32 posts
Good setup. I have the Axiom 25 midi keyboard. An excellent little keyboard and the drum pads on it are particularly useful.
Is anybody else using protools 7.4?
congrats looks like a nice setup for you...
Cinvala — Aug 08, 2008Is anybody else using protools 7.4?
Yes, I am using LE 7.4 at the studio, and LE (M-Powered) 7.1 at home.
I have the reference monitors, I have had to have them replaced 2x. Once because I discharged static electricity into the left one via the volume control which blew the right amplifier, and once because I was playing them too loud. So don't touch the left one if you gather static electricity. And don't play them too loud, (louder than a vocal shout) otherwise they are great monitors they sound spectacular for such a small unit.
charger — Aug 08, 2008[quote author=Cinvala link=1218168751/0#3 date=1218203591]Is anybody else using protools 7.4?
Yes, I am using LE 7.4 at the studio, and LE (M-Powered) 7.1 at home.
8-)
It just got delivered to me at work....oooooooh...nice big box.
Cool, I just saw this thread. I use Pro Tools 7.4 for M-Audio. That looks like an excellent setup. Enjoy.
I'll bet there will be a lot of head and ass scratching for a bit. :D
I got everything set up and registered last night, haven't had the chance to record anything yet...but when I do ;)
Looks like the whole board is protools. I'd better get saving. :)
No, Harv and I are still SONAR with Layla 24's, but then he's been busy traveling and buying blue pills, and I'm still broke until the new job kicks in and I sell one of my houses. :(
Paul and I are also still with Sonar....
Just depends on what you are comfortable with.
Really?
Now I must go bump up that thread for Jon to record a comparison. I kept hearing over there that Pro Tools sounded better (which, of course, is the most important aspect of recording, isn't it?). That said, your CD's and Paul's one lonely CD (hint, hint ;) ) both sound great.
What system is the CD mastered on? I believe Rocket was using PT on the last release. Either way, it's a subjective thang and both systems are highly adequate for recording. I picked PT over Sonar because I had better DAW performance overall. Jon claims a noticeable sound difference. I never A/B'ed anything, it just worked better on my system.
heh actually Rocket used Reaper for NightBorn and 3 Steps, not sure what he used on IMS.
But all of the new stuff is recorded and mastered in Sonar, since it is what I have and use. And Losin' Time was done all in Sonar, so...
I don't mean to come off as a downer, but I am pretty sure the noticeable sound difference is Jon's liking PT over Sonar, with how he uses it, plus the joy of a new tool.
I have used the TDM and PC version of PT, Sonar and Reaper, to me they all handle the end audio pretty much the same, its all just 1s and 0s, your d/a a/d converters have more to do with sound quality than the software does, IHMO.
I still say use what you feel works best for you.
I am not gonna rag on someone for using what they like, to me the midi utilities in PT are far weaker for how I do midi work, as I don't like piano roll, so I could get another midi utility like finale and PT or use Sonar which has a good midi editor using staffs instead of PR.
It all boils down to what you prefer and enjoy.
The point I was making was that it was mastered differently than what it was recorded on, so A CD, No matter where the fuck it comes from is not a good judge because its a mixed bag. In a lot of case Someone records, then sends it off to be run through another system.
I new you had done that with IMS Reissue, so it's mixed bag. Paul's and your new stuff I guess would be comparable since it came from one source.
As I said above, they're all adequate for recording.
There is some difference between the two IMS Releases. I have both, you know:D
ok, I see your point and it is a valid point.
I know their is a huge difference in the sound of both versions, but much of that is due to having better fx, more experienced ears by not only me but also having Rocket's and Paul's ears involved in the mixing process. and then Rocket's for mastering. The second version of IMS was remixed and then mastered. IMHO it had jack to do with what base prog was used.
Well, I knew there were more variables than just two different DAW's, but in Craig's post, He said "CD's sound great". That's where I thought there was a little more to the comparision than just that.
yeah totally,
I mean really and truly to me its which programs workflow works best for your needs. Period.
