Do I Need Pro Tools To Be Taken Seriously?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mystasynasta
  • Start date Start date
M

mystasynasta

Mixing Engineer
I have been a user of several recording programs but finally settled on Cubase. I love it and I don't want to switch. However, the standard is Pro Tools. I decided that LE or MP would be a waste of money with 32 track limits, hardware limitations and several other limits that they have put on it. As of now, If I were to send a track off to a larger studio I would just export as an OMF file (which does not keep my mix). I am not sure about LE but I know that the MP version didn't even support OMF import when I tried. I know Cubase to a "t" so I am very quick and productive in it. I can give the artist what they are looking for extremely quickly. The question I have is: Do I need Pro Tools to be taken seriously by artists and other studios or can I stick to Cubase?

Sorry if this subject has been covered but the search function won't work for me today...

Thanks!
 
If yo're doing your job corectly in cubase the only thing you should ever need to send off is the 2 track mixdown for mastering.

A couple of the "BIG" pro studios in my area use Logic & Nuendo, me....I'm a cubase SX3 user ;)
 
In my opinion, I don't care if you are using something as simple as Audacity if you are getting the desired results. I wont argue that there are some differences between softwares but it is the end result that matters most. I've heard plenty of stuff done on Protools that sucked and some really good stuff done on lesser programs which impressed me. Use what works best for you, what you are familar with, what gives you the results you want. Programs only do what you tell them to, if you're good, you can tell almost any of them to do pretty much the same thing. I'm not promoting or degrading any software, some just work better for some people than others. Protools is great but if you can get the same results with another program and feel more comfortable using something else, I say go for it.

Opposing viewpoints welcome.
 
In my opinion it's less about the quality of your work and more about whether you need to interface with ProTools based studios.

If you like Cubase, then keep working in it. However, if you are getting to the point where you have to deliver tracks in Digidesign sessions format, you might want to consider getting into ProTools. That is, if you are doing deadline type work in conjunction with other studios that use PT.

If that is the case, most people won't want to hassle with OMF and other forms of importing into PT sessions. What they'll want is to be able to send you a session, or recieve a session from you, and just pick up the work right where it was left off. That is the beauty of compatibility and one big reason for ProTool's success.

You might want to consider what I do, which is to use both Digital Performer AND ProTools. Digital Performer is to me what Cubase is to you, I'm completely comfortable and fast in DP and I've used it for a very long time. So I do most of my creative composing work in DP. But I do need to be compatible with PT studios from time to time, and the whole thing about exchanging PT sessions is really great. So I also have a Digi 002R and PT 7.3.

This arrangement works out really well for me. You can most likely use your Digidesign hardware as your interface for Cubase as well. So really you are just switching software when you need to.

Just another scenario for you to consider.
 
Not if you can provide audio samples of your work. Otherwise, a lot of idiots will look through your gear list for "Pro Tools". Not everyone, but a lot.
 
SonicAlbert said:
You can most likely use your Digidesign hardware as your interface for Cubase as well.
Click to expand...
This is really my main problem with protools. Having to use their interface.

No one cares what program you use as long as you can give them what they want. If you are sending a session out to be mixed, your mix is irrelevent. So OMF works just fine.

If you are sending it out to have someone else add things to it and send it back, just send them stem mixes.

Most big studios do movie post work, a lot of that is being done in Nuendo. They will be familiar with how to transfer stuff between the two. (cubase and Nuendo being about the same thing)

I have a much harder time with the whole mac/pc thing than I do the Nuendo/ Protools thing.
 
I look at it this way. Having PT on your equipment list may possibly lure an extra fish here or there in towards your line, but the bait is your reputation and the hook is your skillz. Having PT in and of itself will not set the hook or bag the fish.

There are plenty of pro studios that use Nuendo instead of PT. ARS, right round the corner from me, uses it and has no problem booking full up for years now with from every strata of the business from local bands to national TV commercial work.

G.
 
