Hi all,

Well, my wife and I have put money down on Nuendo, but there's still time to
change our minds.

The music my wife does will be about an even split between audio recording
(vocals, electric guitar, accoustic stringed instruments) and sequencing with
software plug-ins and one Triton Pro. She'll be wanting the software to work
simultaneously as a recording system and a compositional tool. She is also,
however, not very computer literate yet (enough to work well in Ableton Live
through). Also, we'll be wanting to interact with studios on some parts of
her projects.

(we've bee PC/Sonar 2 users up until now)

So, it looked to me like Nuendo 2.x would be the way to go for greatest
strength in both audio and sequencing in one package. Still, there's time to
change our minds, and my worry with Nuendo is the reports of less a than
stellar stability history for Steinberg products in general, including some
crashing problems in Nuendo 2.x switching between multiple open projects
(though that's not something we'll be doing much of).

Obviously, the 2 main other choices we're considering are ProTools and Logic.

It looks to me like there are vastly more studios out there using ProTools
than anything else, and I hear it's the easiest to use for audio (that will
matter for my wife), has adequate sequencing, and is highly stable, but they
nickel and dime you to death (like add $500 for OMF support!?).

Logic, on the other hand, seems to be the clear price/performance winner, most
powerful for sequencing, pretty stable, optimized for Mac (obviously), and
very flexible, but with a fairly high learning curve.

Would anyone suggest that I use my downpayment on Nuendo for an 002 Rack or
Logic Platinum instead?

Thanks,

- Steve Jorgensen

Steve J wrote:

Hi all,

Well, my wife and I have put money down on Nuendo, but there's still time to
change our minds.

The music my wife does will be about an even split between audio recording
(vocals, electric guitar, accoustic stringed instruments) and sequencing with
software plug-ins and one Triton Pro. She'll be wanting the software to work
simultaneously as a recording system and a compositional tool. She is also,
however, not very computer literate yet (enough to work well in Ableton Live
through). Also, we'll be wanting to interact with studios on some parts of
her projects.

(we've bee PC/Sonar 2 users up until now)

So, it looked to me like Nuendo 2.x would be the way to go for greatest
strength in both audio and sequencing in one package. Still, there's time to
change our minds, and my worry with Nuendo is the reports of less a than
stellar stability history for Steinberg products in general, including some
crashing problems in Nuendo 2.x switching between multiple open projects
(though that's not something we'll be doing much of).

Obviously, the 2 main other choices we're considering are ProTools and Logic.

It looks to me like there are vastly more studios out there using ProTools
than anything else, and I hear it's the easiest to use for audio (that will
matter for my wife), has adequate sequencing, and is highly stable, but they
nickel and dime you to death (like add $500 for OMF support!?).

Logic, on the other hand, seems to be the clear price/performance winner,
most
powerful for sequencing, pretty stable, optimized for Mac (obviously), and
very flexible, but with a fairly high learning curve.

Would anyone suggest that I use my downpayment on Nuendo for an 002 Rack or
Logic Platinum instead?


You know in still think Nuendo a PC kind of of thing. I know there's buttloads
of Mac users with Nuendo but this is a just personal observation.


Thanks,

- Steve Jorgensen

You know in still think Nuendo a PC kind of of thing. I know there's
buttloads
of Mac users with Nuendo but this is a just personal observation.


No wonder I couldn't get through English.

You should definitely check out MotU's Digital Performer 4.11.

Obviously, the 2 main other choices we're considering are ProTools and
Logic.

There's Digital Performer also.


Scott Fraser

In article am writes:

Well, my wife and I have put money down on Nuendo, but there's still time to
change our minds.

The music my wife does will be about an even split between audio recording
(vocals, electric guitar, accoustic stringed instruments) and sequencing with
software plug-ins and one Triton Pro. She'll be wanting the software to work
simultaneously as a recording system and a compositional tool. She is also,
however, not very computer literate yet (enough to work well in Ableton Live
through). Also, we'll be wanting to interact with studios on some parts of
her projects.

