Kinda OT: Why is Pro Tools the standard?

[Phil O'Keefe]

There are a lot of good, solid, capable DAW programs on the market, and IMO, it really comes down to what features you need, what working paradigm you prefer, and how you like to work...

A bit of a history lesson is needed to explain "why" PT became the "industry standard".

For years, the "standard" in pro studios was the analog 2" tape deck, in either 16 or 24 track format. Several companies made them (Scully, Studer, Ampex, MCI, Sony, TASCAM, Otari, etc.) and with a few caveats (16 or 24 track headstack, tape speed - 30 or 15 IPS, noise reduction - Dolby A, SR, dBX or none, NAB IEC, or CCIR EQ curves), tapes were compatible / playable on most of them. This made it relatively easy to move from studio to studio as you were working on a project...

MIDI made its first appearance in the early 80s, and MIDI sequencers started popping up shortly thereafter. Some of the earliest computer MIDI sequencers are still with us today. Emagic / Apple Logic was a development of an old C-Lab sequencer called Creator / Notator. Cubase was originally a MIDI sequencer program, and so was Performer. Cakewalk also started with purely MIDI based sequencing - no audio recording. Audio recording and editing capabilities were added to all of those programs later, after the computer hardware "caught up" and became powerful enough to support it, and after Pro Tools was already well established. The first program (AFAIR) that supported both audio and MIDI in one DAW was Studio Vision.

Pro Tools had its origins as a audio only app called Sound Designer. It wasn't a MIDI sequencer - strictly a audio recording / editing application. It was very limited, very expensive, and used primarily by pros. Later, MIDI sequencing was added to Pro Tools, but at first, it was strictly an audio app.

In the old days, a lot of people used Logic for sequencing, and Pro Tools for audio editing. The pair worked well together, and there are still some people who use that same pair of apps, even today.

Basically, Pro Tools was one of the first apps that came out that did audio recording and editing, and did it well. Everyone else was playing catch-up. The other apps were all good MIDI sequencers, and for years, Digidesign has been playing catch-up in terms of their MIDI sequencing features... so those who needed "power user" features for both tended to rely on two programs to meet their needs.

Today, those concerns have largely been taken care of. Pro Tools has made a lot of strides in terms of beefing up their MIDI capabilities over the last several releases, and version 8 is (finally!) adding MIDI notation - something I had with Notator back in the late 80s, and have missed ever since switching over from Logic to Pro Tools at the turn of the century. The other apps have made significant strides in terms of their audio recording and editing capabilities... IMO, you can do good work on ANY of them today.

So why is PT considered the standard? It got there first, and did a good job, and worked for what pros wanted / needed to do in terms of audio. They captured a large market share. They got name recognition - not only within the industry, but outside of it as well. Just as some people (who know little to nothing about microphones) equate the Neumann name with high quality because they've heard that Neumanns are used by pros (despite the fact that other mikes are equally prized - Telefunken, AKG, Schoeps, etc.), the same happened with Pro Tools - it did indeed become a nearly generic name for DAWs in the minds of some neophytes. And that large market share means that it's similar to the old analog days in that if you record something in Pro Tools, chances are you'll be able to find a professional facility that can open the session and get back to work on it, no matter where you happen to find yourself in the world.

I'm probably running out of space in this post, so I'll add another one in a bit to tell you what I personally like about Pro Tools, and why I decided to go with that as my primary DAW application.

[Let It Burn...]

I got the mbox pro, software, and plug ins for $500. That's pretty effin' cheap for the amount of power you have. It can get even cheaper if you don't get the mbox pro. I think that is mighty reasonable and I aint made out of money.

i mean the hd version

 

and phill, that's probably the best post about protools that i've ever read

[sethlover]

Way back in the covered wagon days computers were not powerful enough to record audio on.
Digidesign invented a way to use daughter board cards that the processing power to enable a computer to record to disk. They created a software interface and named it Protools to make it easier for the engineer to do this type of recording via a gui.

Other software used for midi sequencing was powerful enough to run natively on computers and had been for a long time. When computers became powerful enough to record directly without the use of daughter board technology most of those midi swquencing programs were miles ahead of Digidesign's software because the software interface for a simple multi track recorder is much easier to code than a the more complex midi scoring software which they had already invested years in.

