Metal Guitarist Forums banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,876 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm on the fence. I've never used protools and am unsure of what the advantage to grabbing pro tools 9(not HD9) is over something like cubase. If any of you have experience with both, give me a run down of what you think.
 

·
THUNDERBEEEEAR!
Joined
·
3,920 Posts
This is, in my opinion a matter of how much you use midi. Cubase is vastly superior when midi is concerned, and the difference in audio quality is nominal from what I can hear.
I have to admit I don't have much experience with pro tools, and my preferred daw is Cubase.
So, if you work with audio mostly, it's a matter of how the different daws handle workflow. If you're working with midi, Cubase would be my choice.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,876 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
This is, in my opinion a matter of how much you use midi. Cubase is vastly superior when midi is concerned, and the difference in audio quality is nominal from what I can hear.
I have to admit I don't have much experience with pro tools, and my preferred daw is Cubase.
So, if you work with audio mostly, it's a matter of how the different daws handle workflow. If you're working with midi, Cubase would be my choice.
the only time i really work with midi is when i get drumagog to write midi hits off of my kick track. I don't use fake drums or anything any more. I assume audio quality is basically the same between the two. Just wondering about workflow. Since i'm used to cubase it's probably better for me but everyone loves protools, so i'm interested, i just don't want to drop 600 bucks if i don't have to.
 

·
THUNDERBEEEEAR!
Joined
·
3,920 Posts
the only time i really work with midi is when i get drumagog to write midi hits off of my kick track. I don't use fake drums or anything any more. I assume audio quality is basically the same between the two. Just wondering about workflow. Since i'm used to cubase it's probably better for me but everyone loves protools, so i'm interested, i just don't want to drop 600 bucks if i don't have to.
Then I'd rather drop a few coins into Cubase 6 since you're used to the Cubase workflow.
But... If you can get your hands on an evaluation version, go for it.
Shoot avid a mail, tell them you're running a studio and you want to evaluate their product.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
242 Posts
One of the reasons why Pro Tools is so successful is it's editing power. Though to get the most out of the program I'd highly recommend studying it. Get the 101 book and have a good go over the features of the program, then you can go further into it with the 110, 201 and 210 books (if you want to be a meganerd).

However if you don't need any of that, then you might be best off sticking to Cubase!
 

·
Devil
Joined
·
1,871 Posts
I never noticed too many things in Pro Tools that made editing any easier save for time correction.

Pro Tools is big because of the gear and the ease of transferring projects from studio to studio. Personally, I hate the hardware restrictions and the workflow. Cubase foe-evah.
 
Joined
·
4,429 Posts
i've used both and they are essentially the same. Pro tools seems to have a bit more headroom from memory but that may just me getting better at mixing (I haven't used cubase in a couple of years). Cubase is definitely better for midi. I'd say protools is better and faster for me for editing. But again it all comes down to preference and what you use more. I'm sure if I went back to cubase as my main software in a couple years I'd say the opposite.
 

·
THUNDERBEEEEAR!
Joined
·
3,920 Posts
If this was two years ago I would've agreed with you, but steinberg has done a lot for audio editing in the latest version.
I haven't tried pro tools 9 yet, but I'll get back on that...
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top