(we've bee PC/Sonar 2 users up until now)

So why change? I'm not really up on Sonar, but if it follows in the
legacy of Cakewalk, it makes a lot of sense as a compositional tool
and doesn't stand in your way for recording.

No matter what system you get, you WILL have hassles when working on
projects with other studios and it requires some understanding to work
through them. The best bet is to talk to your most likely
collaborators and see if at least as a group you can agree on an
interchange format if this is going to be a common working mode.
If it's a matter of sending a project to someone to have him or her
add a track, it's best if you both have the same system. If it's just
a matter of sending out a "demo" to prepare someone for a session or
to get some input for writing, then anything will do.

It looks to me like there are vastly more studios out there using ProTools
than anything else, and I hear it's the easiest to use for audio (that will
matter for my wife), has adequate sequencing, and is highly stable, but they
nickel and dime you to death (like add $500 for OMF support!?).

This is all true.

Would anyone suggest that I use my downpayment on Nuendo for an 002 Rack or
Logic Platinum instead?

Not without a lot of thought. Actually, you probably should have
decided on the program before you went out and bought the high powered
Mac. Maybe a PC would be better. Never can be too sure about that
though.

You might find that it's more effective to work with two computers,
using one to record audio and the other as a sequencer.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On 14 Nov 2003 08:57:10 -0500, (Mike Rivers) wrote:


In article am writes:

Well, my wife and I have put money down on Nuendo, but there's still time to
change our minds.

The music my wife does will be about an even split between audio recording
(vocals, electric guitar, accoustic stringed instruments) and sequencing with
software plug-ins and one Triton Pro. She'll be wanting the software to work
simultaneously as a recording system and a compositional tool. She is also,
however, not very computer literate yet (enough to work well in Ableton Live
through). Also, we'll be wanting to interact with studios on some parts of
her projects.

(we've bee PC/Sonar 2 users up until now)

So why change? I'm not really up on Sonar, but if it follows in the
legacy of Cakewalk, it makes a lot of sense as a compositional tool
and doesn't stand in your way for recording.

We did not change lightly. We spent several months deciding, though at the
end, we were sill only leaning a bit toward the Mac - I'm sure we could have
spent a lifetime deciding, but then we wouldn't have a computer. Not
necessarily in order...
1. I'm the one who learned Sonar, but my day job doesn't leave me enough time
to be helpful. My wife has to learn pretty from scratch anyway.
2. The great price/performance you get with the G5
3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace Sonar and CEP with a single, integrated product)
4. The limited signal routing capability of Sonar 2 (how were we to know S3
would fix that)
5. The pure aesthetic value of the Mac.
6. Pretty much every other musician or engineer my wife knows uses Mac.
7. All the music production classes my wife is interested in would teach on a
Mac.
8. Windows 2000 is rock solid, but support is starting to wane, and I'm not
happy with the problems with XP.
9. OS X being a Unix has some nice advantages.
10. Core Audio is a bit more efficient than WDM, and there is nothing like
Core MIDI on PC.

No matter what system you get, you WILL have hassles when working on
projects with other studios and it requires some understanding to work
through them. The best bet is to talk to your most likely
collaborators and see if at least as a group you can agree on an
interchange format if this is going to be a common working mode.
If it's a matter of sending a project to someone to have him or her
add a track, it's best if you both have the same system. If it's just
a matter of sending out a "demo" to prepare someone for a session or
to get some input for writing, then anything will do.

We have one studio/engineer we've been working with, and he only has ProTools.
We like him OK, but he doesn't grasp the sound we're looking for, so we're
going to need to find someone else anyway. One likely prospect is willing to
work with us at home or in the studio, and he prefers Nuendo, though he's
decided to buy ProTools as well because it's too hard swimming against the
tide.

It looks to me like there are vastly more studios out there using ProTools
than anything else, and I hear it's the easiest to use for audio (that will
matter for my wife), has adequate sequencing, and is highly stable, but they
nickel and dime you to death (like add $500 for OMF support!?).