??

whas good im new here, but been in recording for a long time, as far as i look at it, WHO CAREZ what you use? like said before the goal is the end mix, but i understand how ppl are with the whole "PROTOOLS" deal kinda crazy i mean its as if no matter what protools is this just ungodly great thing, i hear young cats around here all the time ranting and ravin bout they want protools then i suggest that they also check out "CUBASE" and other various programs, now i havent dont alot of work with PT but a friend of mine has it in his studio and i believe its theeeee LE version and i admit he did well with it BUT! to be honest i have done mixes that sound pretty damn close and that was when i had the FREE trial version of AUDACITY, i trained myself on like audaicty and all that so now that i have better stuff its interesting what can be done, but ill quit typin cuz i can go on about this subject, but as far as ppl are concerned if they question you cuz of ur lack of PROTOOLS, just let em hear a good ass mix you did with cubase and that should shut em up or sway thier mind away from PT, jus my opinion...
 
I'm no expert...

...but I think you know very well that you don't need to switch to Pro Tools to be taken seriously. Really what your issue seems to boil down to is the format compatibility (or lack thereof) between systems (something about which I know next to nothing), not the perceived "professional validity" of the particular system you're using.

Either way you go, it's a trade-off. You'd have to re-invest and re-learn on a new system, and even though it's the "industry standard", you're far more comfortable on the current system you're using. Yet, the system you're using doesn't transfer elegantly to it. I would think the question you should ask yourself is: Which "trade-off" is more worth it? What's more important to me, being most comfortable on my own gear and having to work harder when trying to "interface" it with other studios, or having the flexibility and greater ease of compatibility but having to learn a new system almost from scratch?

Just my $.02. And FWIW, I use Pro Tools; it's really easy to learn and laid out well. If you know Cubase like you say you do, I doubt you'd have much trouble...:D

One more thing: You're far from alone in having this dilemma. I know tons of engineers who have home studios, and many have told me they use PT because they feel they have to, not because it's necessarily their platform of choice. Some of them really dislike Pro Tools, however, they can take their mixes anywhere, which is most important to them. BUT....their situation might not be the same as yours, which gets back to the question: how important is it in your situation to be instantly compatible with big studios?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies. It is for compatibility but it is also because I want to be able to run Pro Tools. If I want to be an intern somewhere or be an engineer for sessions in other studios then I need to know how to run it. But it also looks really good and professional if I am able to advertise Pro Tools HD. My recordings sound excellent in what I am doing in Cubase and many people who have worked with engineers who have worked with major artists say that I am the best engineer they have ever worked with. So I suppose I am doing something right but I can't help feeling like I am behind, like I need to have the "industry standard." I think I might get Pro Tools MP just so that If I have to transfer a project I can. I can record it in what I am comfortable with and move it over to Pro Tools to transfer it if needed. I can also advertise that I have Pro Tools, just not HD. I'll probably get a less expensive interface to run it and that way I can learn it.

Thanks for the help.
 
mystasynasta, you're approaching it just the way you should. And everyone above me has given great advice. Only get it because YOU want to learn it. Not because you HAVE to learn it because of the "industry standard" crap.

Really, PT was the industry standard years ago. That name has just stuck with it...but really studios use what they want now. Truth is, the industry standard should still be tape...but that's a whole different argument.

I use PT. I'm pretty proficient at the program and use it professionally every day of the week. But still, I'm not 100% happy with it. I keep using it because the company I work for has used it for years, I know it like the back of my hand and it works hand in hand with the other guys at the studio. However, I would love to give another program a test drive. I'm not entirely happy with the way Digi deals with their customers and some other features of other programs intrigue me. Truely I'd love to have multiple DAW's. The problem is switching software at our company would be hard. I'd hate to totally get rid of a program I know and have clients pissed off during a session because I was still learning a new program. Changing the core software you run is a BIG step.

My point is, stick with what you know. You like Cubase? You know everything there is to know about Cubase? Then don't switch unless you have a real reason. Don't buy PT unless you are positively sure you'll make a profit off of buying it.

Pro Tools will not give you a better quality recording or produce a better mix.
 
you dont need nikes to be able to run
:)
you just keep showin'em how fast you can run forest:D
 
mystasynasta said:
However, the standard is Pro Tools.
Click to expand...

