R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: Most popular DAW software in today's high-end studios (other than PT)?  (Read 18358 times)

grievousangel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
  • Real Full Name: William T Johnson

Based on what you are using and reading, what DAW software seems to be most often used in today's high-end recording studios? Of course, other than PT.

How has Samplitude, Nuendo and others shaken out? I understand it's all about what you are use to working with in many cases, as sound-wise, most are neutral sounding. It's about work-flow, flexibility and stability.

Later,

William
Logged

Extreme Mixing

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39

Ummm...

You answered your own question.  It's Pro Tools for sure.  Most people have decided that they don't want to spend time converting files before they can start to work.  Logic is very popular with music producers.  Digital Performer is popular with film composers because it has advantages there.  I am an LA recording engineer.  I have never been asked to work with Nuendo or Samplitude.  That doesn't mean that you can't do great things on those programs.  They all sound really good.  But you asked what was being used.

Steve
Logged

Bob Olhsson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25

The only thing I've heard about is that a few people like to use something else for mixing because they don't want to hand over a Pro Tools session to the label.

It will require something that is both dramatically better and easier to use to replace Pro Tools. Nothing like that has come along, just a series of DAWs that are "as good as" and have a few different and sometimes better features. In fact Avid's biggest problem is that most high-end studios are perfectly happy with a Power PC HD system and not interested in upgrading.

Bubba--Kron

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 47

I use Sonar flawlessly, its really great actually.    Its just controlling lynx aes16 and a Apogee Da-16x.  I cant imagine it sounding much different going through a different program but same gear.  I could be wrong!!

Ive never given Avid a penny in my life.   I learned that lesson watching a friend by 4 avid machines at 40 grand a piece right before final cut edit pro came out, that was not a smart business move on his part at all.
Logged
Cheers, Bryan Richards

Scott Featherstone

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9

I also use Sonar. I love it.
Logged

Extreme Mixing

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39

OK.  So I'm going to send you an album to mix.  We did it all in Pro Tools.  I'll just send you the sessions.  You can open them...Right?  Because I'd like to get them back the same way, so I can turn them in to the label.

There are lots of mixers who use Pro Tools for that very reason.  OMF works--sort of.  Oh, except the mutes don't come through.  And we have a couple of AutoTune effects that we really wanted to use...You didn't get them???

There are lots of issues and most of us don't really want to deal with making those types of mistakes.  It costs a lot of time and missed elements.  Not worth it to most pro mixers, for sure.  That doesn't mean that you can't do amazing work in Sonar, just that you are not as compatible with MOST of the Pro recording world as you are with Pro Tools.  If that doesn't mean anything to you, then that's fine.  But Bob Clearmountain doesn't really care if he spends 5K or 50K on his work tool.  As long as he gets what he wants, and it makes his work more accurate and productive.

Steve
Logged

Paul G

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10

If you export wav files and import wav files it shouldn't matter which DAW you use.

Paul ;D
Logged

Audio Alex

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • Real Full Name: Alex Butler

As has been previously stated, question asked, question answered. Pro Tools for sure, but I also believe geographics play a part also. I use Samplitude as well as PT, but here in the states I don't think Samplitude is as popular a DAW as it is outside of the US.
Logged

musiclab

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
  • Real Full Name: Lou Gimenez

OK.  So I'm going to send you an album to mix.  We did it all in Pro Tools.  I'll just send you the sessions.  You can open them...Right?  Because I'd like to get them back the same way, so I can turn them in to the label.

There are lots of mixers who use Pro Tools for that very reason.  OMF works--sort of.  Oh, except the mutes don't come through.  And we have a couple of AutoTune effects that we really wanted to use...You didn't get them???

There are lots of issues and most of us don't really want to deal with making those types of mistakes.  It costs a lot of time and missed elements.  Not worth it to most pro mixers, for sure.  That doesn't mean that you can't do amazing work in Sonar, just that you are not as compatible with MOST of the Pro recording world as you are with Pro Tools.  If that doesn't mean anything to you, then that's fine.  But Bob Clearmountain doesn't really care if he spends 5K or 50K on his work tool.  As long as he gets what he wants, and it makes his work more accurate and productive.

Steve
yeah but Bob Clearmountain mixes on a console so it doesn't matter what daw he uses, it's not going to have his mix on it. Same with Chris Alge, Michael Wagner does his projects in Nuendo, so you think the labels make him do it over again in Pro Tools? I have Pro Tools and I have Logic, I prefer Logic, I also mix on a console. I've never had anyone complain about what daw I use
Logged
2" 24 track and a whole lot more
www.musiclabnyc.com

Bob Olhsson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25

If you export wav files and import wav files it shouldn't matter which DAW you use.
The difference is the amount of extra time and hassle involved.

