Digidesign ProTools 6.0

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    BTW this is what we're talking about



  • Reply 22 of 43
    I was just looking at the 002 the other day. Yeah its a little pricey, but horrible buy? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> . Protools OWNS logic for audio.



    all my audio buddies think its a good machine to, i cant figure out what your problem with this thing is, giant. that logic setup you described maybe cheaper, but its different . this is a great peace of hardware. accept it.
  • Reply 23 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,256member
    [quote]Originally posted by WishIwasBlack:

    <strong>I was just looking at the 002 the other day. Yeah its a little pricey, but horrible buy? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> . Protools OWNS logic for audio.



    all my audio buddies think its a good machine to, i cant figure out what your problem with this thing is, giant. that logic setup you described maybe cheaper, but its different . this is a great peace of hardware. accept it.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yes but Logic OWNS protools for Midi. So they complement themselves very nicely. I think Giant may be pointing to the fact that the 002 is a portable design with tradeoffs and for the money you could add a logic control, better preamps and more functionality by going to components. Correct me if I'm wrong.
  • Reply 24 of 43
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    yes but for audio post-production in video or film, there simply is nothing even close to PRotools!!!!



    Logic seems to be a different beast entirely.
  • Reply 25 of 43
    SWEET! PT6 plus Reason 2.... NOW(or... when it released) i can be fully OS X native.
  • Reply 26 of 43
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by TommyBrando:

    <strong>



    You can not possibly be in digital recording if this is the mindset you are in. You are the first person IVE run into that thinks digi002 is a bad purchase. Of course i deal with a different set of musicians / engineers/ producers everyday who are the targets for this product. If your affiliates agree with you on your point about the 002, they are not very educated people as far as music hardware goes. Its expensive, yeah. Get over it. Im not saying this is the best product ever, im saying that they nailed alot of great points with it, more so than any other company.. and you wont accept that. oh well. im done arguing over this

    [ 08-16-2002: Message edited by: TommyBrando ]</strong><hr></blockquote>





    You can't be serious w/ this: <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />



    And you can't be serious with this statement unless you haven't looked at the specs of the 002 or logic. The 002+pro-tools does literally ~1-3% of what logic control+logic does, with the exception of no i/o on the logic. Of course, that doesn't matter since you still have &gt;$500 difference to get that i/o, and get it better.



    Yeah, lack of education. sorry that you identify with a product so much, but in the real world they are just tools.



    PS what mindset? The one that points out the errors in your statements? That's what most of that post was.



    Be careful before your promotion of a crappy product causes others to waste their hard-earned money...
  • Reply 27 of 43
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by WishIwasBlack:

    <strong>

    all my audio buddies think its a good machine to, i cant figure out what your problem with this thing is, giant. that logic setup you described maybe cheaper, but its different . this is a great peace of hardware. accept it.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    compare specs.
  • Reply 28 of 43
    [quote]Originally posted by giant:

    <strong>



    compare specs.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Just finished comparing specs. Most important spec difference. Logic vs ProTools?. ummmm..... Protools.



    Dude go buy your logic setup and stop trashing good hardware from other companies. Especially ones that make superior software to run it. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
  • Reply 29 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,256member
    Hey this is cool. Audio snobbery at it's best. Thankfully we have choices and that's important. I can't afford protools so I'm looking to go



    Mac

    FW Interface(Firestation)

    Logic

    Logic Control(eventually)



    hopefully mLAN support is added to Logic and becomes usefull. I just want to setup a scratch pad studio based around Mac of course
  • Reply 30 of 43
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by TommyBrando:

    <strong>



    Just finished comparing specs. Most important spec difference. Logic vs ProTools?. ummmm..... Protools.



    Dude go buy your logic setup and stop trashing good hardware from other companies. Especially ones that make superior software to run it. </strong><hr></blockquote>





    I have the logic setup...as well as the digi system. :eek:



    see, unlike you, some people realize the strengths of each, and do actual work that requires both. Get a clue...



    me and my associates





    edit: had to take out your fruity and undeserving (PT is best for mastering ) little smily. You've obviously never gotten anything out of the home studio, so what music industry are you in?



