Cubase vs. Protools...

[bigwillz24]

Okay now that your here. This is NOT about how one is better than the other or vice-versa. All I want is the major advantages and disadavantages of using one over the other. For example:

Cubase has automatic plugin delay compensation Protools does not.

Protools has the ability to rearrange plugins on inserts Cubase does not.

Thanks

[zook250]

real time bouncing in protools le sucks.

[altitude909]

Cubase: Midi at its best
Protools: Midi at its worst

[jonnyc]

Originally Posted by zook250

real time bouncing in protools le sucks.

Word. That's one of the most annoying uhh features of LE. I just love it when I'm finishing up a full cd project and I have to sit there for an hour while everything bounces down.

[karl_danger]

if you get protools 7 that does have automatic delay compensation. although protools midi functions arent the best out there they are still pretty good and getting better....and cubase is not the best either. id probably go with logic if i was wanting to work with midi. theres a reason almost every major studio uses protools....its by far the best editor out there for audio and since so many studios use it it makes it alot easier to move your work to a different studio. go ahead and flame me for me not capitalizing words and bad grammar i dont care

[Farview]

Originally Posted by karl_danger

go ahead and flame me for me not capitalizing words and bad grammar i dont care

OK. I hate your grammer and lack of capitalization.

Feel better?

[bennychico11]

PT has gotten a lot better with their MIDI features since version 7 came out. You have to understand they were originally just an audio editing program that incorporated MIDI later while program like Logic or DP started with MIDI first and incorporated audio.
Pro Tools LE 7 actually still does not contain delay compensation but utilizes a round-about way to buffer the audio being processed. But this was done even in versions before 7.
And as far as real time bouncing...this is just something that is left over from the analog days, and actually many people still utilize it. How else are you going to get your audio out of the computer, into your analog gear (an SSL console, EQs, etc.) and then back in?

as far as Cubase, I've only used their LE version and it was so long ago that I can't even remember the features so I can't comment on that. sorry.

[Brad_C]

I just hate the fact that Pro-tools only works with digidesign products (and M-Audio), and you can't have pro-tools and a firepod. Also since a pro-tools plug-in costs a million dollars.

[Chris Shaeffer]

I Own both. Cubase was my first "real" DAW and I used it for a few years before investing in Pro Tools. I upgraded to SX2 but haven't been able to justify getting 3. I just don't use it all that much.

Pro Tools does have wicked fast editing, and I like that most eveything happenes with the 2 main windows. It also comes with a few plugins that I like better than the stock Cubase plugs. Pro Tools LE and most of the RTAS plugs don't have a delay- not like the TDM system plugs which ALL have different delays.

I *really* like being able to move projects from studio to studio with Pro Tools- that actually lets me work: Pro Tools may not actually be any better than the other programs out there, but it does have name recognition. I've paid for my Pro Tools with the work it allowed me to do.

Cubase has:
Unlimited tracks, full dealy compensation *even* on hardware sends(!), timecode and advanced video functions, OMF inport and export, faster than realtime bounce, track freeze, distributed processing... the list goes on.

Pro Tools: cheaper to get into at the ground level. The mBox comes with PT and is less than Cubase SX. While this is true, the arguement breaks down when you realize PT LE is more on the level of Cubase SL. Verye expensive to upgrade.

Cubase: Infinitely upgradeable and grows to the limit of your hardware.

Seriously, the only reason I chose PT over Cubase is because of the professional work that I do. That's the only reason I'd recommend it to a home recordist, as well, because Cubase pretty much kicks its butt in every other area except work flow.

Take care,
Chris

[bennychico11]

Originally Posted by Brad_C

Also since a pro-tools plug-in costs a million dollars.

lol, well they don't cost anymore than a VST version of that same plugin would.

[Farview]

Originally Posted by bennychico11

lol, well they don't cost anymore than a VST version of that same plugin would.

Yes, they do. Normally about 1 1/2 times what a native plug would cost.

[bennychico11]

Originally Posted by Farview

Yes, they do. Normally about 1 1/2 times what a native plug would cost.

are we talking about RTAS or TDM/HTDM plugins here? big difference. If you're talking about RTAS, most plugin companies sell one disc that has all host based plugins on them (including RTAS). Waves Bundles, Antares, Izotope, Spectrasonics, Nomad Factory, Elemental Audio, etc.
Now if you mean TDM/HTDM...yes, but there's a little bit different processing done with those plugins. And I assumed Brad C wasn't talking about TDM.

[fraserhutch]

TDM = "Take Da Money"

[Farview]

I keep forgetting that when people say 'Protools', they mean LE instead of HD.

[giraffe]

Originally Posted by Chris Shaeffer

I
Pro Tools LE and most of the RTAS plugs don't have a delay-

huh, i'm fairly sure you're wrong about this........ especially since i've bumped audio around according to the dealer published delay of plugs to iron out parallel compression. (not always, but after enough of the right plugs it needs to be done)

[bennychico11]

Originally Posted by Farview

I keep forgetting that when people say 'Protools', they mean LE instead of HD.

lol, it's okay. Most people on this forum mean LE, so I just assume that.

huh, i'm fairly sure you're wrong about this........ especially since i've bumped audio around according to the dealer published delay of plugs to iron out parallel compression. (not always, but after enough of the right plugs it needs to be done)

well, you're right, every plugin induces delay...no matter what program you are working with. However, LE uses it's built in buffering to help compensate for plugin latency. This usually can cover up to the maximum size your buffer goes up to. For example, if your buffer setting is set on 1024, then any plugins that create less than 1024 samples of delay are accomodated for. It's nothing as fancy as ADC and the more plugins you add the worse (the so-called mastering plugins are terrible, IMO)....but it doesn't hurt to at least have a reverb on an aux or basic dynamic plugins. It's when you get into the fancy 12 band EQs and stuff that you run into issues.

