Hey,
I have Digi002 Rack with ProTools LE on Mac G5. I 'm happy with it.
You have already made a point I value a lot - compatibility with the
studios. Also, the Reason comes with Digi002 package.
Cheers,
Costy.

Hi

I think it all comes down to a few things: first of all the use you'll be doing with the setup, and I mean if you are handling more audio than MIDI or vice versa; in the first case I'd go with Pro Tools, in that its editing and audio managing capabilities surpass Cubase by far (IMO), while the MIDI side altbeit a bit limited is more than enough for average programmings, and now with Reason and other synth or RTAS instruments available thru Rewire the expanadbility is no problem. If you plan on doing lots of MIDI programming and VSTi then Cubase is a bit better choice.

Second thing is the integration of the software with the HW side: Pro Tools is written to work with its hardware and it does its job as a rock solid unit with the 002R (I have it on a PC too and it's working OK), while Cubase being an open platform is capable to run on whatever HW interface you choose, but will not have the tight integration with it that Pro Tools has.

Third is compatibility with bigger facilities: bring your LE created session to an HD equipped studio to mix and voilà, you can instantly open it and start mixing with TDM plug ins and all the bells and whistles.
Plus, I think that the 002R is a brilliant step up in audio quality compared to its older 001 predecessor, really tighter sounding with focused bass and detailed high end, the two weak points I found in the previous hardware, on top of that you also have four decent sounding preamps built in and up to 18 phisical I/O to hook up outboard both analog and digital.

On the downside, with Pro Tools LE you have the track limitation to 32, although that can be overcome with the dynamic voice allocation (that brings you to 64 available tracks, 32 of which can play at the same time), if you plan to spread your sessions wider than that you'll have to be a bit creative with submixing...also, PTLE doesn't have plug in Auto Delay Comepnsation...that Cubase has..but it seems to be coming in a next release, also no 5.1 or whatever surround capability yet...unless you DYI.
Pro Tools is a bit more demanding on your system (although the specs of the system you listed make me think you shouldn't have any problem power-wise), but I think this is coming back with better audio quality.

In the end I think that the best solution would be to get the 002R (Pro Tools LE 6.4 coming with it) and get Cubase SX also, it can be run on the Digidesign hardware via the ASIO driver which works OK and have the capability to use all of the I/Os even within Cubase; that way you'd have the best of both worlds, audio editing and mixing with PT, MIDI programming and VSTi with Cubase, on the same machine. Try them both out before buying, because a big part of the game is how you feel comfortable working with the software, and how you interact with it, if it's clicking with you or not. If you go with pro Tools make sure you PC hardware is compatible with the specs posted on the Digidesign User COnference (DUC).

Hope this helps

L.G.

Unless you are going to track at home and mix at a real ProTools studio, I think you would be tying your hands behind your back by getting a ProTools Lite setup. All of the proprietary limitations of ProTools, with few of the benefits of an HD system :P .

If you are going to be your own recording entity all the way, I think there is so much more you can do with a Cubase kind of setup.

mix at a real ProTools studio

Sorry, but...what's not "real" about Pro Tools LE?

It depends on the caliber of work that one's going to do; I edited and mixed the large bulk of my work in the past 4 years on an LE system (and that consists of a pair of dozens of commercially released CDs, several indie DV shot movies, both short and long form, TV commercials...) and I didn't feel like I had my hands tied behind my back at all except for a pair of opportunities, where I needed motre tracks, but that's where the compatibility with larger TDM studios is handy...I just drop the session on a removable drive or DVD and head for a nearby HD equipped studio...no sweat.

To me that's not the problem, as I can mix within my environment by using plug ins and real hardware units together (Lexicon and Eventide reverbs connected digitally, hardware compressors and EQs...) the thing is very versatile and if one learns how to truly take advantage of all its features the "limitation" of 32 voices and no DSP processing is a minor shortcoming, considering the price of the package.

Anyway, to each his own... :D

L.G.

i second the 002 hardware with Protools or Cubase...best of both worlds and can experiment...maybe the LE is not the "real" Protools but can do a great job...i remenber when a 32 tape studio was considered "pro"... :roll:

Right now i'm running the 002r with Nuendo (basically Cubase "delux") and the hardware works much better with nuendo than it does with slow tools. i can keep the HW buffer lower in nuendo without problems at a higher track count with lower latency. I still do use pro tools when someone requests that i do but its like pulling teeth to me at this point..