KAyo

  • R/E/P Forums
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 237
  • Real Full Name: KAyo
  • Business Videos 24/7

Till today, I have been using many DAW softwares, Some work more ergonomically than others, but, all sound respectable.
I started on Pro-tools, moved to Cubase, Nuendo, and even Vegas & Acid. I am really fond of them all. Nuendo and Vegas are great for PC-XP based Video/ Audio editing systems, without breaking the bank. Cubase and Acid are nice for midi complexities. For mastering.. Wavelab, SoundForge and Sequoia. All work really well, again some annoying ergonomic issues can deter me at times. Saying that, I also have Sonar installed, many Dj’s I know, somehow prefer Sonar and send mixes on that etc..

Ciao’
KAyo
Logged
www.kantabiz.com
Business Video Directory

luis Markson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22

Back when I worked in a studio we used this:

http://www.merging.com/

I'm not sure if they still do.... We were a beta tester.
Logged

KAyo

  • R/E/P Forums
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 237
  • Real Full Name: KAyo
  • Business Videos 24/7

Back when I worked in a studio we used this:

http://www.merging.com/

I'm not sure if they still do.... We were a beta tester.


One of the best!
Still going, I sense.

Cheers,
KAyo
Logged
www.kantabiz.com
Business Video Directory

luis Markson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22


One of the best!
Still going, I sense.

Cheers,
KAyo

We were using it with a DMXR100 via MADI. Pretty progressive for a small studio. From what I remember of it (10 years ago now) is was increadably intuative and sounded great.
Logged

Glenn Bucci

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22

I have been using Cubase since Cubase 5.1 had been out many years back. They improved the audio engine, tons of new features, and improved plug ins. Personally I don't see a need for Pro Tools especially since now you can get the pro version native (though it cost a lot more than Cubase, or Logic). Cubase has stronger midi and the only reason to use PT is the preference of the work flow if you like it better.

I have also used Samplitude and it does allow you to burn CD's with redbook info which Cubase/Nuendo can't do. However the amount of people who user of Samplitude is so much smaller than Cubase/Nuendo. I would rather use a program that more people and studios are familar with. I have never had a client walk away because I did not use Pro Tools. Some would say "how come you don't use Pro Tools? When I tell them in detail about the improved midi features, Score, and now that Yamaha owns them and they are improving the DAW with their R&D, they all have backed down and respected that I use Cubase. Many home studio guys use a cheaper version of Cubase, and like that they can go into my studio with their files and download them into Cubase in my studio.
Logged

Extreme Mixing

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39

I have been using Cubase since Cubase 5.1 had been out many years back. They improved the audio engine, tons of new features, and improved plug ins. Personally I don't see a need for Pro Tools especially since now you can get the pro version native (though it cost a lot more than Cubase, or Logic).

I have never had a client walk away because I did not use Pro Tools. Some would say "how come you don't use Pro Tools? When I tell them in detail about the improved midi features, Score, and now that Yamaha owns them and they are improving the DAW with their R&D, they all have backed down and respected that I use Cubase. Many home studio guys use a cheaper version of Cubase, and like that they can go into my studio with their files and download them into Cubase in my studio.

So I'm guessing that you don't mention cost being a major factor in your choice of DAW, but clearly it is.

Sounds like you're using Cubase for the same reason most of us are using Pro Tools and Logic--it's what most of our clients are using and we save time not having to convert all of the files.  Fine with me.  But midi in Pro Tools has gotten very good.  I'll like it better when it's 64 bit because of the memory issues, but you can use VEPro as a server to get around that.  Logic is pretty cool, but has its learning curve.

Steve
Logged

Glenn Bucci

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22

Price is clearly a factor and PT HD2 or 3 cost thousands more than Cubase which is like $499. 10 years ago Pro Tools HD was king. But with computers being more powerful today than the aged HD cards, there is no reason so spend so much money on a  DAW. People like Peter Frampton uses Nuendo, Phil Collins uses Cubase in his studio, and the list goes on. No longer is PT the ultimate DAW to have due to it having so much power. This is one of the reasons we now have a native Pro Tools, since sales were down and they were trying to catch more users in their net. However PT Native still is a lot more expensive. Granted Pro Tools due to being used for so many years in the studio world is still king, but more and more have switch over to other DAW's. The reason you need more DSP power really comes down to how many plug ins you use in a session. But with today's computers, you will find that you have enough power to handle your plug ins. Then of course if you have UAD plug ins they use their own DSP cards as well.
Logged

Extreme Mixing

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39

Wow.  Cuebase 6 now has groups!  Pro Tools has had those since version 5--9 years ago.  Does it have VCA Groups and a dedicated control surface with custom groups?  If you can't tell, I'm still not sure that Cuebase is quite as mature a program as Pro Tools.  There are reasons why some of us spend so much money.  We want the features and compatibility.  I have a client using Pro Tools on an iMac with a motu traveler interface.  It's working great and probably has most of the features that your $499 version of Cuebase has.  I've mixed a couple of her records on her system.  The big advantage that HD still has is very low latency monitoring.  That's a big deal.  I know there are workarounds, but I really don't want to go that way.

I'm glad you're happy with Cuebass, but just know that many in the Pro Tools "crowd" are working pro's who know what Pro Tools is all about and we are pretty clear as to why we like it and continue to use it.  To be fair, I like and use Logic and Digital Performer as well.  But I find the way PT handles audio to make the most sense and work the best for me.

Steve
Logged

KAyo

  • R/E/P Forums
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 237
  • Real Full Name: KAyo
  • Business Videos 24/7

The new Pro-Tools Native, has finally opened access to a lot more people and apparently, it’s the best version ever of Pro-Tools, so say a lot of Pro-Tools users themselves. Watch here > http://apps.avid.com/hd-native/

I am quite keen to get this version of Pro-Tools very soon. Most PT rigs were beyond budget, but now, I think it’s a real possibility to acquire one, plus, it’s compatible with most of your well constructed VST plugs, now that’s a screamer of a bonus for me. Saying that, I also have my UAD/ SSL and Powercore DSP’s to help with plug-in chores.

I guess the only impediment at present is pricing. Let the hype settle in conjunction with a slight price drop and boom! In like flyn.
Can’t wait…

Ciao’
KAyo
Logged
www.kantabiz.com
Business Video Directory

JohnTravis

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16

Great question, and the answer is Pro-Tools is the standard whether any of us like it or not. I've used several of the programs starting with Vision, then going to Cubase, Performer, Creator/Notator and then settling on Logic which i used for years. Logic is a great program for creating music and has some plug-ins I wish were on PT.

One day I had made a record that some of which was going to be mixed by Randy Staub who was working out of a studio in Vancouver and the studio tech told me that the files had to be in Pro-Tools as their computer was Pro-Tools only. He also said that a computer would not work with both Logic or Pro-Tools on it and got a little miffed when I said I was running a computer like that as I was talking to him. The upshot was I had to print all of the tracks on the songs Randy was mixing as WAV files with the plug-ins on them, which had to be done in real time.

Also most record companies would only accept the completed masters as Pro-tools files so the last day of every project was spent converting everything including unused songs to that format. After a few years of swimming against the tide I finally caved and started using Pro-tools too.

The bottom line is whether we like it or not, to the big labels, at least here in the US, Pro-tools is the only game in town and everything else is considered prosumer. I can't say I agree with that, but it is what it is and we don't always get t make the rules.

Logged

Extreme Mixing

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39

You are exactly right, John.

Steve
Logged

Bob Olhsson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25

Pro Tools will remain the standard until somebody comes up with something significantly better in software. It simply hasn't happened in a decade other than bells and whistles. They got into the major studios first with an affordable, reliable recording platform and most people are unwiling to waste their time learning a new program or dealing with file conversions.

Jim Williams

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575

Is this why most new releases rip me a new one in the ear drums when 15 years ago they didn't? Does convienience trump quality?
Logged

zakco

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Real Full Name: Zak Cohen

Is this why most new releases rip me a new one in the ear drums when 15 years ago they didn't? Does convienience trump quality?

Are you suggesting that Protools is inferior fidelity wise to other DAWs?

Z
Logged

Bob Olhsson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25

Is this why most new releases rip me a new one in the ear drums when 15 years ago they didn't? Does convienience trump quality?
No.

People put more signal processing on each track than most control rooms had available in total 15 years ago. Better sounding hardware to use with Pro Tools has been available from the beginning but too many people were too cheap to invest in it. Avid's very latest HD hardware is actually very decent sounding.

Telefunk

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: Most popular DAW software in today's high-end studios (other than PT)?
« Reply #25 on: August 03, 2011, 05:57:01 pm »

Wow.  Cuebase 6 now has groups!  Pro Tools has had those since version 5--9 years ago.

Cubase has had groups as long as I remember, at least since SX3, or longer. What is that? Like 8--9 years?

Besides, i'm mixing with console, so labels will not get multitrack mixes from me anyway. If they ask them, i usually just send them the Cubase project and they're happy.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up