Digidesign is a standard because it was the first. Is it the best? There are more powerful applications available but will they interface as easily with others in a Protools dominated profession? That's basically the reason why they are still going strong.

[sethlover]

In the old days, a lot of people used Logic for sequencing, and Pro Tools for audio editing. The pair worked well together, and there are still some people who use that same pair of apps, even today.

 

 

Did you mean Vison (later Studio Vison Pro by Opcode) for sequencing?

[thedh02]

I got very pissed for a second when I read that VSTs were not supported under Pro Tools. Then, I realized that most of the VSTs I use also come with RTAS, I just never installed them.


I can do pretty much everything I wanna do on Tracktion3, so I guess it'll just be a matter of relearning all the basics, but I feel like that'll take very little time as every feature I use on Tracktion pretty much is on the face of the ProjectMix.

...so the closer January gets, the more excited I get to start using that studio they have at the school. I would love to be able to use the M-Audio ProjectMix. It's just that it costs more than a computer :eek::eek: Does anybody here have any experience with it?

[thedh02]

There are a lot of good, solid, capable DAW programs on the market, and IMO, it really comes down to what features you need, what working paradigm you prefer, and how you like to work... A bit of a history lesson is needed to explain "why" PT became the "industry standard". For years, the "standard" in pro studios was the analog 2" tape deck, in either 16 or 24 track format. Several companies made them (Scully, Studer, Ampex, MCI, Sony, TASCAM, Otari, etc.) and with a few caveats (16 or 24 track headstack, tape speed - 30 or 15 IPS, noise reduction - Dolby A, SR, dBX or none, NAB IEC, or CCIR EQ curves), tapes were compatible / playable on most of them. This made it relatively easy to move from studio to studio as you were working on a project... MIDI made its first appearance in the early 80s, and MIDI sequencers started popping up shortly thereafter. Some of the earliest computer MIDI sequencers are still with us today. Emagic / Apple Logic was a development of an old C-Lab sequencer called Creator / Notator. Cubase was originally a MIDI sequencer program, and so was Performer. Cakewalk also started with purely MIDI based sequencing - no audio recording. Audio recording and editing capabilities were added to all of those programs later, after the computer hardware "caught up" and became powerful enough to support it, and after Pro Tools was already well established. The first program (AFAIR) that supported both audio and MIDI in one DAW was Studio Vision. Pro Tools had its origins as a audio only app called Sound Designer. It wasn't a MIDI sequencer - strictly a audio recording / editing application. It was very limited, very expensive, and used primarily by pros. Later, MIDI sequencing was added to Pro Tools, but at first, it was strictly an audio app. In the old days, a lot of people used Logic for sequencing, and Pro Tools for audio editing. The pair worked well together, and there are still some people who use that same pair of apps, even today. Basically, Pro Tools was one of the first apps that came out that did audio recording and editing, and did it well. Everyone else was playing catch-up. The other apps were all good MIDI sequencers, and for years, Digidesign has been playing catch-up in terms of their MIDI sequencing features... so those who needed "power user" features for both tended to rely on two programs to meet their needs. Today, those concerns have largely been taken care of. Pro Tools has made a lot of strides in terms of beefing up their MIDI capabilities over the last several releases, and version 8 is (finally!) adding MIDI notation - something I had with Notator back in the late 80s, and have missed ever since switching over from Logic to Pro Tools at the turn of the century. The other apps have made significant strides in terms of their audio recording and editing capabilities... IMO, you can do good work on ANY of them today. So why is PT considered the standard? It got there first, and did a good job, and worked for what pros wanted / needed to do in terms of audio. They captured a large market share. They got name recognition - not only within the industry, but outside of it as well. Just as some people (who know little to nothing about microphones) equate the Neumann name with high quality because they've heard that Neumanns are used by pros (despite the fact that other mikes are equally prized - Telefunken, AKG, Schoeps, etc.), the same happened with Pro Tools - it did indeed become a nearly generic name for DAWs in the minds of some neophytes. And that large market share means that it's similar to the old analog days in that if you record something in Pro Tools, chances are you'll be able to find a professional facility that can open the session and get back to work on it, no matter where you happen to find yourself in the world. I'm probably running out of space in this post, so I'll add another one in a bit to tell you what I personally like about Pro Tools, and why I decided to go with that as my primary DAW application.