    [ 08-19-2002: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
  • Reply 31 of 43
    Hey, this is cool. It's better that Mac vs. PC geek wars!
  • Reply 32 of 43
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    giant your fervor is silly . . . its pretty well known that the standard for much sound production is Protools . . . many people in the industry, many that I have met... including a technician for Prince use PTs . . . sequencing and certain sound creation are probably better with Logic . . . most professional studios would probably see to it to have both in order to cover all eventualities.



    By the way, though you dis Tommy for product loyalty it seems that its your rabid responce that reveals some kind of fixation.



    Now one thing that you cannot deny is that post-production for video and film is done with Protools -tout court, et tant pis It is absolutely THE standard . . . at least in ALL of the labs that I have worked with.
  • Reply 33 of 43
    f



    [ 08-20-2002: Message edited by: WishIwasBlack ]</p>
  • Reply 34 of 43
    First post, but I've been around here for a while.



    This is the silliest discussion ever!



    ProTools is great, and so is Logic.



    ProTools benefits from the ASSUMPTION that it is the best thing ever. This was true when audio was being done on the IIfx with NuBus cards, but today, cpus can handle plugs etc without the need for DSP farms. Digi overprices their hardware because they know gear snobs will pay big bucks to have the newest and best. But...



    that isnt to say Digi and ProTools is bad. Far from it. The hardware is top notch! For tracking, there might not be anything better. However, as stated, MIDI sucks on PT.



    But Logic holds its own. Cubase is a joke. Digital Performer is in the class of Logic, but perhaps not as capable (YMMV).



    Logic is more of a compositional tool. You can track with it as well (I know, I have!). The results can be just as good as with PT. But you have to know what you're doing.



    So is there a winner? Sure. The winner is the person who realises that PT and Logic fit very nicely together (esp. with OMF and PT hardware support in Logic!). Use them together. Make good music.



    BTW, the Digi002 doesnt (on paper) look to be as complete as Logic Control, but in the hands of a skilled producer, may give some excellent result.



    P.S. Sorry for the non-commital reply!
  • Reply 35 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,256member
    [quote] Cubase is a joke. <hr></blockquote>



    Explain yourself! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
  • Reply 36 of 43
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    I only know two Logic studios not running on digi cards.



    That being said, a good place to start to see why Pro-Tools is obviously not a better coded audio app is to look at the environment in logic. With it, you have complete control over the audio and midi routing under the surface via a visual scripting system. What software in any field is similarly streamlined and has that level of organization, esspecially for such a powerful and complex tool? That why every level of the program can be customized indefinitely by the user. Pro-tools on the other hand, appears like a microsoft product. Things are hard-coded, which is probably why it's so hard for them to implement anything other than straight audio editing. I remember a buddy complaining that with monitor spanning, windows would open in predetermined spaces on the original monitor. The options were just not fully thought through. Even something so simple as window arrangement is a ****ing nightmare with pro-tools, whereas logic allows you to customize as much as you can imagine, and you have many more windows designed specially for controlling the depths of the software as well as windows enabling the user to perform repetetive tasks easily. You have full information concerning all midi events and routing.



    Pro-Tools is the standard for tracking because editing blunt audio objects is extremely intuitive. While logic may give the user much more control over that editing, It is very easy to do the basics with Pro-Tools.



    The level of control given to the user with Logic means you have much more control of the end product, which is why it works great for composition. Pro-Tools is in most recording situations because it does the basics well and is easy to use. This is why I use both. But as a musician, I have to use logic more. Once you use both there is no question why.



    As for the 002 and logic contol, the above also holds true. The 002 doesn't give you nearly the options that logic control gives you, and when you couple logic and the logic control, the sky's the limit.