IMHO:

Nuendo has better editing
Nuendo has better MIDI integration
Nuendo has better HW integration
Nuendo has better integration with the 002r (dont ask how)

While it is true that pro tools is "industry standard" i think it is only that way because people are cattle and move with the masses. No i dont work for stienberg and no i dont think digidesign products are crap by any means. I have used both for many years now and i have formed my opinion and preferance.

Also. yes you "could" use all your 32 tracks then tell who ever you are tracking to wait around while you 2 track so you can make space for new tracks but do you really want to waste everyones time?

I agree with all Nuendo stuff...except editing...i think, IMHO, Protools is the best editing program EVER...

What can I say. I'm using Pro Tools, Cubase and Nuendo, and I like them a lot.
But I have to admit that I do prefer Pro Tools, but it's just because I'm using it a lot. Maybe just an old habit? :lol:

:P

Hi
I use protools LE with a powercore firewire in VST to RTAS wrapper. I can use all the VSTis I like, have DSP power for reverbs and mastering, and have great audio editing. I'm very happy.

There again I've not tried anything else!
Rhyd

RedDawnRecords wrote: While it is true that pro tools is "industry standard" i think it is only that way because people are cattle and move with the masses.

I think that's a rather short sighted and cynical way to look at it. People use Pro Tools because it's a common program- Most REAL studios have a pro tools rig and taking your LE session into a TDM / HD studio without having to go through OMF- AIFF/BWF conversion is priceless. And it's become a common program because the GUI is very logical and covers the middle ground for most people (unlike logic, cubase etc.). Are there people on the extremes who don't get enough out of it? Yes- MIDI guys for one. BUt I can't think of a better platform to be standard than PT, and I've used them all.

FTR, I also use DP 4.5.

Yes, Nuendo is great, but I have to spend an our or so prepping a track to take it into the Nuendo studio I mixdown in. If there was a PT studio with the same rates that was convenient to me, I'd choose it in a heartbeat over the Nuendo studio.

Just the way it works.

I have both a Pro Tools TDM set up and an Mbox for the road and both systems work incredibly well for me. I admit that I trust my TDM system more BUT that's only because of it's dedicated processing (which neither the 002 or a cubase system will have). I have been very surprised at how well the Mbox holds up though... I only have it running off of my iBook and I can get a full recording running smooth enough to mix in the box (drum kit, bass, several guitars, keys, several vocals, etc.). Oh, and the Pro Tools plug-ins are nothing to write home about but they're certainly usable and probably the best plug-ins that you'll get packaged with a system.

I hope that helps!

I have a Digi 002 rack with a Rosetta 800 and a G5 Dual 1.8 with 2 gig and I get better performance than an HD 1 sytstem with software like the Waves mastering bundle, which won't even run on the HD 1 system at 96khz without an accel card. The one limitation is track count.
There seems to be some perception that Protools LE is somehow a cheaper/crappier version than the TDM version, but I have not ever noticed a difference and I have worked on both.

thanks!

Some great posts--thanks for all your help! I really appreciate it!

Costy wrote: Hey,
I have Digi002 Rack with ProTools LE on Mac G5. I 'm happy with it.
You have already made a point I value a lot - compatibility with the
studios. Also, the Reason comes with Digi002 package.
Cheers,
Costy.

I'm thinking about purchasing Digidesign's LE rack. I have a bunch of outboard gear (ie EQ, Compression, etc). I've looked on the back for aux in's and didn't notice any. Does it work well with outboard analog gear.

Yes

You just plug your outboard gear (better using a patch bay) to the analog I/Os that are on the back, and assign them as inserts or aux sends in the Pro Tools mixer, I do this all the time with my setup, works great; the onlything you have to be aware of is latency, as sending a signal for a round trip out and back in the interface will cause some samples of latency, thus delaying the processed track; this is easily fixed by making a playlist of the track (duplicating it) and sliding it ahead of its original position by the same amount of latency generated by the hardware insert. If you use digital I/Os the latency is reduced to just a few samples, and it's unnoticeable (I link my outboard reverbs this way).

Hope this helps

L.G.

I admit that I trust my TDM system more BUT that's only because of it's dedicated processing (which neither the 002 or a cubase system will have).

That is not true, Creamware offers cards that look remarkably similar to the ProTools HD Core Cards. They are priced from attainable ($500USD) to the higher end($2500USD). They seem to be able to run ASIO drivers (Cubase,Nuendo, Sonar etc.) and also come bundled with their own Synths and Plug-Ins. Although they don't seem to run the entire load of the audio application, it appears they take more of the load off the CPU then say a UAD, or TC Powercore card. But then again I don't have on so...

Link removed

Some one buy one already...