This is all true.

Would anyone suggest that I use my downpayment on Nuendo for an 002 Rack or
Logic Platinum instead?

Not without a lot of thought. Actually, you probably should have
decided on the program before you went out and bought the high powered
Mac. Maybe a PC would be better. Never can be too sure about that
though.

Well, we had decided it would be ProTools, Logic, or Digital Performer. It
wasn't until we actually had the Mac that we realized we should also consider
Nuendo. Quite a lot of thought has already been put in, and I think we've
come to the right conclusion, though I know we'll have to just work with it to
ever know for sure. Because of the size of the purchase, I thought it was
prudent to ask here where there are so many people know more than we do about
all these programs.

You might find that it's more effective to work with two computers,
using one to record audio and the other as a sequencer.

I think that would be a hassle since my wife usually has several projects in
progress at a time, and she'll be wanting to bounce freeley between audo
recording, sequencing, and arranging. Having everything in one system,
program, and project file should be much easier, especially for someone who is
still coming to grips with how a file system works.

Of course, regarding 2 computers, it looks like it's possible, with Nuendo, to
run a single project/file in real time, across 2 computers where they need not
be the same OS. I've even seen evidence that they won't both have to be
running Nuendo, one can run SX2. Will we ever need or use this? Who knows,
but it is a neat capability.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:03:01 GMT, Steve Jorgensen
wrote:

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace Sonar and CEP with a single, integrated product)

Should read

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace -Acid- and CEP with a single, integrated product)

Steve Jorgensen wrote in message . ..

Would anyone suggest that I use my downpayment on Nuendo for an 002 Rack or
Logic Platinum instead?


Nuendo user here. I'm very happy with Nuendo 2 on mac. It's been
rock solid for me, more cost efficient and flexible than the whole PT
bottomless pit, and of course the sound quality is excellent.

You should check out the Nuendo forum and ask people who are using it
on a G5. Last I heard they were still working out a few redraw issues
with Panther, but the G5 Jag was fine. But it's worth double
checking.

There's a lot of features you'll find in Nuendo that PT just ain't
got. On the other hand there are more options for setting up your
system when you're not tied to PT hardware and so there are more ways
for users to hose themselves up. The kids over on the Nuendo board
(lots of Cubase upgraders) are always bitching wondering why their
cheesy system is experiencing so many issues. Do your research and
make sure you choose good components that play well together.

-BH

If you want to do some loops and some drum programming, check out Reason.
Reason is very cool for all sorts of things.

I know it will play with Pro Tools through rewire and I'm sure it will play
with other DAW software as well.


---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

In article , Steve
Jorgensen wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:03:01 GMT, Steve Jorgensen
wrote:

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace Sonar and CEP with a single, integrated product)

Should read

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace -Acid- and CEP with a single, integrated product)
From what i understand nuendo has even less midi than pro tools (if any
at all). It's not a standard (definitely not on the Mac) and when you
consider what you get with a digi 002 rack not even a good deal. For
loop stretching you get Live thrown in for free with the pro tools
package as well as reason and sampletank and amplitube for your guitar
distortion needs. These are all cut down versions of the real things
but still are very powerful and can be upgraded at a later date. the
midi in pro tools while not up to Logic or DP standards is very
useable. Believe me, all of the software packages nickle and dime you
to death with add ons so pro tools is not alone. For the money the
package that digi sells right now is pretty un-beatable and will be
very powerful in combination with your G5 .

