^LOL... name them... i wanna call them them and ask about that, because even studios that kept 2"... which is most major studios... use the PT rigs for editing, comping, and in place of making slave reels. c'mon now.
estimated cost on starting up with protools hd 1
- Thread starter joeymusicguy
- Start date
gabriel g.
Member
Lasse Lammert
HCAF Blitzkrieg
Joshua Wickman
Yes Sir!
I use 3 uad cards with protools. You can not use them tracking but they work just fine for mixing.
I was not encouraging lying. I was merely encouraging joey to keep his old setup. There is nothing wrong with keeping it and using it for certain sessions. Obviously he's had plenty of clients that don't mind him not using pro tools and I suspect that will continue.
Granted it will probably be in his best interest to stick with pro tools once he gets it so that he can become fully familiarized with it. But there is nothing wrong with keeping an old system as a backup or simply to have access to certain plugins. In the case where he works on a previous session that was done in his old daw its even more beneficial.
There was a previous poster who said he regretted the switch from Pro Tools to Logic, so advising someone to keep their old system I think isn't a bad thing. The way I see it, the more versatile you are, the better.
Regarding the white lies... there's already a few examples people have posted about it. I don't particularly agree with them all. But I don't expect to not work with the Mastering engineer I talked about earlier because he's using an iMac to master my CD rather than a Mac Pro. He is a respected engineer and I simply trust his 20+ years of experience.
And I don't think studios that list pro tools in their equipment list and go on to record sessions in reels or other daws are necessarily lying. There is a difference between an artist or a label calling a studio to ask them if they have a pro tools system, and demanding that it be used on their sessions. I certainly am not encouraging to go against the latter.
Obviously during tracking a band or artist will be able to tell if it's being used or not (if they're somewhat familiar with daw's). But what about mixing? Most bands get sent mp3's as references. Would you be able to tell if a session was mixed in pro tools or not?
Please dont' get me wrong, I am not anti pro tools, and I'm not for lying to clients. But I know from experience that some people use little lies, even big engineers apparently. And in a world where people still believe that pro tools makes you sound better than non pro tools, or having a Mac Pro over an iMac makes you a more worthwhile engineer, then I can definetely see why its still happening.
Regarding the Reel over Pro tools - I kinda agree with James. Unless its a really old school studio with stubborn engineers. On the other hand, what a luxury to have access to both. I don't see why they couldn't use pro tools in some sessions, and the reels in others, or both as James suggested. I suspect they do.
Granted it will probably be in his best interest to stick with pro tools once he gets it so that he can become fully familiarized with it. But there is nothing wrong with keeping an old system as a backup or simply to have access to certain plugins. In the case where he works on a previous session that was done in his old daw its even more beneficial.
There was a previous poster who said he regretted the switch from Pro Tools to Logic, so advising someone to keep their old system I think isn't a bad thing. The way I see it, the more versatile you are, the better.
Regarding the white lies... there's already a few examples people have posted about it. I don't particularly agree with them all. But I don't expect to not work with the Mastering engineer I talked about earlier because he's using an iMac to master my CD rather than a Mac Pro. He is a respected engineer and I simply trust his 20+ years of experience.
And I don't think studios that list pro tools in their equipment list and go on to record sessions in reels or other daws are necessarily lying. There is a difference between an artist or a label calling a studio to ask them if they have a pro tools system, and demanding that it be used on their sessions. I certainly am not encouraging to go against the latter.
Obviously during tracking a band or artist will be able to tell if it's being used or not (if they're somewhat familiar with daw's). But what about mixing? Most bands get sent mp3's as references. Would you be able to tell if a session was mixed in pro tools or not?
Please dont' get me wrong, I am not anti pro tools, and I'm not for lying to clients. But I know from experience that some people use little lies, even big engineers apparently. And in a world where people still believe that pro tools makes you sound better than non pro tools, or having a Mac Pro over an iMac makes you a more worthwhile engineer, then I can definetely see why its still happening.