I am dying to get my hands on one, or at least hear a review.

M.

I don't know about the Creamware stuff, but so far the only DSP cards that have been tested on LE systems are UAD-1 and Powercore. They both work but there's pros and cons to this approach: the pros are obviously acces to top notch plug ins developed by the respective manufacturers and the use of DSP power that lightens the stress on the CPU by a large amount while allowing to run several heavy plugs without hiccups.
The cons are that you have to use a dedicated VSR-RTAS wrapper to use theose plugs within the Pro Tools environment, as they are VST only (and this is a minor shortcoming), while the most important thing is latency, as the trip of the signal to the DSP card and back induces a huge latency on the track; yes, there's the delay compensator, but it only works for a certain amount of latency, so you have to adopt the same ol' metohd of sliding the track forward to compensate...is this worth it? Some say it definitely is, others say it's not, you try it for yourself and decide.

Hope this helps

L.G.

Neundo 3 is being released very soon. Previous Neundo versions were based around the same engine and interface as Cubase SX, but apparently Neundo 3 is supossed to be remarkably better. I run Nuendo 2.2, granted not everyone can afford $2,500 recording software, but its by far the best program you can get, as far as im concerned...compatible with just about every VST and DX plugin you can throw at it. Plus Steinberg has amazing quality and service...

I'm not going to say Pro Tools is lame, because its obviously a very reputable program and i dont have much experience with it. But i would DEFINITELY recommend either Steinberg Cubase SX or Nuendo 2/3...

Lorenzo sez:

...also, PTLE doesn't have plug in Auto Delay Comepnsation...that Cubase has..but it seems to be coming in a next release...

I sez:

By that do you mean that you have to manually adjust the track backward in time for latency after recording? And if so is it a big deal or is it simply a mouse click and you're on to other things?

Lorenzo sez:

also no 5.1 or whatever surround capability yet...unless you DYI.

I sez:

I have understood that to mean you were talking about Pro Tools 002, that it didn't have the 5.1 capability, but that the Cubase does. Do I have that right?

Second, do we know if there are plans to make the 002 create the 5.1 surround? (I currently don't need it, but I think it's where the recording industry will head in the near future, so I suppose one ought to at least be able to create it, no?)

Thanks
Keith

red-pill:
usually its as easy as rendering an RTAS plugin with its AudioSuit counterpart. if its a plugin without an AudioSuite version (like auto-tune) you need to bus the track to another track and record it, then slide the audio over.

In reply to some of the other posts, I run logic 7, and DP 4, and have used qbase, and if audio and recording live instruments is your forte, ProTools can't be beat. For audio editing, there is no comparison, which is why protools is the industry standard the world over in professional recording studios.

There are downsides to protools which have been mentioned, and yes, at the moment other programs are more CPU efficient (ProTools doesn't fully support dual processors either). However, ProTools 7 is in the works which will hopefully fix all of these issues, and 6.7 has already brought many MIDI enhancements. Also, in reguards to the 32 track limit, I still have clients that say "wow!" when i tell them i can record 32 tracks. there are many professional music studios running RADAR recorders with only 24 tracks. I know its cliché, but look what the beatles did with 4 tracks. its just not that big a limitation for the majority of music studios. Post is a different story...

If you are using the equipment for your own personal projects, try out the different software options (download protools free) and find out what is most comfortable for your needs.

If you are looking to bring paying customers in however, you really should have the option of protools, or you will forever be explaining the lack thereof to every client that comes through your doors. Thats just the nature of the industry right now.

i run both cubase sl 2 and protools LE w/ an MBox and i can't really tell the difference with the two. i must admit that i use cubase WAAAAAY more, but that's cuz i work extensively with midi and rewire. i used to be able to tell the difference with audio, pt being better than cubase, but that was when i DIDN'T KNOW that i could use the MBox w/ cubase, and i was using the audiophile 24/96 pci card. but once i started using the MBox w/ my cubase, the audio has been just as clean.
and BTW, VST-RTAS wrappers don't work with every vst or vsti.
i think it really comes down to feel.
but if i were to give a suggestion, i would follow the first suggestion made on this post:
get both ptLE and cubase (why not SL, keep costs down), but just get the 002 for both.

/af

Good info guys,

So about that 5.1 surround thing, or lack thereof? What's the story?

K

useless feature unless you actually plan on making use of it...apparently 5.1 will be the standard in recording by 2010, but i dont know about that one...i run a 2.1 set up at most, when i have access to my BlueSky 2.1 monitors...either way, don't make your decision based on its 5.1 cababilities....