If you're really heavily into the midi thing I would suggest Logic but
keep in mind they still charge extra for each and every one of their
soft synths and samplers (which are excellent by the way) and the audio
part is not as intuitive as pro tools AND you don't get an audio/midi
interface thrown in with the package.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:16:33 GMT, Guitarboy wrote:


From what i understand nuendo has even less midi than pro tools (if any
at all). It's not a standard (definitely not on the Mac) and when you

My understanding is that this definitely no longer true in Nuendo 2.0 which
inherits all the MIDI features of Cubase SX2. That puts it well above
ProTools for MIDI, and in the ball park with Logic.

consider what you get with a digi 002 rack not even a good deal. For
loop stretching you get Live thrown in for free with the pro tools
package as well as reason and sampletank and amplitube for your guitar
distortion needs. These are all cut down versions of the real things
but still are very powerful and can be upgraded at a later date. the

I'm aware of these balancing factors, but on the other side, by the time you
pay heavy premiums with ProTools for features that are free in other software
such as OMF support (about 2 of these add-ons would equal the cost of the 002
rack), and if you account for the arbitrary 32-track ceiling with LE that can
be surmounted only by paying for an HD system...

midi in pro tools while not up to Logic or DP standards is very
useable. Believe me, all of the software packages nickle and dime you
to death with add ons so pro tools is not alone. For the money the

True, ProTools just seems to charge for more things in the feature category,
not just add-on instruments, plug-ins, etc., which to me are really separate
products well deserving of their own separate purchase prices.

package that digi sells right now is pretty un-beatable and will be
very powerful in combination with your G5 .

Perhaps, the biggest difficulty with this decision making process is the fact
that there are so many very good choices.

....

In article , Steve
Jorgensen wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:16:33 GMT, Guitarboy wrote:




My understanding is that this definitely no longer true in Nuendo 2.0 which
inherits all the MIDI features of Cubase SX2. That puts it well above
ProTools for MIDI, and in the ball park with Logic.



I'm aware of these balancing factors, but on the other side, by the time you
pay heavy premiums with ProTools for features that are free in other software
such as OMF support (about 2 of these add-ons would equal the cost of the 002
rack), and if you account for the arbitrary 32-track ceiling with LE that can
be surmounted only by paying for an HD system...
You dont need OMF support in Pro Tools because you would need OMF to go
from whatever non standard software you were using to pro tools. if you
already have pro tools you just bring a pro tools session into the
studio and viola!!!! also having the 32 tracks means the system is
stable and won't max out the computer. I know plenty of pro's using pro
tools 002R's in their project studios and 32 tracks are enough to work
on records so unless you're doing huge orchestral productions you can
get away with 32 tracks just fine (the playlists feature helps you save
different versions of tracks without burning up track count)


True, ProTools just seems to charge for more things in the feature category,
not just add-on instruments, plug-ins, etc., which to me are really separate
products well deserving of their own separate purchase prices.
Pro Tools comes with some plug in packages and a full set of pro tools
plugins made by digi just like the other programs. of course if you
want the more esoteric plugs (or better ones like waves or mcdsp) then
you have to purchase them JUST ASE THE OTHER PACKAGES REQUIRE YOU TO
DO.
Also, the best plugs are available only as rtas (or tdm) such as sony
oxford or mcdsp or eventide or many others. If you're such a big
willie to need huge track counts you might need great sounding plugins
as well.


Perhaps, the biggest difficulty with this decision making process is the fact
that there are so many very good choices.

...
Its only an impression that pro tools le is any more expensive than any
other native software package. you need to sit down with a calculator
and figure it out.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:03:01 GMT, Steve Jorgensen
wrote:

On 14 Nov 2003 08:57:10 -0500, (Mike Rivers) wrote:


In article am writes:

Well, my wife and I have put money down on Nuendo, but there's still time to
change our minds.

The music my wife does will be about an even split between audio recording
(vocals, electric guitar, accoustic stringed instruments) and sequencing with
software plug-ins and one Triton Pro. She'll be wanting the software to work
simultaneously as a recording system and a compositional tool. She is also,
however, not very computer literate yet (enough to work well in Ableton Live
through). Also, we'll be wanting to interact with studios on some parts of
her projects.

(we've bee PC/Sonar 2 users up until now)

So why change? I'm not really up on Sonar, but if it follows in the
legacy of Cakewalk, it makes a lot of sense as a compositional tool
and doesn't stand in your way for recording.

We did not change lightly. We spent several months deciding, though at the
end, we were sill only leaning a bit toward the Mac - I'm sure we could have
spent a lifetime deciding, but then we wouldn't have a computer. Not
necessarily in order...
1. I'm the one who learned Sonar, but my day job doesn't leave me enough time
to be helpful. My wife has to learn pretty from scratch anyway.
2. The great price/performance you get with the G5
Check latest macworld comparison, you get better price/performance
with Intel, especially if you are not talking top of line.

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace Sonar and CEP with a single, integrated product)
4. The limited signal routing capability of Sonar 2 (how were we to know S3
would fix that)
5. The pure aesthetic value of the Mac.
Yes, Mac has better "value" (resale), but if you assemble your own pc
using Intel chips, you can have a $1000 system outperforming every Mac
except the dual G5.

6. Pretty much every other musician or engineer my wife knows uses Mac.
7. All the music production classes my wife is interested in would teach on a
Mac.
8. Windows 2000 is rock solid, but support is starting to wane, and I'm not
happy with the problems with XP.
9. OS X being a Unix has some nice advantages.
XP is much more stable and easier to use than 2000. If you are
switching to Mac OS X just a few month ago, the biggest drag you will
find is that; most plug ins and virtual instruments are still NOT
available for OS X. Especially there is no good sampler!!! DP4 user
has reported that they get significantly less track count (without
drop offs) on OS X compares to OS 9. And everytime Apple updates OS,
you would expect some problem with 3rd party software and hardware.

10. Core Audio is a bit more efficient than WDM, and there is nothing like
Core MIDI on PC.

Don't know about this, but definitely MS doesn't push WDM like Apple
pushing CoreAudio. Again, CA and CM is nice, until when Apple
releasing OS updates, then everyone kneels and pray that their stuff
still works!!!

No matter what system you get, you WILL have hassles when working on
projects with other studios and it requires some understanding to work
through them. The best bet is to talk to your most likely
collaborators and see if at least as a group you can agree on an
interchange format if this is going to be a common working mode.
If it's a matter of sending a project to someone to have him or her
add a track, it's best if you both have the same system. If it's just
a matter of sending out a "demo" to prepare someone for a session or
to get some input for writing, then anything will do.

We have one studio/engineer we've been working with, and he only has ProTools.
We like him OK, but he doesn't grasp the sound we're looking for, so we're
going to need to find someone else anyway. One likely prospect is willing to
work with us at home or in the studio, and he prefers Nuendo, though he's
decided to buy ProTools as well because it's too hard swimming against the
tide.

NO one would pay a guy using Nuendo any significantly amount because
you can have exactly the same software and hardware for very little
money. Where as on PT, $10K will barely get you started in this money
pit game. It is the system exclusivity and cost that's makig you to
caugh up like $300/hr to use a PT studio....
002Rack is not a very good choice unless you think of it as something
that will eventually get you into full PT system. PTLE has all the
short comings of the PT (MIDI) and none of the advantages of a TDM
system.
Logic is cool, but it's environment is incredibly and un-necessarily
complicated. Apple does make sure it works better than any other DAW
on the Mac, though. I own Logic, so I can say that it's really not
for the computer-challenged.
You see more musicians on Mac because like 6 years ago, Mac is better
than win98 and there was no software on the PC then (Cakewalk was a
joke). And most musicians would stick to the system they know for
pretty much the rest of their lives....

It looks to me like there are vastly more studios out there using ProTools
than anything else, and I hear it's the easiest to use for audio (that will
matter for my wife), has adequate sequencing, and is highly stable, but they
nickel and dime you to death (like add $500 for OMF support!?).

This is all true.

Would anyone suggest that I use my downpayment on Nuendo for an 002 Rack or
Logic Platinum instead?

Not without a lot of thought. Actually, you probably should have
decided on the program before you went out and bought the high powered
Mac. Maybe a PC would be better. Never can be too sure about that
though.

Well, we had decided it would be ProTools, Logic, or Digital Performer. It
wasn't until we actually had the Mac that we realized we should also consider
Nuendo. Quite a lot of thought has already been put in, and I think we've
come to the right conclusion, though I know we'll have to just work with it to
ever know for sure. Because of the size of the purchase, I thought it was
prudent to ask here where there are so many people know more than we do about
all these programs.

You might find that it's more effective to work with two computers,
using one to record audio and the other as a sequencer.

I think that would be a hassle since my wife usually has several projects in
progress at a time, and she'll be wanting to bounce freeley between audo
recording, sequencing, and arranging. Having everything in one system,
program, and project file should be much easier, especially for someone who is
still coming to grips with how a file system works.

Of course, regarding 2 computers, it looks like it's possible, with Nuendo, to
run a single project/file in real time, across 2 computers where they need not
be the same OS. I've even seen evidence that they won't both have to be
running Nuendo, one can run SX2. Will we ever need or use this? Who knows,
but it is a neat capability.

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:27:47 GMT, pg13 wrote:

....
We did not change lightly. We spent several months deciding, though at the
end, we were sill only leaning a bit toward the Mac - I'm sure we could have
spent a lifetime deciding, but then we wouldn't have a computer. Not
necessarily in order...
1. I'm the one who learned Sonar, but my day job doesn't leave me enough time
to be helpful. My wife has to learn pretty from scratch anyway.
2. The great price/performance you get with the G5
Check latest macworld comparison, you get better price/performance
with Intel, especially if you are not talking top of line.

Well, I am talking top of the line, and the closest performance-comparable
Dual Athalon 64 system I could come up with was about $3500 (yes, it's
possible to spend more and ge tmor than that), but there was no option in the
system configuraitons to ship with a DVR-R or Serial ATA drives, so figure it
would come to something like $4000 for that vs $3000 for the G5.

Perhaps, one could actually come out about exactly the same price as the G5 if
you assemble the system yourself, but then you're not comparing apples to
apples anymore (so to speak) because you're comparing one system with a 1-year
warranty, and made with components that were assembled and tested together for
reliability and stability, pre-tested before it shipped out the door - with
one you assembled yourself with no warranty, and that may have some
compatability issues to resolve. Furthermore, what is the cost of your time
to assemble and test the system, and how long will that take (realistically -
they always take longer than yuo estimate)? The last W2K system I assembled
took probably 12 hours by the time all debugging was done.

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace Sonar and CEP with a single, integrated product)
4. The limited signal routing capability of Sonar 2 (how were we to know S3
would fix that)
5. The pure aesthetic value of the Mac.
Yes, Mac has better "value" (resale), but if you assemble your own pc
using Intel chips, you can have a $1000 system outperforming every Mac
except the dual G5.

$1000 plus your time, and for the kind of component quality I expect for an
Audio system, I don't think I can do it for under about $2000 with that much
HDD storage and the DVD-R drive. The dual G5 comes with a 160GB Serial ATA
drive.

6. Pretty much every other musician or engineer my wife knows uses Mac.
7. All the music production classes my wife is interested in would teach on a
Mac.
8. Windows 2000 is rock solid, but support is starting to wane, and I'm not
happy with the problems with XP.
9. OS X being a Unix has some nice advantages.
XP is much more stable and easier to use than 2000. If you are

What Windows XP are you using? I find the XP GUI way more hassle to navigate
than the Windows 2000 interface, and it's buggy as all hell. About once every
2 days, I have it fail to release a rectangle of the screen - it just stops
redrawing there until you restart the machine. I've had this happen on all of
the XP systems I've worked on. Oh yeah, it also will sometimes fail to allow
operating sliders, etc in an MDI client window until you grab and drag the
window's title bar to make it work again. None of these issues occur on
Windows 2000.

switching to Mac OS X just a few month ago, the biggest drag you will
find is that; most plug ins and virtual instruments are still NOT
available for OS X. Especially there is no good sampler!!! DP4 user
has reported that they get significantly less track count (without
drop offs) on OS X compares to OS 9. And everytime Apple updates OS,
you would expect some problem with 3rd party software and hardware.

