[[email protected]]

On Apr 9, 10:11*am, "Phil W" wrote:
RichL wrote:
If you're just starting out, you might want to reconsider. *ProTools
is definitely the "industry standard" but for home studio use you can
get software packages that do *nearly all* the same things yet cost a
small fraction of the equivalent ProTools versions.

And IF you really need to be compatible to this "industry standard", a small
version like LE or M-Powered is simply a joke. In this case, you will want
to go for one of the "real" PT versions anyway. I doubt, that the project
files for a PT HD system will be compatible with a LE/M-Powered system.
Besides that, think of how much direct compatibility you really need. In
many cases, where you record in one DAW program and mix in another one, you
will have to make mixdowns of each individual track anyway. For example,
last autumn we recorded a song in Logic and went to a studio, that uses PT
for mixing... It was a bunch of work to "bounce" the individual tracks,
since there were quite a few "edits" and punch-ins in the Logic project, but
in the end it worked perfectly.

Steinberg's Cubase and Cakewalk's Sonar are two good examples.
They'll run on either PC or Mac and aren't fussy about what kinds of
soundcards (or A/D converters) you use.

AFAIK Sonar runs only on Windows, but there s no Mac version. Cubase is
available for both OSs.
For the price of a stripped down PT version, Sonar will offer a lot more
functions and options. Reaper is even cheaper (50 $ for personal use / 250
for commercial use) and very flexible to use. You really ought to consider,
if you need ProTools. Don t get blinded by its big name, other DAW programs
offer the same functions and a lot more flexibility for the operator at a
fraction of the cost for PT!

I use Sonar Producer on a PC with an M-Audio Delta 44 soundcard. *The
Delta 44 allows 4 inputs but I never use more than 2 simultaneously.
The 4 outputs allow me to run two for stereo headphones and two for
powered monitors.

It costs around $150 new.

That s another point. PT software requires PT hardware, no matter if you
have something better. It simply won t run. Do you really want to go that
route?

Phil

There's so much incorrect, as in wrong, information here I don't know
where to begin and don't have any incentive to fix it all.

Might as while correct this one: You can run a session between PTHD
and any flavor of PTLE, including M-Powered with zero issues.
Naturally, if you expect a 48 track session imported into your $400
hardware/software DAW which clearly limits you to 24 tracks and four
outputs to magically transform your software into 48 track capable and
your box to having 16 outputs, well, I don't know what to tell you.

I do this daily, and if the plugins are on both machines, they live.

Digidesign simply said for years "We don't currently want to market to
the native DAW users. Since the software can always be pirated,
we'll make the hardware the dongle"

And these days there are many choices of hardware for PT is you want
to use it. The excuse of hardware being a dealkiller is a joke.
Don't like PT? Fine. But don't make your choice based on wrong info.

And BTW, the whole "My Sonar runs better than PTools" is a funny one
too, because first you have to eliminate the platform issues. If
you're running WIndows, use a WIndows program, not one cobbled
together because people kept asking for it. PT for Windows has a
zillion more problems than PT for OSX, even if lots of them are (MS)
driver related. I would never recommend it. There are many other
reasons I won't get into (Firewi great on OSX, not great on
WIndows, which does something to the list of interfaces you'd
consider.)

Here's something no one mentions,but it's King for me: Forget about
plug-ins, compatibilty, etc. PT, for me, has the best physical
handling of files in how you grab them, move them, cursor/trim/click
and otherwise edit and put them where they have to be. No contest.
Up until recently I had up to date DP and Logic. and have used Sonar,
Cubase and Reaper enough to do a paying session on any, so I know them
too. And I didn't drink any Kool-Aid. Sitting in front of PT is,
again I stress, for me, a way, way better experience even purely from
that standpoint. If you do a lot of editing and the interface holds
you back, it's a biggie, forget about the Kool Aid.

I have watched enough people struggling with the "more powerful than
ProTools for only $50" and I can't help them. I've literally watched
someone use 20 moves that would have taken me 5, and spent so much
time moving windows and alerts out of the way that I got bored and
turned away.

Before anyone goes out and sets up with any of those, especially
WIndows variants, I would say don't use cost and "Kool-Aid" factor as
why not to go ProTools.

Some folks love to hate ProTools, but it's usually people who don't
use it or know much about it. Like I said, I don't mind the PT
haters, I hope they have good running systems. Seriously. But
they're often using 20 year old info in their arguments.

v

[RichL]

wrote:
On Apr 9, 10:11 am, "Phil W" wrote:
RichL wrote:
If you're just starting out, you might want to reconsider. ProTools
is definitely the "industry standard" but for home studio use you
can get software packages that do *nearly all* the same things yet
cost a small fraction of the equivalent ProTools versions.

