Post Audio Software

Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:42 pm

Which do you think is the best Post Audio Software?

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:59 am

Pro Tools is the path of least resistance, since Digi's parent company owns the OMF file format.

Is it the best? that's debateble.
There are jobs requiring PT skills.

I live a few miles away from Mackie, but Soundscape is still a mystery to me. I've only seen it at trade shows.

Of the choices given I own DP.

Cool

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2003 1:11 pm

Ys, liked it or not, PT rules.
A few years ago I have heard about Niagra, something like that. Hope it is not Viagra -lol

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2003 11:23 pm

Hey G, I just got DP4 at work and have never used it. I'm familiar with logic, cubase and nuendo, and have tinkered with cakewalk/sonar, and a few other things here and there (all on PC, not mac). Any parts of the DP4 manual you think can help me dive into it quickest? Or powertips to get me started recording in nuendo fashion with DP?

Unfortunately I don't have the luxury of reps from MOTU coming in to give me a run down, and I have to have this thing learned by yesterday!

Another thing is we currently have the Mbox hooked up to the Mac DP is running on, but DP won't recognize the card (or i can't find the right menu screen to set it up in). I've installed the digi coreaudio drivers for the Mbox already, and it's working fine with iTunes, and i'm assuming protools LE 6.1, although I haven't done anything in that yet either.

I appreciate any help, resources, forwarded weblinks, or manual page numbers you can give me! Smile

Cheers

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2003 9:27 pm

Hey,
I think that this poll is a little vague. I want to vote but I couldn't commit myself to just voting for one program covering all fields...
I guess that if I was going to be locked in a closet for 10 years with a single computer and one type of software, I might make my choice based on my circumstances but I have the ability to choose based on what I want to do, so if re-written: One software for post/film, One software for music production etc. then I might take the plunge and vote!
Regards,
mIchAEl

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:54 am

Apprentice, check out unicornation.com.

I'm still a newbie on DP, picked it up at a time when all of my projects were in Cubase5.

My approach is to learn the midi, and audio sections seperately.

Then focus in on other features like Polar, surround sound, DV features and OMF import export.

Because of the decline in quality of the Steinberg releases, I decided early on to find alternatives for OSX.

Cool

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:26 pm

It's interesting that Steinberg isn't jumping all over this opportunity with Logic moving to Mac. It's seemed to be a common view that Steinberg will focus on the PC market now since they could have quite a run of the market.

I'd say instead this would be a great time to really ramp up development of smart, stable, useful features and programs for the Mac and really try to hammer Logic right at home.

Naturally the combination of Emagic being owned by Apple, and the Apple hype machine would make that a hard battle, but honestly.. if you're going to make a move strike before your opposition gets its bearings.

Not that competition is a bad thing, I'm just surprised they haven't ramped up product development at Steinberg and really wowed people. Then they'd have a great foundation on both platforms, and a customer base for it no matter the system used.

Owell..

Thanks for the DP tips! Smile

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2003 12:12 pm

well, i am a little jaded because i have a protools system. it is good and reliable. they all pretty much do the same thing, the decision should be what can you afford. for my first film i used cakewalk and had no problems. now i'm onto protools, have started scoring the next film yet but don't really forsee any problems down the road. i still prefer recording in analog and transferring and editing on a daw but that's just me....

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2003 3:46 pm

I own both platforms, the trend lately has seen the PC ex-Logic users moving in mass from SX to samplitude.

Steinberg really needs to work on the quality of their releases on both platforms. Rolling Eyes

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:53 pm

I still don't understand the Steinberg issue.

I've been using cubase 3.5, SX, Nuendo and Nuendo 2.0 for as long as I've been able to really =P and I've never had a problem with any of them. no conflicts, no errors, no crashes, nothing. I've used some of the above programs on both mac and pc.

what exactly happens when you guys use them that speaks so ill of the programming?

all the vsts and rewire devices work smoothly too..

hell, because i'm such a computer nerd i don't even buy into the intel hype. amd dual athlon system and everything =P.

not that i'm trying to start a cpu conversation, i'm just stating that if anyone's going to have problems with steinberg i'd figure it would be me.

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2003 12:20 am

Hey Apprentice,
For me it's not an issue of "bugs" and "crashes" in the software itself. I believe that the software that I've worked with has been relatively stable as well. (relatively!!) If you hear me compare one to another, it's generally because of the different tools of the trade offered from one platform to another. I just find it easier to do faster editing in Protools over say, SX, for example for post production/film. All programs have their good points and bad. That argument will stand the test of time so long as there is competition in the audio software world. Now about SX users moving over to Cool Edit, I'd like to hear more myself and why you think this is true G-Dub. Interesting point for those of you who haven't heard already... Now that Adobe has taken over Syntrillium Software's Cool Edit Pro software development, they will now rename it "Adobe Audition" which is supposed to be on the market within a month or so. (Apparently, just a name change for the most part for now!)

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2003 7:47 am

Having been on Cubase since version 3.x, I'm probably to familiar with them.

I don't have any problem with the sound of Cubase, but if you look at their history with versions 4, and 5 they released a series of updates that added new features instead of addressing the bugs. Or they fixed a bug and broke another part of the app.

In OSX for most USB devices no drivers are required. Most USB audio devices will not work with SX unless they have specific drivers. Steinberg has not acknowledged that there is a problem. A lot of people have interfaces that work with other apps but not SX.

I used Cubase5.0, none of the 5.1x updates were stable for me, they just recently released 5.2 as a beta. the PC version was released more than a year earlier. After a while you begin to see a pattern, and develop a wait and see attitude with updates. Compared to the other DAWs I own, it's definately a beta testers user experience.

But my biggest gripe is not being able to import mixes from previous versions, with automation, and effects in place. Basically means you have to keep old versions around. If a client wants revisit old material, it could take weeks, to months to recreate complex mixes.

In my consulting business, some clients need OMF, Open TL and TDM support. Those are pretty much standard features for "Pro" mac DAWs.

I did help one client setup OSX and SX, two months later he's still converting his music to the new format.
After struggling with inconsistant import of Cubase5 sessions. He now bounces all tracks as stereo (to retain panning)with their effects and automation. Then
he drops them into the timeline. Works sort of, he's obsessed with the transfer, and has not generated any new music in SX yet.

If he has to do the same exercise to use SX2 in October, may have to put him on suicide watch.

Very Happy

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2003 8:38 pm

Hehehe.. thanks guys, this is making more sense now. I guess because I've had the luxury of sticking to one program per list of things I'm working on I haven't really experienced any of these issues.

So far Logic 6 and Nuendo 2 seem to make a lot of sense to me personally. I think Logic would have won out if I could have afforded a Mac, however that wasn't possible.

I'm pretty happy with Nuendo 2 so far, but I guess time will tell.

Heck, on the flipside of things, I hope I am coming back to complain about similar problems with the software. At least that means I'm getting work!

Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2003 9:24 am

Pro Tools is way to go for Post. Nothing else in the price range has the flexability. I use it day in/out mixing movies and TV. It works, it's stable and clients love the end result. I'm doing "Hellraiser/Deader" right now and the director is just loving the speed and flexability of the system.We are mixing on 2 HD3 systems with 2 control 24's using Virtual VTR as video playback. It rocks! Check out the links for pictures of the room under "facility".

Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2003 7:42 pm

OOOHHHH!!!!

That's a pretty facility Dr. Cool

This topic sponsored by: