Now that PT has been freed from hardware restrictions most of the popular DAWs can be compared on a straight software to software basis. (Still several single platform DAWs, but that's not as big a restriction as the old PT restriction.) I had thought of starting a new thread asking people with experience with multiple platforms to compare workflow and software features. (My experience with major platforms other than PT is measured in hours rather than months, so I'm not really qualified.) Most of the old DAW vs. DAW threads that involved PT tended to get bogged down in the hardware issue (which was the big issue before last week). Probably a better idea a couple of months from now, but if anyone else wants to chime in Id definitely be interested.

Great point Bob. I think you really touched on the core element. I've tried quite a few different systems but tossed most of them after 10 mins. I look at them like an A&R searching for the next hit does. Don't bore us, get to the chorus.

Top DAW's for me are:

Samplitude/Sequoia
Reaper
and I'm assuming PT9

I am not at all interested in any Mac systems so I'm bias. I don't believe apple is in the game anymore (just a hunch) unless they drop there price by 30%. The winning OS is coming down to money and stability this next wave... and PC has that in the pocket.

Make the thread and lets see how it evolves. Its what I'm doing with a few threads that I've recently started.

does anyone know if PT9 has offline bouncing? Its probably already been asked but it didn't show up in the searches.

As far as I know bouncing is still in real time. Personally, I prefer this but I understand wanting a quick bounce. I just find that the quality is better when it's done in real time.

yeah, I'm not arguing the merits of that. But 90% of the bounces I do are not very critical. They're rough mixes, cuts that go home with clients that night, or projects where I don't care about the sound quality as much, like a pod cast. Anything worth doing I do real time bounces. But there is absolutely no benefit to waiting around an hour for a pod cast to bounce. And I've done a number of blind tests, its really hard to hear any differences until you get into higher sample rates (88.2 or 96). I don't hear it at all at 44.1. I still think its largely an academic issue. But its enough to keep me away from PT until they add that feature. Its too bad too bc I really like PT. I love mixing in it. But its too much of a time waster.

Oh and Huseph, you mentioned earlier you can't think of a nicer stock reverb, Logic's Space Designer is worth the price of admission alone. Even comparing apples to apples Logic's Platinum Verb has IMO better control and a much nicer presence than Dverb. And now that PT is in the same class as Logic, in that you buy the software for about the same price, I think they should maybe think about including a convolution reverb. at least TL Space (which I do like). Maybe they do. I dunno.

Unofrtunately no TL Space. A lot of other cool plugins but not that one. I would give back Intune, Mastermeter, Metro and a few others for TL-Space.

http://www.avid.com/US/products/Pro-Tools-Software/effects-and-instruments

The offline bounce issue is another hot debate. I'm on the fence with it. Overall I want the security of Real Time especially if you plan on using any outboard gear, (I also heard there may be some issues going offline while using UAD cards too, anybody experience that?) Listening to that final mixdown is a professional quality control measure. Quality Control for paying clients is something to believe in.

In defense of Offline, sometimes I'm just working on my own stuff or a song with a friend or an intern and we really are just working on some ideas. Or, I have a couple bands that want to come in, record a verrrrry rough full album, then we make a cd with no post production what-so-ever so that they can listen to it for a couple weeks and make decisions on which ones they want to put into full blown production. In those cases, Offline would be helpful.

The option to turn it on and off would be a nice touch. Maybe in PT10?

I export mixes faster then RT for ages and have no trouble with it and no degradation in sound.
If you use outboard FX you have to use RT export, anyhow, ..
With UAD, FTRT is no problems with a properly setup computer and drivers.
I do the final check of a production CD by listening through the master CD. I had a few occasions were the CD-R had a mechanical fault that produced drop-outs.
So, the last check is always done on the medium I hand out to the customers.

I personally agree with Big K. Its only math, your computer is compiling all the numbers down. With today's chips it really should not make a difference how fast its done as long as its done just as accurately. I get the whole wanting to listen to it for quality control reasons. But I'm not saying that they should get rid of real time bouncing, that's not a valid perspective to argue this. The big question is; do you really think its advantageous to not have the option? How could not having it as an option be a good thing? Granted with PT9 they're starting to catch up feature wise with the others, but I seriously question the "Industry" if this is the "Industry Standard". I love editing in PT, but there are so many cons of it that it cannot be my only option. They've essentially forced me to use other software. That doesn't sound like a good business strategy to me. But they are on the right track I guess.

isn't there a saying something like this: "The first guy out of the gate usually doesn't win the race" Wasn't PT the first DAW of this kind?

I am all for keeping realtime export as an option, too. It is useful in certain situations...