I will definitely be waiting patiently for that next post. That was a great read. Thanks

[Phil O'Keefe]

Did you mean Vison (later Studio Vison Pro by Opcode) for sequencing?

No, I meant Logic. A lot of composers loved Logic due to its power user MIDI capabilities. Logic was (possibly still is) TDM compatible, so it worked with the Digidesign hardware of the Pro Tools systems. I don't know for certain, but I don't believe Studio Vision was ever TDM compatible.

Again, Studio Vision was, as far as I recall, the first program that allowed audio recording / editing and MIDI sequencing in a single, "native" (relies strictly on the computer's CPU power, as opposed to DSP cards) DAW program. Vision was a popular sequencer in its day, but was killed off after Opcode was purchased by Gibson.

[Phil O'Keefe]

I got very pissed for a second when I read that VSTs were not supported under Pro Tools. Then, I realized that most of the VSTs I use also come with RTAS, I just never installed them.

There's a lot of VST plugins that have never been ported over to / coded for RTAS...

www.fxpansion.com

You need their VST -> RTAS "wrapper" to run those non-RTAS VST plugins in Pro Tools. Works great with the vast majority of VST plugins out there, and it only costs $99. Definitely gets a "highly recommended - :phil: " from me.

[Bobby D]

phil, one of the best posts YET from anyone on Hc.....kudos!

[thedh02]

Phil,

 

is that FXpansion plugin known to create any lag during the conversion?

or is it pretty much real time?

[Phil O'Keefe]

Phil, is that FXpansion plugin known to create any lag during the conversion? or is it pretty much real time?

 

 

No (additional) latency issues, no lag, nearly non-existent CPU "hit".

 

Like I said - Highly recommended. :phil:

[sethlover]

No, I meant Logic. A lot of composers loved Logic due to its power user MIDI capabilities. Logic was (possibly still is) TDM compatible, so it worked with the Digidesign hardware of the Pro Tools systems. I don't know for certain, but I don't believe Studio Vision was ever TDM compatible. Again, Studio Vision was, as far as I recall, the first program that allowed audio recording / editing and MIDI sequencing in a single, "native" (relies strictly on the computer's CPU power, as opposed to DSP cards) DAW program. Vision was a popular sequencer in its day, but was killed off after Opcode was purchased by Gibson.

Back in the 90's the two big boys on the block were Protools for Audio and Vision for Midi. Vision was one of if not the first GUI midi sequencing software you could get for Mac OS. It was sort of the same thing that Protools had going for it being the first. They had some sort of agreement because for years Vision linked up with Protools flawlessly were others did not. IMO I think it was this alliance that set Digidesign back years in developing a good midi interface for Protools. Back then Mac's were the only computers powerful enough to do this kind of work. SVP was TDM compatable, and they intergrated almost like they were one program.

Around 1999 Gibson bought Opcode, and with it Studio Vision Pro (Vision's successor). Mind you, this was the "Protools" of midi sequencing at the time (every professional house and artist was using it, U2, Michael Jackson, Madonna, Beck. An industry standard). There was some sort of riff between the Gibson guys and the main coder guy at Opcode. If I remember it was the guy started Opcode. He walked out and with him all the main coders for the program left. Gibson never put anything more into the program. Within months everyone was bailing from the program. One of the main reasons if I remember was that everything was going VST and SVP the more expensive of the line had not added the feature yet (never did), only the lower entry level version had it. It went under overnight. Within a sort time it was totally obsolete. Enter Logic. From there Logic took over filling SVP's shoes and integrating in Protools. Logic was at the time as robust if not more than SVP, a perfect fit. I remember it well because I had to learn how to use Logic (on the fly) and it was a pain in the ass having worked with Vision/SVP's keyboard shortcuts for years.

[Stratmaster458]

Pro Tools isn't "the" standard its just one of them. Alot in the industry also use apple Logic.