True, and a genuine down-side, but the plug-ins will come along soon, and VST
plug-ins can be used with AU software using the FXpansion product. I'm
assuming that once all the software is optimized for OS X / G5, the
performance will reach it proper level.

10. Core Audio is a bit more efficient than WDM, and there is nothing like
Core MIDI on PC.

Don't know about this, but definitely MS doesn't push WDM like Apple
pushing CoreAudio. Again, CA and CM is nice, until when Apple
releasing OS updates, then everyone kneels and pray that their stuff
still works!!!

I've had problems with DirectX updates and Sonar, too.

....
We have one studio/engineer we've been working with, and he only has ProTools.
We like him OK, but he doesn't grasp the sound we're looking for, so we're
going to need to find someone else anyway. One likely prospect is willing to
work with us at home or in the studio, and he prefers Nuendo, though he's
decided to buy ProTools as well because it's too hard swimming against the
tide.

NO one would pay a guy using Nuendo any significantly amount because
you can have exactly the same software and hardware for very little
money. Where as on PT, $10K will barely get you started in this money

I don't pay an engineer to use their software - I pay for the engineer. It's
just easier to work with the engineer if we're using the same software.

pit game. It is the system exclusivity and cost that's makig you to
caugh up like $300/hr to use a PT studio....
002Rack is not a very good choice unless you think of it as something
that will eventually get you into full PT system. PTLE has all the
short comings of the PT (MIDI) and none of the advantages of a TDM
system.

Except for the advantage of being able to seemlessly move projects to the
studio and back when the studio uses PT.

Logic is cool, but it's environment is incredibly and un-necessarily
complicated. Apple does make sure it works better than any other DAW
on the Mac, though. I own Logic, so I can say that it's really not
for the computer-challenged.

Yeah. I have a friend who raves about its flexibility, but no one says it's
easy to learn. Possibly not a good idea for us.

You see more musicians on Mac because like 6 years ago, Mac is better
than win98 and there was no software on the PC then (Cakewalk was a
joke). And most musicians would stick to the system they know for
pretty much the rest of their lives....

Yes, but those are the people we're going to want to work with, and besides,
the G5 is back in the game price vs performance-wise. With the dual 3GHz on
its way, it looks like they'll be staying in the game, too. I'm not saying
its vastly superior to PCs or anything, but a genuine good value.

The current G5 line up is for entry-level workstation, the real work
horse will be out early next year. By then, the price/performance
ratio will again favor the PC. You'll see what I mean.

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 07:38:02 GMT, Steve Jorgensen
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:27:47 GMT, pg13 wrote:

...
We did not change lightly. We spent several months deciding, though at the
end, we were sill only leaning a bit toward the Mac - I'm sure we could have
spent a lifetime deciding, but then we wouldn't have a computer. Not
necessarily in order...
1. I'm the one who learned Sonar, but my day job doesn't leave me enough time
to be helpful. My wife has to learn pretty from scratch anyway.
2. The great price/performance you get with the G5
Check latest macworld comparison, you get better price/performance
with Intel, especially if you are not talking top of line.

Well, I am talking top of the line, and the closest performance-comparable
Dual Athalon 64 system I could come up with was about $3500 (yes, it's
possible to spend more and ge tmor than that), but there was no option in the
system configuraitons to ship with a DVR-R or Serial ATA drives, so figure it
would come to something like $4000 for that vs $3000 for the G5.

Perhaps, one could actually come out about exactly the same price as the G5 if
you assemble the system yourself, but then you're not comparing apples to
apples anymore (so to speak) because you're comparing one system with a 1-year
warranty, and made with components that were assembled and tested together for
reliability and stability, pre-tested before it shipped out the door - with
one you assembled yourself with no warranty, and that may have some
compatability issues to resolve. Furthermore, what is the cost of your time
to assemble and test the system, and how long will that take (realistically -
they always take longer than yuo estimate)? The last W2K system I assembled
took probably 12 hours by the time all debugging was done.

