fokof]

PT is in that situation because of their monopoly situation , exactly like Microsoft is. You can't run PT with any hardware other than Avid's. Their hardware acts as a dongle. And everybody knows that that there is LOTS of other Waaaaayyyyyyy better AD/DA out there for the same money.

Avid is gonna loose that monopoly because computers are getting much more powerfull , and there soon will be no more reason to buy those ( too much ) expensive Axcel cards.
So get get a hold of other platforms like Digital Performer or stuff alike too.

[deaf pea]

Originally Posted by Charling

...for MOST uses I think cubase/logic/one of the others and a decent desktop is the answer, and it'll probably be a tenth of the price!

Originally Posted by fokof

...get a hold of other platforms like Digital
Performer...

For your HOME studio, yes. But if you want to do ANY recording or mixing at a PROFESSIONAL studio, you'd better have PT . . .
If not, you're gonna spend a lot of time ($$$$) transfering your audio files into a compatible format and importing the NEW files into a PT session . . .
PT IS the "professional" standard . . .

Those other systems WILL work OK, by themselves. But they ARE NOT compatible with what is used in the professional studios. And it has been the "professional standard" for 20+ years - PT (or in it's earlier form "Sound Designer")

Originally Posted by fokof

PT is in that situation because of their monopoly situation , exactly like Microsoft is. You can't run PT with any hardware other than Avid's. Their hardware acts as a dongle.

Not true . . . the Apogee Electronics AD/DA units have ALWAYS worked fine with PT. And now with the M- versions of PT there's another source of compatible interfaces.

Originally Posted by fokof

. And everybody knows that that there is LOTS of other Waaaaayyyyyyy better AD/DA out there for the same money.

For "the same money"?
I don't think so . . . to get significantly better AD/DA performance than the 002 or 003 you have to pay significantly more $$ . . . like for the 192 or something from dB Technologies or Weiss or ?

Originally Posted by fokof

Avid is gonna loose that monopoly because computers are getting much more powerfull , and there soon will be no more reason to buy those ( too much ) expensive Axcel cards.

The best system at the studio where I work at has a relatively new G5 with dual 2GHz processors, 4 GByte of RAM, 3 HD Accel cards, a SYNC I/O (to sync up the Studer analog 24 track), 2 192 interfaces (with 24 I/O) and 2000 GB of hard disk storage. I find that I don't run out of processing speed, TDM or ANYTHING . . . bottom line, IT WORKS!

The studio IS a "professional studio" - over $1 million invested in 2 rooms, plus mastering. Gold and Platinum records, Grammy nominations with several wins, other awards, too.



There will ALWAYS be a reason to buy Digidesign/Avid products . . . to STAY on the "cutting edge" of the digital audio revolution!

[Aaron]

Originally Posted by KekChoz

It's not Cubase that was the first Sequencer software in the market, many years ago? I heard somewhere that it was...
What are the pros and cons between Cubase and PT? Me too i'm in a dilemma, but between Cubase and PT instead.

I use A PT HD 3 system at school and Cubase SX 3 at home. I've found that Cubase's midi features are a bit easier to use, and Protools' routing is a lot more flexible and similar to routing in the analog realm.

[KekChoz]

Thanks for the advices!! i appreciate

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by deaf pea

IIRC, "Texture" by Todd Rontgren's keyboardist (I don't remember his name - was it Roger something?)

Roger Powell.