I use Logic and love it, its perfect for what I do now until I can afford a 24 track tape machine

[Bobby D]

I used Cubase 2.0 on an Atari ST for YEARS, it was the MOST STABLE timing-wise midi platform I have heard. MIDI was hardwired on the motherboard of those machines, and they were/are rock solid.

Funny thing is, I tried to buy a "legit" copy of 2.0 for the Atari from Steinberg, my contact there asked me "which crack are you running", I told him, and his response was "that one is GOOD, we don't sell or support it anymore, just use the crack"

usually I say NO to CRACK

but I stand by my original post -- the MAIN reason that Protools became dominant is that it was the EASIEST TRANSITION for old skool recording guys to master.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Digidesign is a standard because it was the first. Is it the best? There are more powerful applications available...

 

That's debatable, and largely dependent on 1) your budget and 2) what you want to do. As I said, in terms of MIDI sequencing, most apps have been ahead of Pro Tools for ages, and still are in some respects (as of PT 7.4); however, the last few things I've really felt they needed to add to it in terms of sequencing appear to be included in Pro Tools 8, which, if all goes according to schedule, should be released sometime this month.

[thedh02]

Phil,

have you used the M-Audio ProjectMix. I would use it both as an interface and controller. What do you think?

[jorhay1]

I mean, I understand that word-of-mouth inside of the music recording industry has had a lot to do with it... but what about it do you think has made it so popular, and do you think the hype is deserved? I've been using Trackion 3 for about a year now and I love it. Absolutely love it. It's so simple and I don't really feel like I'm missing out on features over the bigger boys. I tried Sonar, Cubase, Reason, Live, and ended on TRacktion and love it. I love the fact that I can do pretty much everything just by using the keyboard. The single screen interface is also such an amazing idea. However, in January, I'm going to be taking a Recording Engineering class and they use Pro Tools, that's what they teach. I'm kind of afraid, because I feel like it might bring me away from Tracktion. I always figured that this day would come when I would have to start using Pro Tools I just never thought it would be this soon. Am I worrying for no reason? Can I do with Pro Tools Le everything I can with tracktion? Ease of use is my main concern. I plan on buying the M-Audio Project Mix sometime in the near future in order to use Pro Tools.

 

 

imho

its the way it edits audio

 

edit drums (or audio in general) in any other program

 

you will have your answer

 

pro tools excels at audio

it basically replaced tape at major studios

because its rock solid and deals with audio so well

mulitrack tape was only audio so it filled the gap well

 

tracktion rocks

its similar to pro tools (pt is only 2 pages ; it has a mixer)

i bet you'll feel right at home with PT

 

meanwhile

i've been digging writing and composing in logic lately

recording audio is a bit of a pain although

logic is a great creative tool.

 

but for industrial strength audio work

nothing comes close to teh toolz

[Phil O'Keefe]

Back in the 90's the two big boys on the block were Protools for Audio and Vision for Midi. Vision was one of if not the first GUI midi sequencing software you could get for Mac OS. It was sort of the same thing that Protools had going for it being the first. They had some sort of agreement because for years Vision linked up with Protools flawlessly were others did not. IMO I think it was this alliance that set Digidesign back years in developing a good midi interface for Protools.

 

We're getting into an era where my memory is a little shaky, but on further reflection, I think Studio Vision did have TDM / DAE compatibility. Digidesign used to distribute C-Lab (and then later, Emagic) products in the USA (I'm talking late 80s / early 90s here), so there was a tie-in there between those companies, and Logic certainly had TDM compatibility in the 1990's. That was about the time Studio Vision was released... circa 1990, IIRC. Again, as far as Audio + MIDI, as far as I know, SV was first. As far as a graphical user interface, MIDIMAC was probably first on the Mac - and that was a Vision predecessor from the mid-1980's. But Notator and then later, Logic, had full blown GUI's as early as the late 1980's too, as did Cubase. Early / mid-80s was the era of the text sequencers on PC's, Commodore 64's and Atari ST's - Dr T's KCS, Master Tracks Pro, etc. By the late 80's, lots of sequencing programs were using GUI's. Logic first hit the Mac circa early 1993.