Regarding the Reel over Pro tools - I kinda agree with James. Unless its a really old school studio with stubborn engineers. On the other hand, what a luxury to have access to both. I don't see why they couldn't use pro tools in some sessions, and the reels in others, or both as James suggested. I suspect they do.
Buy an HD3 accel system.......and sell the other two cards or even one card via ebay or whatever is cool now......the plugin package that comes with the HD3 is really solid, and you can get used systems pretty cheap, by the time you sell the other cards the HD1 that you are left with is way cheaper and you can keep the plugins that you want and sell the rest.....The 192's are great for Hardware inserts as well....
If you mix on a console you may need more but if you are mixing in protools get one 192 with an A to D expansion. 16 in 8 out and 8 hardware inserts for mixing......
Plus i think now if you buy new you end up with protools 8
If you mix on a console you may need more but if you are mixing in protools get one 192 with an A to D expansion. 16 in 8 out and 8 hardware inserts for mixing......
Plus i think now if you buy new you end up with protools 8
Lasse Lammert
HCAF Blitzkrieg
Buy an HD3 accel system.......and sell the other two cards or even one card via ebay or whatever is cool now......the plugin package that comes with the HD3 is really solid, and you can get used systems pretty cheap, by the time you sell the other cards the HD1 that you are left with is way cheaper and you can keep the plugins that you want and sell the rest.....The 192's are great for Hardware inserts as well....
If you mix on a console you may need more but if you are mixing in protools get one 192 with an A to D expansion. 16 in 8 out and 8 hardware inserts for mixing......
Plus i think now if you buy new you end up with protools 8
yup, I got the HD3 plugin pack and it rocks!
drew_drummer
Dancefap
Um... Sound City...
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK-JZoXzyTY&feature=pla[/ame]
don't forget about the fact that cubase / nuendo works with 32 bit floating point, which gives you way more headroom than a 24 Bit DAW.
a well known mastering engineer i have talked to in person did some tests - listening tests, not measuremnts - and came to the conclusion that the cubase
summing (bus) sounded way better than pro tools or logic...
you have to test that for yourself, and it may be up to your taste,
but for the things i do, the 32 bit floating point technology (preventing internal clipping) is important, as i don't have to watch levels, and mix by ear, not by eye..
but maybe i'm just too lazy learning a whole new daw and setting up a new workflow
a well known mastering engineer i have talked to in person did some tests - listening tests, not measuremnts - and came to the conclusion that the cubase
summing (bus) sounded way better than pro tools or logic...
you have to test that for yourself, and it may be up to your taste,
but for the things i do, the 32 bit floating point technology (preventing internal clipping) is important, as i don't have to watch levels, and mix by ear, not by eye..
but maybe i'm just too lazy learning a whole new daw and setting up a new workflow
Regardless of what sounds best, Pro Tools must be doing something right to be industry standard. Argue all you want, but there isn't much of a reason to do so.
Via Noctis
Member
I was actually thinking about upgrading to pro tools Hd. Just wondering if it is a stupid idea for me or not. I thought this might be the best page to post this cause James Murphy... well... he rules..and he is following this page... so anyway.. I have a good job and could afford a PTHD system. Currently use logic, and presonus. I don't see a high demand for labels calling me here. (wisconsin) But I have a huge boner for buying good gear. I am in 2 bands and record my friends bands. I am not a noob when it comes to song writing I have been playing for 16 years. And the "friend" band I am talking about many more years than that. I was just curious to the people following this thread. Some comments. I hear alot of pros and cons I look for screenshots of protools, never find it, but if it makes it easier or faster to mix, I would think that it might be wise for me. I hate working with bands I don't know in this area... mostly cause they suck. But if I could give my own mixes and my friends mixes a "boost" is it what I am looking for. Like i said, I can afford it.
Edit: I use presonus the same reason I started with a peavey bandit. Gotta start somewhere. But if i spend Thousands of dollars upgrading like I did with guitar to find my "tone" would it be better to just go all out and then be done with it???
