grywolf627
Member
I've got to agree with this. I use both Protools and Cubase. And while over all, I prefer working in Cubase, editing in Protools is so much better.
pt vs cubase
- Thread starter joeymusicguy
- Start date
I've got to agree with this. I use both Protools and Cubase. And while over all, I prefer working in Cubase, editing in Protools is so much better.
I'm going to have to repeat myself... IN MY OPINION. I don't really believe any major DAW is inferior to another. There are just differences some people prefer. For me, PT was the last choice for a DAW of my own, because I've used it at my school, and felt Logic was easier to learn from scratch than PT.
There's nothing wrong with Logic's audio editing, except having to create a backup everytime you do something destructive to the audio file. That kind of sucks at first.
edit. Actually, I did say editing but I didn't really mean audio editing... Audio editing is quite fine in PT. My bad.
its just different strokes for different folks
example: cut a guitar part into 16th note seperations
cubase:
click on the scissor tool, click close to grid lines for each seperation needed
pro tools:
set nudge and grid both to 16th note
put your edit cursor where you want to make the first seperation, make sure the track you want to edit the region on is selected, hit b to make the cut, hit the plus key to move to the next 16th note (b, +, b, +, etc)
example: cut a guitar part into 16th note seperations
cubase:
click on the scissor tool, click close to grid lines for each seperation needed
pro tools:
set nudge and grid both to 16th note
put your edit cursor where you want to make the first seperation, make sure the track you want to edit the region on is selected, hit b to make the cut, hit the plus key to move to the next 16th note (b, +, b, +, etc)
JayB
Member
I'm gonna say that it just comes down to what you know. I started on Pro Tools, had a hell of a time wrapping my head around it at first, but now I can't wrap my head around Cubase haha. It's just alien to me , I got a trial version to use because a band sent me a Cubase project file to mix , and I was so confused I converted it to Pro Tools. I'm sure if I started on Cubase I'd feel the same way about PT.
JayB
Member
just had to say elastic audio is the SHIT !PT has it...it's called elastic audio and works better than time warp in cubase
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Ugh, nobody saw my second post.
Fine here is an example:
Load a drum track into pro tools, it's over 500 measures long and it wasn't tracked with a click. I want to program the grid to fit the drums without altering thier tempo or pitch.
It's easy to do in cubase, I know it can be done in pro tools, but it's not as easy. That make sense?
I'm aware of what elastic audio is/does and it's NOT the same thing I was talking about.
Fine here is an example:
Load a drum track into pro tools, it's over 500 measures long and it wasn't tracked with a click. I want to program the grid to fit the drums without altering thier tempo or pitch.
It's easy to do in cubase, I know it can be done in pro tools, but it's not as easy. That make sense?
I'm aware of what elastic audio is/does and it's NOT the same thing I was talking about.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Here, I'm talking about this tool. I wish pro tools had this tool:
[/IMG]
So when I track drums without a click I can make this happen:
Supposedly the way you do this in pro tools is beat detective.
So when I track drums without a click I can make this happen:
Supposedly the way you do this in pro tools is beat detective.
to specify the specific cubase feature he's talking about, its called "time warp"
not "free warp"
and what it does is make tempo stretching for your project grid
as in, the grid can be aligned to source audio by sight or automated via hit points
it allows you to take for instance, a drummers natural timing, and create your session grid around his human meter. then you can snap things to grid in the project (like piano midi notes for instance), and they'll be aligned with the drummers natural timing
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
yes Loren and joey.. pro tools can do that, exactly what joey just described... and quite easily.. it's called Bar/Beat Marker Generation, and it's the often overlooked functionality of Beat Detective. once you've identified the "hit points" using the Capture and Analyze tools, BD will conform the grid rather than the audio.
again, i'll repeat my mantra... it's all about simply reading the manual.
again, i'll repeat my mantra... it's all about simply reading the manual.
C_F_H_13
Protools Guru
Nope.
Protools:
Select audio. Go Edit-Separate Audio-Choose between at the transients or on the grid.
C_F_H_13
Protools Guru
+1. You can use beat detective or do it visually with the command-i key function. Not to be a dick, but alot of the things you guys are complaining about PT seems to come down to user error or lack of knowledge.
ahjteam
Anssi Tenhunen
scissor tool at start (1) and end (2) of the range, alt key down and once after the first cut (3).
paladin shredder
Member
I know I'm coming in late, and someone else already touched on this, but there is one big thing to take into consideration here.
Pro Tools was designed to replace adat and tape machines. It was also designed to be used with an analog console for mixing, and analog consoles are still widely used today by countless pros. When working on an analog board, a mono audio track doesn't just magically transform into a stereo track by putting reverb on it. If you have 8 or 16 or 48 audio channels, that's all you have! If you want a stereo audio track, you have to sacrifice an extra one of your audio channels with a duplicate of the same signal.
Thats why bus and aux channels are so useful. You could have one reverb plugin/rack unit, and send your snare, toms, guitar solo, main vocal, vocal harmonies, cowbell, etc. all to the same reverb. This spares you loosing audio channels unnecessarily, while also conserving cpu power by only using one reverb plugin instead of 20 reverbs inserted on each audio track.
I'm not trying to come down on you, obviously the way you work is quite successful. All i'm saying is this is how a countless number of professionals work. They want a program that works completely in-sync with their big ass expensive analog console, and that's where protools delivers.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Yeah, but the problem with beat detective is you have to rely on it's ability to accurately detect your shit, then if it doesn't you have to go in and un fuck it. With time warp it's just a matter of dragging around the time line. It's user controlled.
So yeah, pro tools has it sort of. I'm saying I like the way cubase does it better, so I would rather have it function in the same manner.
Plus, yeah I could have read the manual, learned how to do it. You are correct! But it's a fucking button in cubase. There is no learning key commands or how to use beat detective. Hit the button and go. I like that.
So yeah, pro tools has it sort of. I'm saying I like the way cubase does it better, so I would rather have it function in the same manner.
Plus, yeah I could have read the manual, learned how to do it. You are correct! But it's a fucking button in cubase. There is no learning key commands or how to use beat detective. Hit the button and go. I like that.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Also, let me re state for the record that I have no issue with pro tools. My ramble was just off the top of my head features I wouldn't mind seeing.
C_F_H_13
Protools Guru
ok.....
First off, if you wanted to you could drag around the timeline in PT. Secondly, it's not like you need beat detective to be sample accurate when you're doing tempos. Who cares if it's slightly off, you're going to round it up aren't you? Nobody does tempos of 119.8745 instead of 120. and It's 2 buttons pushed together in PT.....command and I. You hit the buttons and go. and I like that.
CatharsisStudios
trcksngsrpbngs
- Jun 25, 2008
- 2,198
- 10
- 38