 

Cubase and Logic were HUGE in Europe, and both were also quite popular in the USA throughout the 90's. I don't know the actual sales figures, but I would be very surprised if one or the other didn't outsell Vision during that decade - they were all certainly widely used. And again, due to Digidesign distributing the C-Lab / Emagic products in the late 80s / early 90s, they had a vested interest in giving Logic TDM / DAE compatibility, so Studio Vision was definitely not the only sequencer to feature that in the 1990s. And of course, Gibson purchased Opcode circa 1998, and all the products were discontinued by 1999...

 

Probably the biggest lasting echo of Studio Vision / Opcode was OMS... but that's largely become obsolete since OS X was released...

[Phil O'Keefe]

Phil, have you used the M-Audio ProjectMix. I would use it both as an interface and controller. What do you think?

 

 

Just a little. It's a good controller and audio interface; similar in some respects to the Digi 002 / 003, but with fewer outputs, but a lower list price. IIRC, you'd have to purchase Pro Tools M-Powered separately (around $250-300) for it.

 

IMO, a hardware controller is a very good thing to have, and if you want to have an integrated audio interface / control surface that will work with Pro Tools, that's about the cheapest way to do it.

[sethlover]

Probably the biggest lasting echo of Studio Vision was OMS... but that's largely become obsolete since OS X was released...

O-{censored}ing-MS. Ha, ha! Have not heard that in a long time (thank God). Remember Galaxy? OMS... That was another reason why Vision had the monopoly on the market. You had to run that under everything. Only SVP worked great with it, go figure they owned both.

Yeah back then Vision was king, Digital Performer was very popular too but it seemed backward ass compared to Vision and everyone was using Vision anyway not to mention the Protools integration, that might have helped a bit. I think Logic won out over DP after SVP went under because it was the closest interface to SVP, i.e easy to make the switch and it also had VST. A plus was they also had a version of Logic for PC (back when it was cross platform) and by that time PC's were becoming powerful enough to record audio with. DP was Mac only.

I'm pretty sure Vision was the first you could get for Mac OS. If I remember right it came out in 1988 or 89. I think logic ported their version from Atari ST some time after but by then everyone was already using Vision (just a midi sequencer at the time but incredibly kick ass even by todays standards. Very easy and fun to use. Beck was using it way, way past it's due date, might still? I wish I still had a copy, I just might in a box somewhere, ha!). Before Opcode went under the two top sequencers were SVP and DP. Logic, Cubase, and Cakewalk were sort of considered (all be it not true in Logic's case) sub par. You would see them way on the back pages in the Sweetwater catalogs DAW section for example. My have things changed.

[Welladjusted]

My understanding is that it's a "first guest at the party" scenario. It was the first noteworthy DAW, so it has built-in loyalty because nobody sees a reason to try something new.

 

It's very similar to Avid in the film world. They were the first big name in digital editing, and although Apple gives them a healthy competition in Final Cut, they're still industry standard. I could be wrong on Final Cut's market share in Hollywood, but if memory serves, Avid is still standard.

 

Edit: Final cut has 49% market share, as opposed to Avid's 22. Looks like the comparison isn't as apt as I thought.

[thedh02]

Yeah it seems pretty cool.
I really do like my Mackie Satellite tho it woulda been sweet to just use that w/ Pro Tools. Can't have it all tho

Also, I record music but I'm not really like a crazy audiophile... I prefer the musical excellence over production magic. So, when moving from my Satellites Mic Pres to the ProjectMix's, do you think I'll hear a big negative difference or is it negligible?

[thedh02]

WellAdjusted,

 

that's gonna be my major, Video and Digital media...

I was wondering if I'm gonna do that, do you think is it pretty much necessary that I use Macs? I still haven't had my meeting with the program director so I'll have to wait till jan. 5th to ask the department. anyway

 

'Cause as much as I've fantasized about going to Mac I don't do it mostly due to price. Dream setup could probably be MacBook Pro dual-booting OSX and WinXp. But That would cost so much money it's not even funny. Oh god.. I can just see it now... MacBook Pro running pro tools with a projectmix i/o

 

 

 

 

Oh and also man could you recommend me some cameras?

