Pro Tools mixing vs Logic mixing?

C

chad kennith

New member
I'm looking into buying either pro tools or logic. Every thread I've seen says Logic is better for composing, and pro tools is better for mixing, but none of them explained why. Why would pro tools be better for mixing? Any info you guys have would be appreciated. Thank you.
 
Most people find Logic to be more user friendly for midi composition and editing. Protools can be a bit cumbersome in that area.
I don't know if, or why, Protools is 'better' for mixing although I have no complaints. :)

Reaper is a solid alternative, as said.
 
chad kennith said:
I'm looking into buying either pro tools or logic. Every thread I've seen says Logic is better for composing, and pro tools is better for mixing, but none of them explained why. Why would pro tools be better for mixing? Any info you guys have would be appreciated. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Pro tools is moving towards monthly subscription or a perpetual license for a hefty price. Good luck!

Avid |News Room
 
Used Reaper for a long time, currently using ProTools...right now I prefer ProTools. As for choosing between ProTools and Logic, I can't give any suggestions since I've never used Logic.
 
I've used Logic. It's what I first started with. But I don't want to make a comparison. The reason is that I switched from Logic to Reaper at Logic 5.1, the last version supported on Windows. Both Reaper and Logic have moved on since then, so my experience with Logic is now way out of date.
 
chad kennith said:
I'm looking into buying either pro tools or logic. Every thread I've seen says Logic is better for composing, and pro tools is better for mixing, but none of them explained why. Why would pro tools be better for mixing? Any info you guys have would be appreciated. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Get Reaper or Studio One. You save money. You've got a more intuitive and user-friendly environment to work with.

Pro-Tools are the ones that teach in most schools but this doesn't mean anything.
It means that it was one of the first DAWs that ever came out. But that's all.

New ideas, fresh minds and new DAWs are coming to the surface.
 
Pro Tools is better for editing, hands down. It is a software designed for professional audio in every circumstance (film, live, studio, broadcast, etc.)
Logic and especially Logic X, is marketed to the home producer. It comes loaded with MIDI instrument profiles, samples, loops, drum machines and sounds. If you're a one man army working at home, Logic is probably better for you.

If you're using MIDI and synths, use Logic. You can basically create a prog rock epos in 3 minutes in that DAW if become familiar with all the MIDI tools.
Pro Tools does hardly give two poops about MIDI and MIDI programming since it is not specialized in that area but it does support every feature that Logic has. It is more cumbersome to use for MIDI (but more fluent for everything else, IMO), is more expensive and does not have a lot of plug-ins by default that Logic X will have.


Reaper is not better than Pro Tools and you would be foolish to believe that a free program has the vast editing capabilities that Pro Tools has. Every profressional studio runs Pro Tools for a reason.
But I'm rather certain that you're not creating documentaries for the BBC or recording a professional band, so really, fuck it.
You can get Reaper with Pro Tools skins so it feels similar.
 
The OP seriously need to look at where pro tools is going with their business..

It is now cloud based like Adobe Acrobat. You have to pay 30 dollars per month or like 800 for one year and like 200 per year for upgrades. There is benefit to going cloud based, but that's a lot of money when you add up the years.
 
anoopbal said:
The OP seriously need to look at where pro tools is going with their business..

It is now cloud based like Adobe Acrobat. You have to pay 30 dollars per month or like 800 for one year and like 200 per year for upgrades. There is benefit to going cloud based, but that's a lot of money when you add up the years.
Click to expand...

I imagine you can still buy PT11 and be done with it but, yeah, be aware of the future plans.
 
anoopbal said:
The OP seriously need to look at where pro tools is going with their business..

It is now cloud based like Adobe Acrobat. You have to pay 30 dollars per month or like 800 for one year and like 200 per year for upgrades. There is benefit to going cloud based, but that's a lot of money when you add up the years.
Click to expand...

pro tools have always been like that.

The fact that they used to work with only their own audio interfaces always threw me off,
they might have changed it but... the mistake has been made
 
Paschalis I. said:
pro tools have always been like that.

The fact that they used to work with only their own audio interfaces always threw me off,
they might have changed it but... the mistake has been made
Click to expand...

The subscription and licensing started in Jan 2015 if i read it right. So pretty recent. It is another way to milk money and fight against piracy, just like adobe acrobat.
 
Isn't pt12 going to have a final purchase option as well?
Its going to be 30£ a month I think, so not 800 a year.
It's scummy either way.
 
Subscription is the way it's going. I vowed I wouldn't, but I'm paying Adobe every month now for over a year, and it's ok.

The biggest thing here is that the one you grow up on is the one you tend to stay with, because you have speed, shortcuts and familiarity. In practice, Protool, Cubase, Reaper, Logic and a few others have their fans. The reality is they're similar but different. Cubase (my favourite) and Logic were sequencers first, dealing with MIDI - and then got audio capabilities added. protools was always rubbish as a sequencer - very basic, but good as a mixer. Very handy for studios who specialised in real music recording, rather than midi, or a combination.

when you hear a forum topic say a certain thing is best - it is ALWAYS biased because we recommend what we know and like. I love Cubase, but I'm aware lots hate it. That's perfectly fine. As they get cleverer, they get more complex, and less newcomer friendly. If I tried Cubase 8, my current version, as a newcomer, I'd hate it! I have had to use Protools quite a few times in studios I visit, but I hate it. Sadly, I think it's just me expecting it to work like Cubase, which it doesn't. Logic people hate Cubase, Cubase people hate Logic - Reaper is of course rubbish (however, this is simply because I've never used it, while it's proponents like Gecko obviously love it). It doesn't matter.

The cheaper ones can be perfectly good, unless you need something they can't do. I've never gone for protools because what I have has always worked for me. I really don't think you can say there is a 'best'.
 
If one DAW simply has every feature that another one does plus even more and does them all more efficiently, I would say that it's better.
I will for instance not accept an argument that Audacity is just as good or capable as Logic or Pro Tools depending on who you ask. That's just objectively wrong since the program is missing many features that both these programs have.

But really, every DAW can record a normal band and use MIDI. Most bonus features that software like PT have are highly specialized (such as video integration) or workflow optimizations that are of course subjective.
 
rob aylestone said:
In practice, Protool, Cubase, Reaper, Logic and a few others have their fans. The reality is they're similar but different.
Click to expand...

Yes. The difference is important. Our brains are all wired differently and we process information in different ways. If the workflow built into a DAW by the programmers matches how we process stuff, the DAW will seem to be more intuitive.

In the early years, I started with Logic, but I also tried Cakewalk and Cubase. I couldn't come to grips with either of those, and so I defaulted to Logic which I used for many years.

Despite my reluctance to switch to Reaper, when I did, I discovered the transition was way easier than expected, and I took to it like a duck to water, despite the significant differences between it and Logic. This was mainly because for me Reaper did things the way my brain said they ought to be done.

(Similarly, I've experience with Wavelab and Soundforge. For me, Soundforge seems more logical, and Wavelab doesn't make sense).
 
gecko zzed said:
Yes. The difference is important. Our brains are all wired differently and we process information in different ways. If the workflow built into a DAW by the programmers matches how we process stuff, the DAW will seem to be more intuitive.

In the early years, I started with Logic, but I also tried Cakewalk and Cubase. I couldn't come to grips with either of those, and so I defaulted to Logic which I used for many years.

Despite my reluctance to switch to Reaper, when I did, I discovered the transition was way easier than expected, and I took to it like a duck to water, despite the significant differences between it and Logic. This was mainly because for me Reaper did things the way my brain said they ought to be done.

(Similarly, I've experience with Wavelab and Soundforge. For me, Soundforge seems more logical, and Wavelab doesn't make sense).
Click to expand...

100% agree with this.
I only ever taken to Sony Vegas and Protools. Everything else just seemed overly complicated and messy to me.
I know it'll be the exact opposite for plenty of people.
 
Steenamaroo said:
100% agree with this.
I only ever taken to Sony Vegas and Protools. Everything else just seemed overly complicated and messy to me.
I know it'll be the exact opposite for plenty of people.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, Vegas and Reaper do things very similarly. If you know one, you can do the other.

But Adobe Premiere leaves me totally confused. In fact all Adobe stuff does that to me.
 
I used to think that too, until I spent the time to get to know premiere - then I discovered that photoshop, which had always been alien to me, and I preferred other software, actually worked really nicely - so I'm Adobe - BUT, I can't get on with audition. Weird isn't it!
 
rob aylestone said:
I used to think that too, until I spent the time to get to know premiere - then I discovered that photoshop, which had always been alien to me, and I preferred other software, actually worked really nicely - so I'm Adobe - BUT, I can't get on with audition. Weird isn't it!
Click to expand...

As I understand it audition was born out of Adobe picking up Cool Edit Pro, so that might be your reason.
I hate Premiere! :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top