A nice tool, to be sure, BUT....... still the beneficiary of clever marketing.

Trash music produced in Pro Tools will get you no where.

Killer gold produced in Audacity (or Sonar or Cubase or Tracktion or whatever) will get you paying clients.

Use what best highlights your gifts, and then master it! Dont give in to marketing glamour.... there are several studios here using Pro Tools, but the guy who gets all the work is using Cubase and Nuendo, and he gets the work because his results are top shelf and he knows what he's doing.
 
mystasynasta said:
Thanks for the replies. It is for compatibility but it is also because I want to be able to run Pro Tools. If I want to be an intern somewhere or be an engineer for sessions in other studios then I need to know how to run it.
Click to expand...

If that is what you are interested in, then get ProTools and get good on it. It's a no-brainer, and your value and hire-ability as an intern or engineer will go up considerably if you already know ProTools.

As far as an industry standard, here in LA I only see ProTools in commercial studios. Composers use whatever they want for their creative work, i.e. Digital Performer, Logic, etc., but frequently they also have a ProTools setup. Most if not all big film recording sessions are done to ProTools. You never hear of Nuendo, Cubase, Logic or DP being used for those. Sometimes you'll have ProTools and multitrack tape running at the same time.

So that's the long way of saying that if you are serious about becoming an intern and working at a commercial studio, it would be to your benefit to know ProTools.
 
The last pro studio I was in...a couple months ago....the Pro Tools gear was sitting in the corner gathering dust. Analog tape machines...three of them , are now doing the heavy lifting for the place. Demand is way, way up for vintage sound. Go figger!
 
Farview said:
This is really my main problem with protools. Having to use their interface.
Click to expand...


Well you can basically bypass their interfaces. I mean if I had a high quality 8 channel converter with all my own pre's patched into it I'm basically circumventing the interface. I mean yeah you have to own it but you don't have to have the sound of it.
 
jonnyc said:
Well you can basically bypass their interfaces. I mean if I had a high quality 8 channel converter with all my own pre's patched into it I'm basically circumventing the interface. I mean yeah you have to own it but you don't have to have the sound of it.
Click to expand...
Right, so you have to buy two things. If you are running HD, you have to buy an overpriced interface just to bypass it with another expensive interface that is actually worth its cost.

Digi is a hardware company, that is what they are selling. The software is designed to make you use the hardware. Once you buy in to the system, you are stuck using their stuff and upgrading on their schedule.
 
Farview said:
.
Click to expand...




farview.

Not to hijack this thread with a completely off topic question but I gotta ask this question to somebody and frankly, you are the only person on the internet I'm aware of who MIGHT be able to answer it.

I realize you worked on KMD amps (presumably the xv100sd head) ages ago and you might not remember technical stuff about the amp but I need to ask:

I recently bought one of those. I'm a newb and dont know much about amps technically but I notice it has five 12ax7 tube sockets. 3 on the left and 2 on the right. (looking at it from behind). Are all of them preamp tubes or is one for the reverb or some other thing or what? Should I use 12ax7's in all those? (mine has no tubes right now). Which one is "v1, v2 etc"?(when looking at it from the back).

Also, do you remember what that "hum balance" knob on the back does? never saw one of those before. I would imagine it has something to do with hum???

And do you remember what the plate voltage on that amp generally runs?

Disregard if it was too long ago to remember. I dont remember crap from 20 years ago.
 
I think that, for the most part, it probably is a good idea to go the digidesign route if you want to be taken seriously.

Obviously, while your work should be able to speak for itself, the grave yards are full of those who were very talented and did good work, but never amounted to much in life. In this particular business, perception is reality. You will, very often, be evaluated by aesthetics; the look and comfort factor of your space, your personality and professionalism ... and your equipment list.

It all gets thrown in to one big pile, and unfortunately, digidesign have managed to get a slice of that pile by psychologically embedding their name in to the industry as being some sort of a "standard." So the fact remains that there is at least a small amount of validity to the concerns you're posing. Enough to at least make it a consideration when deciding what tools or platform you plan on using.

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top