hueseph wrote: The midi functionality also looks amazing.

I'm not sure if you are talking about the MIDI functionality with respect to the pitch correction software, but that seems pretty cool to me.

The demo video in the link sucks big time!
How am I supposed to understand the quality of a pitch correction plugin if they add an annoying delay to the voice??! Besides.. a female voice that shifts by 2 semitones is telling me nothing about the actual quality of the plugin.
Not convinced by the video for sure,
Now Melodyne DNA technology is what I call "kinda scary".

Sorry...

Just interested in what would motivate you to buy protools (LE or M-Powered I assume) knowing that you ran other software for a while.

Limited tracks, ties you to proprietary (and only pretty average) hardware, has less extensive MIDI functionality than Logic, Cubase, Sonar, video features require a 500 dollar upgrade, NO PLUGIN DELAY COMPENSATION (jeepers, is it still 2001 or something in Digiworld?).

I just don't see the attraction in the PTLE/M-Powered World and don't buy into that 'industry standard' hype. PTHD is obviously a different kettle of fish, but for half the money you could put together a better Logic studio, or for a third less a Nuendo studio.

It's LE. I can't afford an HD system....yet. When I first strted usin PT at home with the Digi, I got accustomed to the workflow. As much as I like and still have Cubase, PT feels more logical to me. No other reason.

really.. well maybe you can give us come accute examples or scenarios as to why. being that i am still learning more about cubase.( everytime i use it i am stuck to the book.)
did the cluttered work space on cbse get you fatiged?

I personally didn't mind the Cubase software too much, but I didn't like how the software didn't map to the interface 100%. Perhaps it could have been done easier, but why should I have to fuss with something like that?

I was also just used to Pro Tools. It was comfortable to me, even though at the time I had only used it occasionally. I guess it did seem less cluttered.

Calling one company for issues is pretty nice, too. I've seen the "Oh, you're using ABC software with our interface. That's your issue." Or the other way around.

I don't mind the fact that I'm limited to their hardware. For what I do, it's perfectly fine. I also like the idea that I'm not paying for features I don't use (DVTK), but like the idea that I can add it on later.

I think when you consider the fact that a lot of people use similar hardware (PreSonus, etc.) as the LE hardware with other DAWs, it's all on quite a level playing field.

I don't think it becomes a different game until the higher end converters are used.

SeniorFedup wrote: really.. well maybe you can give us come accute examples or scenarios as to why. being that i am still learning more about cubase.( everytime i use it i am stuck to the book.)
did the cluttered work space on cbse get you fatiged?

It's the routing. I always felt like I had to go through more menus to access the routing in Cubase. I like the way PT handles that. The routing is very apparent.

Also plugins are very apparent as well. Setting up plugins always seemed like a bit of a pain in Cubase. It's not hard but more mouse clicks than I felt necessary. First set up the instrument as a source, then assign to a channel. In PT it's just per channel and you're done. 8 is even better with those things now and the midi editing is much simpler since they finally added a separate midi/score edit window.

Incidentally, I just saw the Creative Control seminar for PT and I have to say the playlist and comping features in 8 are very handy.

Anyway, I don't want this to be anti Cubase. I think Cubase is a great and very powerful tool.

This is all a matter of taste, but really, Cubase's interface is pretty darned easy to use IMHO. Plugins handle quite easily in Cubase although VSTis require the extra step of setting up the plugin using F11 and having a MIDI track as well as a seperate vsti track for the audio.

If you want clutter then try Sonar's interface, or Logic, (although better in Logic Studio 8). PT's interface is quite simple, but until 8 it was like so 1995, bland, uninspiring etc, grey. 8 is a bit better looking but nothing special.

Having said all of this, I first used Cubase with VST 3.5, and then progressed through SX1 to SX3 (where I am currently at, although 5 is looking more inspired). Cubase 4 opened up much options for routing and sidechaining and C5 catches up to Sonar and Logic by throwing in pitch correction, drum modules and decent convolution reverb. The lack of plugin delay compensation, track limits and proprietary hardware are still the biggest weaknesses for PTLE and M-Powered, and enough to discourage a lot of potential users, and really, should be, in terms of PDC and track limits, something Digi could easily alleviate and give a lot more freedom to their users - it appears though that they don't want to, they deliberately restrict so as to encourage people to buy expensive HD systems.

thanks for the reply...not to sound comparative to the T but have you been using sx3 or 4 last
?

SeniorFedup wrote: thanks for the reply...not to sound comparative to the T but have you been using sx3 or 4 last
?

I never got past SL 1. I wanted to go to Cubase 4 but there seemed to be a lot of issues with it on the forum. Mind you, no more issues than would be had with any other software.

As far as clutter is concerned, PT can easily be as cluttered as Cubase. It's almost necessary to have two monitors in order to utilize either properly. There are always keyboard short cuts.

i own 4.5 and the only issue i get is sometime when i open a certain project .(i forgot what type already, but i think its midi) the click track doesnt sound..maybe some one can help me on this one.

but i find it to be good enough to not want to switch. beint that i first started on cubase i dont have the issue of routing and clicking on vst conneects all the time. (by now i should have a key command for it.)