10 years ago, hands down PT was best, if you could afford the TDM system. Now its far more balanced, at least from what I have experienced, in use, reading, and talking with others.
Yeah, If it weren't for the upgrade fees for Sonar, I'd probably still be with them.
It's actually your fault that I use PT. You sold me the M-Audio card that I use. :D I have no real money in PT. I traded a shitload of pedals and shit for it, so it was no real out of pocket.
yeah I will say the upgrade fees are a total pain in the ass...
and the m-audio cards are ideal for PT.
I am still on version 5P because I am tired of shelling out upgrade fees for what to me are very minute changes in Sonar.
I have a registered copy of SP5. I installed it on my laptop to tinker with the X3 USB. I'm not a USB fan, so that was a waste, but it's there.
heh yeah USB isn't a winner for Audio Device, IMO, although I use my XT as the Audio Device for our net computer, does pretty good for playback, but I sure wouldn't try to use it in a DAW situation.
The X3 2.0 USB is better than the XT's 1.1 USB, but I still find it lacking compared to a direct connection or S/PDIF.
well that is good, sorta, but yeah s/pdif or direct is definitely more vialable use for a device, duess should include lightpipe as well in that.
I've been through this all before--if anyone has ever done the "great mix bus shootout" a few years back which compared the mix busses of every DAW and a bunch of high-end and low-end consoles as well... the sound differences are certainly slight enough to not recommend any one app over another.
However, having the system start every time you press the play or record button goes a huge way to making you happy with a DAW. I do believe there are some sonic differences between the apps... I certainly had a very hard time getting a good mix out of Reaper. I get great sounding mixes out of PT and FLStudio... the only ones I own, so I can't compare to anything else. But the other factor to me is the bult-in plugins. Lots of times people end up using them, for example, for EQ. The new Digi EQ III plugin is great... one of the better EQ plugins I've heard. And the plugins you can get on PT--things like McDSP and Channel Strip, and the old LexiVerb and ReverbOne--kind of put it over the top for me. But that's just a subjective sound I like, not anything objective.
I've been thinking of making the switch to ProTools M-Powered. Now that I have a machine with enough power and USB slots to use my dongle-locked software legitimately, I've been wondering whether to make the jump from Cubase SX3 to Cubase 4/Studio or ProTools. Since my Firebox has completely crapped out, I've been using the Toneport that came with my Gearbox Gold software. It's okay, I guess, but I'd much rather have a Firewire interface So, I'd get something like the Mbox 2 Pro or some other Firewire interface from M-Audio. The reason I'm considering Protools is because most of the people I record projects with over the web use Protools LE and even though we usually have the same effect plugins and such, sharing projects isn't exactly easy. It usually involves exporting every track as a wav file and capturing screen shots of plugin settings. Not too fun. How is Protools' learning curve? And how well does MIDI work in Protools?
I'd say I'm very new to all this, the only recording software I ever used was calkwalks guitar studio, which was a dog of a program, which I ended up avoiding if possible. Having said that, if the support for guitar studio was as good as the support for protools, I may have found it easier to use. I've ended up buying a couple of books on protools and have been working through those, and have found protools fairly straight forward. With your previous experience, I'd say you wouldn't have any problems.
SaMex,
I would go with PT in that case, The people I work with all use SOnar so for me its also easier, guess I should have mentioned that as well cuase in this net musician age it is a big thing.
Being able to much projects back and forth easily is a big thing as well so software compatibility is a good thing...
Cin you will get there man just takes time.
I am jsut about done with the recording phase of my tutorial I am cooking up for the Cave, so hopefully I will be able to have it for you all in the coming weeks.
Ligerborn — Sep 13, 2008
I am jsut about done with the recording phase of my tutorial I am cooking up for the Cave, so hopefully I will be able to have it for you all in the coming weeks.
COOL! looking forward too it.