I've seen the Canon HF100 and it seems legit,

but I'm assuming if it's gonna be a college they want me to have

good equipment. I don't even know where to start.

What do you think?

[Phil O'Keefe]

Now, as promised, why I like / use Pro Tools:

 

I'm a Logic PC orphan. When Apple purchased Emagic, they decided to drop PC support. I can understand that - it probably made a lot of sense for them from a business standpoint. OTOH, it didn't make a lot of PC users very happy - about 35% of the Logic user base was running PC's at the time, and as I said, I had been using C-Lab / Emagic products since 1988 - first on the Atari ST / Mega ST/e, and then on PC's. I had purchased every hardware option they sold, and all the software upgrades, and had thousands of dollars into them over the years.... and Apple gave me zero incentive to switch computer platforms beyond a free crossgrade to Logic Apple. I had a ton of money invested in other PC hardware / software, and crossgrading it would have been expensive... and since Apple wasn't offering us a discount on a new Mac, or any other assistance in crossgrading the rest of our applications, I wasn't about to make the switch.

 

Lest anyone think I am taking sides in the Mac vs PC debates, I'm not. I'm typing this on a Mac, and I've owned Macs (as well as PC's) for ages... but I prefer the PC in the studio, because if something goes wrong, I can run down to Best Buy or hit www.newegg.com and have new parts here and fix it myself within a day. If an Mac dies, it might take two weeks to have Apple fix it - and for me, that is an unacceptable amount of downtime for my studio...

 

Anyway, around that same time, I was getting more requests for Pro Tools from clients, and I was finding I really needed to be compatible with the large LA / Hollywood studios, because we were starting things there and working on them here, or vise-versa. I went out and purchased a Digi 001, and started using that.

 

I quickly realized that it absolutely SMOKED Logic in terms of audio recording and editing. It was no contest - not even close. Logic was much better in terms of MIDI sequencing, but since the majority of my work is audio related, and because I still had Logic PC, as well as my old Atari Mega ST/e and Notator 3.21 system (complete with SMPTE sync), I could do advanced MIDI stuff on something other than Pro Tools, and if desired, import a SMF (standard MIDI file) into Pro Tools, or just lock the two computers together.

 

For audio, I've yet to find another DAW application that was as easy to use, and as fast to use. Pro Tools uses two main screens - a mixer screen and an edit screen, and I find the paradigm to be very similar to the analog equipment I started out on - mixing console + tape deck / splicing block. It's very elegant, very efficient, and extremely fast to use.

 

It's also highly stable. Although I ran a Emagic Audiowerks 8 card with Logic for a while, even that wasn't as stable as Pro Tools has been for me. Forget about third party software / hardware pairings - there is definitely something to be said for sourcing the software and hardware from the same company... while things have certainly gotten better in that regard, back in the early part of this decade, it was a crap shoot, and if things DIDN'T work as advertised, each company would tend to blame the other. You don't have those concerns with Pro Tools - if something doesn't work, there's only one company to deal with. And Digidesign's customer service has always been first-rate IMO. And as long as your computer meets their recommendations insofar as hardware compatibility, the dang thing is just ROCK SOLID. It works from the get-go, and it hardly ever crashes.

 

Of course, there is a downside to Pro Tools in terms of hardware - you HAVE to use either Digidesign or M-Audio products for the audio interface. That can be a drag if you want to run third party hardware / audio interfaces, but OTOH, you can run third party hardware that is interfaced to the Digidesign hardware - outboard converters, ADAT lightpipe equipped mixers, etc. MIDI interfaces can be from just about any company. The other downside to Pro Tools LE (the native version) is that there's no ADC (delay compensation), and you can't expand beyond 18 channels of audio I/O... for those things, you have to either go with a different DAW program, or bite the bullet and get a Pro Tools HD system.

 

The converters on the Digi 001 were nothing to write home about, but not horrible for the time either. As soon as the Digi 002 was announced, I got one, and it was a big improvement over the 001. I reviewed the current Digi 003 for Keyboard Magazine last year, and it's a bit better than the 002 in some respects.

