It's starting to get Pro-Tools in my head

LeSedna

Mat or Mateo
Jan 20, 2008
5,391
2
38
Montpellier, France
Hello !

- I've been using Cubase SX2 then 3 for my first years of "production" (only guitaristic tracking)
- I'm a plain satisfied user of the wonderful DAW named reaper

But I'm more and more interested by Pro-Tools, because I've read so much for and against it that I wanna know if it's for me or not. There no need to mention that therefore I only look to PT M-Powered and that for the moment don't think of the mp toolkit.

Anyway, I need a better interface than my Line6, which is okay for the bucks, but is a little limited for me, has no pre, and is not so stable (even if its bugs only need replugin, it's still annoying).

So I've come to thinking of RME 400, or Profire 2626... But as I'm also searching a good and cheap way to have a good console interface (I have a behringer BCF2000 but I think its useless)... I've discovered the wonderful digi002 interface+midiconsole.

SO, my questions are :
- is any of you, and I know there are a few, user of the Digi 002 console or Digi 003 console (I insist on the console version because the basic audio interfaces of digidesign don't appeal to me) and do you recommend it for a pro tool use ? Is it okay for editing, is it easy to use with no mouse ? I''ve read it's convenient with the digi 003 but what about the 002 ?
- should I still choose a profire 2626 because it doesn't stick me to PT, in case of hate rage I can sell my PTMP version and stick with reaper only

I'm interested by protools for its editing skills and to know the industry standard, even if I don't like the idea of a standard to follow, it seems that the hype is based on some reality (in france we say "no smoke with no fire"), and I wanna at least try. But as I'm also a true ergonomy believer, the 002 is appealing. Just seeing those dedicated buttons to PT features, and for that price, makes me jealous and dreaming of a smooth workflow. I believe in "1 button - 1 function".

I still think the profire is the best idea, but I wanna know who of you have tried, or plan to try, or recommend, such a switch, and have some advices, for someone like me who wanna run occasionnaly serious projects, personnally or semi-pro (i.e. : paid but not as a full time job). And if I like PT, I may buy a Command 8 later for example.

- Final and subsidiary question, I've read that on MPowered, Elastic Audio cannot work on a selection of tracks ? I don't remember it well, but is there a limitation on MP that leads to the fact that editing some drums or whatever on MP is not the same as on LE or HD ? EDIT: fuuu... do you confirm BD is only in the mp toolkit ?
 
If you're happy with Reaper... stay there... seriously.

You should use the DAW that is most comfortable to you... if you're curious about Pro Tools... try going somewhere where its set up (i dont know if they have Guitar Center or an equivalent in France)... I would definitely suggest that before purchasing anything...

The best thing about PT, in my opinion, is the editing... and PT runs SO much better on a mac than it does on a PC... so, take that into consideration before making any big purchases...
 
Also, one thing that I can't stand about PT (and this has been my experience on both PC's and Mac's) is the delay between when you hit record and when it actually starts - I know it's minor, but for someone like me who uses his DAW for riff-writing, having that infuriating pause really fucks wit mah rhythm (dawg). To be honest, I really think Pro Tools lives up to it's name; the easiest and most intuitive DAW (IMO) for pro's who are strictly recording, but if you're not on the clock doing it for a living and don't have to make every second count (not to mention every ounce of patience), I think the slight awkwardness of Reaper, Cubase, hell, even Logic are worth it, mainly for the plugin availability (but also things like the random record delay).
 
Holy shit, really? Thanks dude, I've experienced it on like 5 different PT rigs (HD and LE, Mac and PC) so I just always assumed it was inherent to the program!