[Chris Shaeffer]

Originally Posted by giraffe

huh, i'm fairly sure you're wrong about this........ especially since i've bumped audio around according to the dealer published delay of plugs to iron out parallel compression. (not always, but after enough of the right plugs it needs to be done)

We're both right. "Most" is an an exageration. "Some" and "many, low CPU" plugins would be more accurate.

Start piling them on and you do get delay. Use a CPU hog and you get delay.

That... and that even the cheapest hardware compressor kicks the shit out of the plugs I have... and that even my student's mom can hear that analog mixes sound clearer than digital mixs... and that my mixer's EQs sound really good and I have 20 3 bands of them with no CPU overhead... and the mixs sound wider... and that it doesn't matter if I'm using Pro Tools, Cubase, the ADAT or the reel to reel... is one of the reasons I mix analog.

-C

[n8tron]

this:

http://duc.digidesign.com/showthread...=&sb=5&o=&vc=1

should clear up any confusion about plugin delay compensation in pro tools le.

its a post by digi tech support, here:
"
2. The hardware buffer size will compensate for any plug-in delays - as long as the plug-in delay isn't longer than your HW buffer size, you shouldn't experience any plug-in delays. This is why it's recommended that you increase your HW buffer size while mixing down, to help compensate. You can always see the amount of plug-in delay in the display at the bottom of the track (as long as the plug-in reports it properly). "

[Dick_Spanner]

ProTools vs. Cubase debate

I believe ProTools is very popular in film and TV score, especially across the Atlantic (USA). I suppose you could say it is the industry standard in this field, and this, really, is the only reason for my interest in the product.

I have been using Cubase for some years now and I am currently using SX3 on a Win2K PC. I would also like to confirm that, at this point, my current combination of hardware and software makes for a very fast and stable DAW indeed.

As for ProTools, I recently tested the MBox2 LE version on a WinXP based PC. Despite following the install procedures by the book, the result was far from satisfactory. The program was sticky and prone to freezing and/or crashes. Moreover, the ProTools interface is unlikely to win any HCI or usability awards. For me, it has one hell of an overly confusing, almost half-finished looking interface, especially when compared with Cubase.

Although I can’t comment on the DSP dependant version of ProTools, it appears that the LE version just doesn’t cut it on a host based system. I think I’ll stick with Cubase for now, or maybe even migrate to Nuendo if need be. If it’s good enough for Zimmerman and Gregson-Williams, than I’m sure it will do for me.

Dick_Spanner

[mikedaul]

Nuendo is definitely gaining ground in the industry for film scoring and the like. It ain't cheap though (around $2000).

If you are looking for something that integrates very well with film/video, give sony vegas a try. It's very easy to learn, and is equally adept at editing/processing both audio and video. It's an exceptional value for what it can do.

[altitude909]

Nuendo is definitely gaining ground in the industry for film scoring and the like. It ain't cheap though (around $2000).

Most of that extra cost is the encoder licences which greatly ups the price. Beyond those, its cubase

[littledog]

If you are going to interact with a lot of other studios, maybe that would be a reason to go with Pro Tools. I get at least a dozen projects a year which have either been started in other studios or are going to go to other studios later. The first question I get is, "Do you have Pro Tools". I've never even once been asked, "Do you have Cubase?".

That doesn't mean I'm saying Pro Tools is better than Cubase, especially as I know squat about Cubase. I'm just saying in my particular case having Pro Tools got me more business.

[tbone36109]

protools is the industry standard like a shure 57 is, is it good sure, but is it the best, not really. i have to use protools at school but i use sonar at home. the biggest reason i would see myself using protools is because of compatibility with other studios(although i know sonar shares a save format with protools that normally integrates between the two pretty well). but i find protools, especially le very, limiting and thats why i would use something sonar or in your case cubase. the track limit can especially be a problem when i find myself using alot of mics on just one or two amps at once, after a couple parts are recorded the tracks add up really fast.

[X man Da Legend]

Originally Posted by tbone36109

protools is the industry standard like a shure 57 is, is it good sure, but is it the best, not really. i have to use protools at school but i use sonar at home. the biggest reason i would see myself using protools is because of compatibility with other studios(although i know sonar shares a save format with protools that normally integrates between the two pretty well). but i find protools, especially le very, limiting and thats why i would use something sonar or in your case cubase. the track limit can especially be a problem when i find myself using alot of mics on just one or two amps at once, after a couple parts are recorded the tracks add up really fast.

what format is this? im using Sonar Home Studio and I always end up having to track my songs to take them to the big studio for the pro tools rig

[altitude909]

I dont see what the big problem is, just export all tracks as wavs or aifs. Thats been standard practice
for years..