And IF you really need to be compatible to this "industry standard",
a small version like LE or M-Powered is simply a joke. In this case,
you will want to go for one of the "real" PT versions anyway. I
doubt, that the project files for a PT HD system will be compatible
with a LE/M-Powered system. Besides that, think of how much direct
compatibility you really need. In many cases, where you record in
one DAW program and mix in another one, you will have to make
mixdowns of each individual track anyway. For example, last autumn
we recorded a song in Logic and went to a studio, that uses PT for
mixing... It was a bunch of work to "bounce" the individual tracks,
since there were quite a few "edits" and punch-ins in the Logic
project, but in the end it worked perfectly.

Steinberg's Cubase and Cakewalk's Sonar are two good examples.
They'll run on either PC or Mac and aren't fussy about what kinds of
soundcards (or A/D converters) you use.

AFAIK Sonar runs only on Windows, but there s no Mac version. Cubase
is available for both OSs.
For the price of a stripped down PT version, Sonar will offer a lot
more functions and options. Reaper is even cheaper (50 $ for
personal use / 250 for commercial use) and very flexible to use. You
really ought to consider, if you need ProTools. Don t get blinded by
its big name, other DAW programs offer the same functions and a lot
more flexibility for the operator at a fraction of the cost for PT!

I use Sonar Producer on a PC with an M-Audio Delta 44 soundcard. The
Delta 44 allows 4 inputs but I never use more than 2 simultaneously.
The 4 outputs allow me to run two for stereo headphones and two for
powered monitors.

It costs around $150 new.

That s another point. PT software requires PT hardware, no matter if
you have something better. It simply won t run. Do you really want
to go that route?

Phil

There's so much incorrect, as in wrong, information here I don't know
where to begin and don't have any incentive to fix it all.

Might as while correct this one: You can run a session between PTHD
and any flavor of PTLE, including M-Powered with zero issues.
Naturally, if you expect a 48 track session imported into your $400
hardware/software DAW which clearly limits you to 24 tracks and four
outputs to magically transform your software into 48 track capable and
your box to having 16 outputs, well, I don't know what to tell you.

I do this daily, and if the plugins are on both machines, they live.

Digidesign simply said for years "We don't currently want to market to
the native DAW users. Since the software can always be pirated,
we'll make the hardware the dongle"

And these days there are many choices of hardware for PT is you want
to use it. The excuse of hardware being a dealkiller is a joke.
Don't like PT? Fine. But don't make your choice based on wrong info.

And BTW, the whole "My Sonar runs better than PTools" is a funny one
too, because first you have to eliminate the platform issues. If
you're running WIndows, use a WIndows program, not one cobbled
together because people kept asking for it. PT for Windows has a
zillion more problems than PT for OSX, even if lots of them are (MS)
driver related. I would never recommend it. There are many other
reasons I won't get into (Firewi great on OSX, not great on
WIndows, which does something to the list of interfaces you'd
consider.)

Here's something no one mentions,but it's King for me: Forget about
plug-ins, compatibilty, etc. PT, for me, has the best physical
handling of files in how you grab them, move them, cursor/trim/click
and otherwise edit and put them where they have to be. No contest.
Up until recently I had up to date DP and Logic. and have used Sonar,
Cubase and Reaper enough to do a paying session on any, so I know them
too. And I didn't drink any Kool-Aid. Sitting in front of PT is,
again I stress, for me, a way, way better experience even purely from
that standpoint. If you do a lot of editing and the interface holds
you back, it's a biggie, forget about the Kool Aid.

I have watched enough people struggling with the "more powerful than
ProTools for only $50" and I can't help them. I've literally watched
someone use 20 moves that would have taken me 5, and spent so much
time moving windows and alerts out of the way that I got bored and
turned away.

Before anyone goes out and sets up with any of those, especially
WIndows variants, I would say don't use cost and "Kool-Aid" factor as
why not to go ProTools.

Some folks love to hate ProTools, but it's usually people who don't
use it or know much about it. Like I said, I don't mind the PT
haters, I hope they have good running systems. Seriously. But
they're often using 20 year old info in their arguments.

Consider the possibility that it's easier for you to do things in PT
because that's what you have the most experience with! And nobody's
talking about Kool Aid or PT haters.

Sheeks, this is worse than the Mac vs. PC arguments as far as inducing
venom. Maybe in the end that's the underlying issue anyways. Guys who
like Macs tend to go for PT because it's laid out in a way that's
comfortable for Mac users?

I'm a PC user for many reasons, none of which have to do with snobbery.
So maybe Sonar was a better fit for me anyways. I'm not a pro nor do I
have any intention of becoming one. But for example with Sonar I don't
have to worry about a limit on the number of tracks; my limit ultimately
reduces to what my PC can handle.

I think that for the OP the "right" answers to his questions depend
largely upon what his goals are which were not all that clearly
expressed.