3. The poor quality of the Sonar loop stretching (we bought it thinking we
could replace Sonar and CEP with a single, integrated product)
4. The limited signal routing capability of Sonar 2 (how were we to know S3
would fix that)
5. The pure aesthetic value of the Mac.
Yes, Mac has better "value" (resale), but if you assemble your own pc
using Intel chips, you can have a $1000 system outperforming every Mac
except the dual G5.

$1000 plus your time, and for the kind of component quality I expect for an
Audio system, I don't think I can do it for under about $2000 with that much
HDD storage and the DVD-R drive. The dual G5 comes with a 160GB Serial ATA
drive.

6. Pretty much every other musician or engineer my wife knows uses Mac.
7. All the music production classes my wife is interested in would teach on a
Mac.
8. Windows 2000 is rock solid, but support is starting to wane, and I'm not
happy with the problems with XP.
9. OS X being a Unix has some nice advantages.
XP is much more stable and easier to use than 2000. If you are

What Windows XP are you using? I find the XP GUI way more hassle to navigate
than the Windows 2000 interface, and it's buggy as all hell. About once every
2 days, I have it fail to release a rectangle of the screen - it just stops
redrawing there until you restart the machine. I've had this happen on all of
the XP systems I've worked on. Oh yeah, it also will sometimes fail to allow
operating sliders, etc in an MDI client window until you grab and drag the
window's title bar to make it work again. None of these issues occur on
Windows 2000.

switching to Mac OS X just a few month ago, the biggest drag you will
find is that; most plug ins and virtual instruments are still NOT
available for OS X. Especially there is no good sampler!!! DP4 user
has reported that they get significantly less track count (without
drop offs) on OS X compares to OS 9. And everytime Apple updates OS,
you would expect some problem with 3rd party software and hardware.

True, and a genuine down-side, but the plug-ins will come along soon, and VST
plug-ins can be used with AU software using the FXpansion product. I'm
assuming that once all the software is optimized for OS X / G5, the
performance will reach it proper level.

10. Core Audio is a bit more efficient than WDM, and there is nothing like
Core MIDI on PC.

Don't know about this, but definitely MS doesn't push WDM like Apple
pushing CoreAudio. Again, CA and CM is nice, until when Apple
releasing OS updates, then everyone kneels and pray that their stuff
still works!!!

I've had problems with DirectX updates and Sonar, too.

...
We have one studio/engineer we've been working with, and he only has ProTools.
We like him OK, but he doesn't grasp the sound we're looking for, so we're
going to need to find someone else anyway. One likely prospect is willing to
work with us at home or in the studio, and he prefers Nuendo, though he's
decided to buy ProTools as well because it's too hard swimming against the
tide.

NO one would pay a guy using Nuendo any significantly amount because
you can have exactly the same software and hardware for very little
money. Where as on PT, $10K will barely get you started in this money

I don't pay an engineer to use their software - I pay for the engineer. It's
just easier to work with the engineer if we're using the same software.

pit game. It is the system exclusivity and cost that's makig you to
caugh up like $300/hr to use a PT studio....
002Rack is not a very good choice unless you think of it as something
that will eventually get you into full PT system. PTLE has all the
short comings of the PT (MIDI) and none of the advantages of a TDM
system.

Except for the advantage of being able to seemlessly move projects to the
studio and back when the studio uses PT.

Logic is cool, but it's environment is incredibly and un-necessarily
complicated. Apple does make sure it works better than any other DAW
on the Mac, though. I own Logic, so I can say that it's really not
for the computer-challenged.

Yeah. I have a friend who raves about its flexibility, but no one says it's
easy to learn. Possibly not a good idea for us.

You see more musicians on Mac because like 6 years ago, Mac is better
than win98 and there was no software on the PC then (Cakewalk was a
joke). And most musicians would stick to the system they know for
pretty much the rest of their lives....

Yes, but those are the people we're going to want to work with, and besides,
the G5 is back in the game price vs performance-wise. With the dual 3GHz on
its way, it looks like they'll be staying in the game, too. I'm not saying
its vastly superior to PCs or anything, but a genuine good value.