 

But I still wanted the additional HD features. I wanted more than 18 channels of I/O. I wanted some of the advanced HD software features that were left out of the LE software. And even though I realize that you can do a lot with a native system when using modern computers / CPU's, I wanted the extra computational horsepower of the DSP chips of the HD Accel cards, and the ability to use some of the more advanced TDM only plug-ins, such as the Eventide Anthology II bundle (which BTW, absolutely rahques :phil: ). And I really wanted the delay compensation, and IMO, no one does DSP and delay compensation as seamlessly and well as Digidesign does.

 

So now I'm running a PT HD2 Accel system, and I'm really happy with it overall. Yes, it was a considerable investment, and not one I made lightly. Yes, you can do a ton of stuff on just about any DAW... but for me, it just works the best for the way I like to work and the things I need to do, and offers me pretty much everything I could want in a DAW.

 

In conclusion,

 

Pros:

 

It's compatible with the widest range of other studios.

 

It's fast and fluid to use, and elegantly laid out.

 

The paradigm fits my mindset and preferred working methods.

 

There's a ton of third party plug-in support for it.

 

It's rock solid stable and reliable.

 

The delay compensation and DSP integration (HD only) are first class.

 

No other DAW program does audio recording / editing nearly as well IMHO.

 

Cons:

 

No standard MIDI notation - although that should be here any time now... (w00t!)

 

You have to use their audio interfaces (HD users do have other options...)

 

Limited maximum track counts for PT LE / PT MP; again, they're increased in PT8.

 

No ADC for PT LE / PT MP, although there is a third party solution that adds that.

 

No S/MUX (88.2 / 96 kHz) on the lightpipe digital I/O's for either PT HD or PT LE.

 

Fewer bundled virtual instruments than Logic, but again, with PT8 they're adding a bunch of new stuff... and if it has everything they're claiming, I believe the MIDI features will have finally caught up to the point where all but the most hardcore film / orchestral composers and MIDI power users should be quite happy with it as their sole MIDI sequencer.

 

So there you have it - that's the story behind how I came to use PT, and the reasons why I like it. However, you have to make up your own mind as to what you want / need, and then determine which application best meets those needs and fits your budget. I own Logic, Sonar, SAW, Cubase... and all of them are very good programs, and certainly capable of doing pro quality recordings when coupled with a good song, great performers, some good outboard gear... oh, and a good engineer. Even $40 for a personal use license for Reaper will give you a DAW that offers features we could only dream about back in the 1980's...there's lots of good options out there, and I am happy for anyone who finds something other than Pro Tools that is the perfect "fit" for them...

 

But for me, it's Pro Tools.

 

YMMV.

[Phil O'Keefe]

WellAdjusted, that's gonna be my major, Video and Digital media... I was wondering if I'm gonna do that, do you think is it pretty much necessary that I use Macs? I still haven't had my meeting with the program director so I'll have to wait till jan. 5th to ask the department. anyway 'Cause as much as I've fantasized about going to Mac I don't do it mostly due to price. Dream setup could probably be MacBook Pro dual-booting OSX and WinXp. But That would cost so much money it's not even funny. Oh god.. I can just see it now... MacBook Pro running pro tools with a projectmix i/o

 

 

I know you didn't ask me, but FWIW...

 

Most pro video stuff is done on Macs. Heck, Pro Tools HD users who use Macs probably outnumber PC users by four to one or more... even though the two are virtually identical now in terms of the program features.

 

I would imagine your instruction and school will all be Mac based, so if you can spring for a Mac, it's probably going to be easier on you. While a Macbook Pro is a nice computer, it's not really your only option though. You can run PT LE on a Core 2 Duo Mac Mini or iMac just fine. You can run it on a White Macbook (but beware - the latest models, except for the lowest priced White one, lack firewire ports, so if you want to use a firewire based interface, such as the Digi 003, you'd be out of luck). And of course, PT LE runs fine on many laptop PC's, but you are probably not going to have all the same video editing options available on the PC... and of course, with a new Mac, there's always Bootcamp and the ability to run Win XP...

 

In your situation, I'd probably recommend a Mac if at all financially "do-able", and unless it absolutely HAS to be a laptop, you may be better off getting a iMac or Mini; both in terms of power (iMac) and price (both).