Thanks Freelight, that makes sense.

Another ? that came up during a Mac/PC flame war on another post.

At this site:
http://www.carillonusa.com/clnweb/performance.jsp?country=US

Their testing shows that a 3.0 or so PC runs significantly more tracks, plug ins and effects than a dual 2.5 G5 on Cubase, but on Pro Tools the Mac dusted it by running 50% more of that sort of thing.

Seems odd, anybody know why?

Thanks
Keith

Sorry to hog the airwaves, but a cubase guy once told me that once you've bought Cubase, and you want to upgrade to a newer version, all you do is pay them the difference between the old and new programs, and they send you the new package.

First of all, is that true?

Second, does Pro Tools do the same thing or do they make you buy the whole thing from scratch?

I'm thinking specifically of version 7 of Pro Tools and what it will hold as far as running with dual processors and being supposedly more CPU efficient, and whether one ought to wait to buy or jump on board now?

Thanks
Keith

what are the specks on the mac running pro tools did it have the card s installed

a cubase guy once told me that once you've bought Cubase, and you want to upgrade to a newer version, all you do is pay them the difference between the old and new programs, and they send you the new package.

First of all, is that true?

Second, does Pro Tools do the same thing or do they make you buy the whole thing from scratch?

It's not really an apples-to-apples comparison. If you're talking purely about software upgrades, there's no price difference from one version of Pro Tools to the next, so they can't really charge you the difference. LE software upgrades are $75, but they don't charge you for every upgrade. I know that Cubase will only offer upgrades going back so far and then you have to buy the program new.

Digidesign also offers hardware upgrades, which is pretty unusual in this industry...especially at the lower price points.

-Duardo

Frob sez:

what are the specks on the mac running pro tools did it have the card s installed.

I sez:

If you're referring to what I said about the mac-PC thing, that's a good question. I don't know if they hanicapped the Mac or not to make their product look better on the tests. It is probably tough to find out. They do give the basic specs for all the machines listed, but there may be significant details missing.

If there are any more or less neutral computer guys out there who could shed light on this, that might be good for all of us.

The link to the test results is under my name, 4 posts back.

Cheers
Keith

took-the-red-pill wrote: Frob sez:

what are the specks on the mac running pro tools did it have the card s installed.

I sez:

If you're referring to what I said about the mac-PC thing, that's a good question. I don't know if they hanicapped the Mac or not to make their product look better on the tests. It is probably tough to find out. They do give the basic specs for all the machines listed, but there may be significant details missing.

If there are any more or less neutral computer guys out there who could shed light on this, that might be good for all of us.

The link to the test results is under my name, 4 posts back.

Cheers
Keith

I think the first thing you need to understand is that while most software makers attempt to market their produxt as cross platform it is always designed with one platform in mind and the other is a compromise. The costs of creating two completely different versions of software each optimized for a specific platform would be enormous and so only what needs to be changed in order to make it run on another platform are integrated.

When PT was created Mac's were by far the better choice for audio and so PT was written for Mac primarily, studios adopted it and it has become for lack of a better word the "professional standard". Cubase was created with PC's in mind to capture the "home/small studio" market since PC's are far more numerous in those environments. Compromises exist in both and also in all other DAW software.

It's funny you think the Mac may have been tampered with to produce better results for the PC. Can you explain how this would benefit a software or hardware maker? It would only result in lost sales to users of the platform they handicapped, not a smart business move. If anything they would want those numbers to be relatively even. It's all about sales not platform bashing. They may handicap a competitors product but not a whole platform that they depend upon for revenue.

One company who attempted to benefit by handicaping another product was Apple itself. When the G5 was released it was already slower than the then current Intel 3.0 GHz, so in essence they cheated to make the Mac appear faster. Read this for the lowdown.

http://spl.haxial.net/apple-powermac-G5/

It's really a shame because Apple makes a fine product but Steve Jobs is once again driving them right into the ground. Instead of making a deal with AMD to provide it's processors and shifting OSX in the direction of Linux (both Unix based OS's BTW) he chose to use the much slower IBM processor and continue to develop the MAC OS as it's own entity. The result has been a machine and OS that is compatible with nothing else and has fallen way behind PC's in performance at twice the price. This gap will only widen as Intel and AMD continue to push the performance envelope and Apple has nothing new in the pipeline. Someone at Apple please fire that nitwit and put Wozniak back in charge.

If your looking for great software/hardware performance consider what platform it was developed for first, this can get you much closer to the results you desire. The same applies to computers, choose your software and the platform will become apparent.

Good luck