Edit: I use presonus the same reason I started with a peavey bandit. Gotta start somewhere. But if i spend Thousands of dollars upgrading like I did with guitar to find my "tone" would it be better to just go all out and then be done with it???
To be clear dude, Pro Tools doesn't offer any sonic advantages over, say, Logic with an RME Fireface 800 and some API preamps, and the latter is a whole lot cheaper - since you aren't planning on really going pro, I don't see the point!
Via Noctis
Member
Ok, thanks Metaltastic. That is what I was wondering. I was thinking in terms of me buying guitar gear to find my live tone. I started with a peavey bandit, went to a marshal valvestate, went to a peavey 5150, went to a 5150 II went to a voodoo labs pre and a mesa 50:50 went to a marshall jcm 2000 went to a jmp-1 and mesa 2:100 and finally settled on a jmp-1 mesa 2:100 with a mesa oversized cab for my band it drop C and mesa recto pre 2:100 marshall 1960 cab for the band in B. Just wondering. if you add it all up I wasted thousands of dollars on gear. Thinking about recording, I would rather drop the estimated 12-15k on a pthd then spend 5k and realize it isn't good enough for me.... I know I am not the only one who has done this with gear!!
to be honest, PT became the industry leader by being one of the 1st programs to completely devote itself to audio editing, while most others were geared around MIDI
HeadCrusher
Member
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Right, and it has consolidated that position by continuing to be the best and most flexible software for audio editing and recording.
Mixing can be done on anything these days, but PT is still king of the mighty chop-chop.
brianhood
No Care Ever
+1
I've only been using pro tools for about 4 or 5 months now, but ive already made some genuinely terrible bands/musicians sound amazing from simply editing stuff
thanks ermz, i found that this was actually a really helpful piece of advice after all.
so, to sum it all up, you'll get way better editing as well as the industry-standart-bonus so to speak, at the expense of quite a high price - money you could otherwise invest in better converters/pres/outboard to improve the sound of your recording.
and at the end of the day, you'll have to decide what's wrong with your current setup, and make the corresponding choices....editing and prestige of protools vs. sound improvement.
btw, when you talk about your clients demanding protools, is that actually geared towards the full blown HD setup, or just the plain fact that you can deal with PT sessions, know how to use the daw, and most importantly how to use it's editing capacities?
because if the latter was the case, getting an m-box or the likes in addition to your old rig wouldn't be that bad of a choice, would it?
so, to sum it all up, you'll get way better editing as well as the industry-standart-bonus so to speak, at the expense of quite a high price - money you could otherwise invest in better converters/pres/outboard to improve the sound of your recording.
and at the end of the day, you'll have to decide what's wrong with your current setup, and make the corresponding choices....editing and prestige of protools vs. sound improvement.
btw, when you talk about your clients demanding protools, is that actually geared towards the full blown HD setup, or just the plain fact that you can deal with PT sessions, know how to use the daw, and most importantly how to use it's editing capacities?
because if the latter was the case, getting an m-box or the likes in addition to your old rig wouldn't be that bad of a choice, would it?
greyskull
Member
- Mar 22, 2006
- 6,072
- 7
- 38
don't forget about the fact that cubase / nuendo works with 32 bit floating point, which gives you way more headroom than a 24 Bit DAW.
a well known mastering engineer i have talked to in person did some tests - listening tests, not measuremnts - and came to the conclusion that the cubase
summing (bus) sounded way better than pro tools or logic...
you have to test that for yourself, and it may be up to your taste,
but for the things i do, the 32 bit floating point technology (preventing internal clipping) is important, as i don't have to watch levels, and mix by ear, not by eye..
but maybe i'm just too lazy learning a whole new daw and setting up a new workflow
well...
pro tools HD has a 48 bit mixer, and definatly more headroom than cubendo.
also i saw a test here...
http://www.recordproduction.com/mpg-event-june05-video1.html
well worth watching, some people agree some disagree.