    Even if you know nothing about audio software, or software in general, just fact that Pro-tools is so widespread should in itself show you that it is not the best designed application out there. It does basic things well, and most audio situations only require those basic tasks. But if you want serious control, or you want to point to a well-design application, you can't really go anywhere but Logic right now. Emagic (now owned by Apple) is doing some amazing stuff right now. Emagic and NI are the two companies putting out the most advanced software, some really cool stuff. To ignore that is pitifully limiting.



    As is blind loyalty to any product of any kind. Better stuff is getting made all the time, and to ignore amazing new developments because of an identification with a product is just plain dumb. Maybe some day soon NI will come out with a sequencer, and if that one is a massive advance over its competition, then you can bet I'll be using it. But that's just me.



    There's nothing wrong with sticking with something because you like it or feel comfortable with it. I could care less what tools you use. A lot of big producers use some really crappy hardware and software. I just think it's dangerous to lead more naive buyers into thinking that an expensive piece of limtied hardware is a good buy, esspecially when that money can be put to much better use elsewhere.



    [ 08-20-2002: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
  • Reply 37 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,256member
    Giant-



    Do you think that Apple can add any touches to Logic's User Interface that might take the program to the next level. I hear that Logic is extremely powerful yet has a fairly steep learning curve. I'm wondering if Apple has the moxy to reduce that learning curve but keep the outstanding features. What do you think ?
  • Reply 38 of 43
    [quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:

    <strong>



    Explain yourself! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Cubase sucks for many reasons



    1) Plug ins take up CPU cycles even when they are not active. This SERIOUSLY limits Cubase's useability on anything but the top end systems. In Logic, plugs only take up CPU if audio is going through them. Same with DP. This is a major flaw!



    2) The interface is TERRIBLE. Granted, some people say Logic is boring, but its not annoying, which Cubase is. In this matter, however, DP has them all beat.



    3) Stability. Granted, you may have a system that is running well with Cubase, but VST 5,1 has been nothing but problems for most users since day one. Check out <a href="http://www.cubase.net"; target="_blank">www.cubase.net</a> and look on the forums. Most of those hard core Cubasers are sticking with 5.0 until SX comes out this year. Although Logic is not perfect (again, I have found DP to be the most stable), it is nowhere near as bad as Cubase.



    I will say that Cubase has by far the best implementation of VST instruments/plugs. this is to expected, no? Too bad the system crashes when you open 2 instances of Absynth, for instance (actually, of any NI plugin!)



    Logic needs improvement, but is a viable choice (along with DP) for composition. PT is fine for tracking. But Cubase, in my mind, is no choice at all.
  • Reply 39 of 43
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    [quote]Originally posted by MagicFingers:

    <strong>Wow, lighten up geek.

    I wasnt being sarcastic at all, I honestly was wondering if it supports Digi 001.

    Now...hmmm.....**** off</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Can you please oh please bring back member ratings?
  • Reply 40 of 43
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:

    <strong>Giant-



    Do you think that Apple can add any touches to Logic's User Interface that might take the program to the next level. I hear that Logic is extremely powerful yet has a fairly steep learning curve. I'm wondering if Apple has the moxy to reduce that learning curve but keep the outstanding features. What do you think ?</strong><hr></blockquote>





    I hope it gets really easy to use, like FCP, but I also don't think the learning curve is really a problem. The program has been designed to be very ergonomic, and emagic used to throw that word around alot when talking about logic. I see it in sort of the same light as the Logic you take in school. It can feel like you are beating your head against the wall when trying to do a proof, but once you get it, you have it for good and it makes perfect sense. If you know other audio software, logic isn't that bad. There's alot of stuff there, but just know that you probably won't even need to ever use half of the program. It's complex enough that users have can have dramatically varied ways of using it. I think the biggest help Apple can give is more comprehensive documentation. But for that, you can expect something bigger than what came with Director 8.5 :eek:



    [ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.