Pro tools v.s Other software

[Bobbsy]

As I stated before, I'm mainly with Bouldersoundguy on this as not much liking Protools. Yes, it's "industry standard" so many post houses use it simply so they can exchange projects, stems etc. with other people working on the same stuff. People who actually come out and say "I love working with it" are few and far between though.

Graceangela9 hints at an important point though. There are a couple of ways to use Protools. One is simply as a piece of software with third party peripherals; the other is to use Protools hardware throughout. This makes a big difference--a bit like Apple vs. PC, as long as you keep things completely controlled by one supplier, reliability should go up--but choice and flexibility goes down. Conversely, using third party stuff can be great but it can introduce problems too You pays your money and takes your chances.

A question for those who do use/like Protools: is it still stuck at 24 bit integer or has it joined the wonderful world of 32 bit float yet? Back when I was working with it, I was always amazed that 24 bit integer was the best it could do.

Bob

 

[bouldersoundguy]

A question for those who do use/like Protools: is it still stuck at 24 bit integer or has it joined the wonderful world of 32 bit float yet? Back when I was working with it, I was always amazed that 24 bit integer was the best it could do.

Not 100% sure, but I think LE is 32 float and HD is 48 fixed. I definitely don't know enough about PT9 to hazard a guess.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Oh, I almost forgot. You can't turn off input monitoring in LE so you're almost stuck with latency. The workaround is to set up one of the outputs besides 1-2 as the monitor bus. I prefer using an analog mixer for routing monitor signals with true zero latency. A bit of a pain but the tightness of the performances is improved, at least with musicians who are up to that kind of precision.