Alright experts, now I've got a question. :) (Re: ProTools)

[Eurythmic]

This is something that I've wondered about ever since I made the switch to digital computer-based recording. As long as I've been following the computer recording industry, it's just been understood that recording with ProTools on a Macintosh is the de facto standard.

Why?

What is the difference, and why is the ProTools/Mac combo so much better than anything else? Although I have no experience with Cubase, I have heard a great deal of songs that were recorded in Cakewalk Pro Audio 9 and ProTools in IBM Compatible machines. And every song I've heard, no matter what fancy equipment was used, sounded like a home demo.

And yet, as I've mentioned, the best sounding album I've ever heard was recorded on the artist's home computer, using ProTools.

So I'm asking all of you: What is the difference?

 

[Eurythmic]

So... no one knows this?

 

[Kitwell]

Pro tools?

Wha is the best album that you have ever heard? Rickey Martin? I know he used Pro Tools. My favorite recording is "Millions living will never die " by Tortoise.

Kit

 

[Eurythmic]

Haunted, by Poe.

 

[RWhite]

I think there is a perception among musicians that Pro Tools is a "Pro Tool", which is not to say that Cakewalk isn't. Just like the perception that Macs are more reliable than PCs. Not true really, but a lot of people believe it.

Pro Tools has done a better job of penetrating the studio market. As it showed up in more and more studios, more and more people figured they had to have it to remain compatable and competitive. Cakewalk started off as a low-brow MIDI sequencer and worked its way up, and still doesn't have the same level of respect.

I think that the system you use has less to do with the end result than the person using it, plus the entire studio enviornment and know-how. And I think more good small-medium size studios just happen to be using Pro Tools.