Jump to content
Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Pro Tools and Cubase 24 bit recording


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6
  • Created
  • Last Reply
It's NOT the converters - at least not the "stock" 888/24 converters, which sound okay, but nothing to rave about IMO. Many people opt for higher quality converters for use with their high dollar PT systems - Apogees, Panasonics, Weiss, etc. IMO, it's probably three main things: PT has one of the easiest / fastest editing environments in the world, and since editing is so commonplace in the major label project world, this is a big plus. Stability and DSP's - The TDM / HD systems don't rely on the host computer's CPU for DSP functions - they're handled by PCI cards with DSP processors on them. The systems are pretty darn stable as well. Reliability is important in the big leagues. Latency. PT TDM systems allow you to monitor with any plug ins you may want to use with very low latency. There's work arounds with native systems, but a lot of people prefer not to take those options. Before the warz start, I'm not saying PT TDM / HD systems are better or worse than native systems such as Cuebase, Logic, Nuendo, PT LE, Samplitude, etc. etc. IMO, native systems are becoming more "viable" each and every day because computers are getting faster and more capable.... but this wasn't the case just a few years ago, and a TDM system definitely had major advantages back then over a native system. That may STILL be true, depending on your needs and opinions, and I'm not trying to argue that either way - I'm just trying to answer the original question as to "how did PT become the standard".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone know why Pro Tools has become so popular in studios? It can be 24bit, but then you have that option in Cubase etc anyway. Is it something to do with the high quality converters? ---------------------------------------------------------------- yes, but its also the enormous 3rd party support. in the last year however support has grown for nuendo as more people look at it as a competitor... not to mention its way of interfacing is probobly more accepted by the comunity, i find protools very intuitive, while using cubase makes me want to stick a 1/4 inch jack in my eye.. but its all preference! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry about that. I was being sarcastic. ProTools has been around since the begining of computer recording. They made a good product and were aggressive with marketing and strategic partnerships. They are now the 600 lb. gorilla.
-David R.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David R. struck a good point..... Digi was very aggressive in getting PT out to the pros. And since many pros were introduced to DAWs through ProTools, many don't want to change... With OMF and Open TL becoming more common, you might see the smaller start-ups go native. If you only have $50,000 to spend on your whole studio, it would be foolish to spend $30,000 of it on Pro Tools. You could just as easily spend $5,000 to $10,000 on a beast of a native system, and spend the rest on acoustics, instruments, analog gear, etc. Wiggum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...