Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Why choose Pro Tools over Logic?

Rilla said:
But in 2019, for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter what DAW you used as long as it gets the job done, isn't too buggy, you have a powerful enough computer and you feel comfortable using the program. For the most part they all perform the same functions.
Click to expand...
Native systems have become very 'professional'. But if you intend to record large multi-mic session with "no" latency, and want to use the workflow and plugins you usually use in your headphone mixes, a DSP based PT system may have it's benefits still.
 
I use Pro Tools for audio and work gigs but Logic Pro for MIDI fun & library stuff. I've spoken to a few people about this and usually they say they prefer the spotting and adding in beat/tempo changes for new cues and how easy it to jump to the memory locations of those cues... Oh and prepping track-laying in PT before going into Media Composer...
 
One other thing Pro Tools does better is transferring between Mac and PC. I used to work with a guy with a Mac but I only had PCs. Never had a problem going back and forth. Logic doesn't do that. :rolleyes: :)
 
Rilla said:
I agree but will add that a lot of current native systems outperform dsp based systems by far.
Click to expand...

If that is so, why does every major recording studio use DSP based systems?

[edit: just read the article and it is focused only on one aspect of "performance." It doesn't address the zero latency or other issues. So it's not a very full or even helpful comparison from the perspective of recording, where PT shines.]
 
There is never any reason to choose Pro Tools, except possibly when sharing files with some other Pro Tools user. Look, it was once the greatest DAW on the planet, but those days are long past. Logic, Cubase and, most of all, Reaper, surpassed it a long, long time ago. Industry standards are not always the best standards.
 
robgb said:
There is never any reason to choose Pro Tools, except possibly when sharing files with some other Pro Tools user. Look, it was once the greatest DAW on the planet, but those days are long past. Logic, Cubase and, most of all, Reaper, surpassed it a long, long time ago. Industry standards are not always the best standards.
Click to expand...


Hmmm, I would not go that far, even though it is many years since I have owned any version of Pro Tools.

Pro Tools HD (not Native) still has some virtues over Native DAWS.
1. Because it is not that user configurable, you can go from studio to studio and largely it will look the same and behave the same.
2. While other apps give you more ways to do things with audio, frequently the way PT gives you will be the most direct and efficient.
3. If you are sending audio back and forth to work jointly on with a high end engineer, he probably knows Pro Tools best and therefore will get a good result in less time, and maybe even a better result than he would in another DAW.
4. A properly setup HD rig is still more stable than any Native DAW and has the lowest latency, although the latency gap has shrunk somewhat.

Industry standards may not always be the best, but they are not industry standards just because people resist change.
 
robgb said:
Avid had the market on video editing for many, many years for exactly the same reasons. They lost it first to Final Cut Pro, then to Adobe Premiere Pro. Now DaVinci Resolve is pulling people away from Premiere. The editing world has learned that you go where the innovation and best work flow is. Maybe musicians need to learn this as well.
Click to expand...


Amateur musicians tend to "go where the innovation and best work flow is." Professionals tend to go where the stability and most consistent work flow is."
 
robgb said:
Which is exactly why the professional editors are now migrating to Davinci Resolve, and many professional composers/engineers are moving to Logic and Cubase. Some are even moving to Reaper, especially in the gaming industry. But more pros need to open their minds a bit. Eventually they will, just as the editors have.
Click to expand...


All I can tell you is that I go to the studios of composer whose names you know, I will not name drop them here, to help with Logic. They ALL still have PT HD for final mixing. There is a reason.
 
Ashermusic said:
All I can tell you is that I go to the studios of composer whose names you know, I will not name drop them here, to help with Logic. They ALL still have PT HD for final mixing. There is a reason.
Click to expand...

Jay's right on this one, at least today. There are still stability and flexibility advantages to PT. They are less than they once were but still there. And zero latency (ok, vanishingly small, not zero). There are workarounds on other DAWs, including the one I use, but they are not easy to incorporate.

No doubt some day things will change @robgb but there has to be a reason. Avid's business practices are not everyone's favourites, so that's one area already. Plenty of people have issues with the way Avid prices and releases upgrades, so there is incentive out there to change if a truly comparable system comes along.

The thing is, for major recording projects at least, the track counts seem only to get bigger and bigger. That alone may extend the life of PT for some time yet. We'll see.
 
JohnG said:
If that is so, why does every major recording studio use DSP based systems?

[edit: just read the article and it is focused only on one aspect of "performance." It doesn't address the zero latency or other issues. So it's not a very full or even helpful comparison from the perspective of recording, where PT shines.]
Click to expand...

Okay, latency is one issue you mentioned. What are the others?

I've yet to have latency issues on my 2007 Mac Pro 1,1 running Logic natively while recording 16 simultaneous tracks.
 
Rilla said:
Okay, latency is one issue you mentioned. What are the others?
Click to expand...

Stability with hundreds and hundreds of tracks.

I'm recording this summer with a big orchestra and choir in London. The last thing anyone wants is to start having to fiddle with shutting tracks down or freezing or something with 80-100 players sitting there waiting, just because you want to do one more take (or overdub) and suddenly your recording software runs out of headroom.

There are multiple room mics, gallery mics, spot mics on all the sections; I don't even ask how many simultaneous tracks are going when we do that, since there's an engineer and a separate PT operator. They used to link two PT rigs when it was HD, but I would think with HDX they wouldn't have to anymore.

Rilla said:
I've yet to have latency issues on my 2007 Mac Pro 1,1 running Logic natively while recording 16 simultaneous tracks.
Click to expand...

Congrats. But what you, or I, or any composer might accept regarding latency may be different from what studio players think is acceptable.

Look -- I'm not trying to sell anyone on PT. I need it to do what I do but if I didn't -- why bother?

Studios, more than ever, have to run like a business. They can't afford to stick their heads in the sand and "just do it that way because we always have." Put another way, if they could save $50-100k on PT gear by using something else, they would, provided that they aren't left stuck when the orchestra costs $10k an hour (or more) because they decided to try something unproven. Because that would be the last time anyone wanted to record at that location.

The day another company can match the performance / reliability of PT will be a tough one for Avid, I would think.
 
JohnG said:
Studios, more than ever, have to run like a business. They can't afford to stick their heads in the sand and "just do it that way because we always have."
Click to expand...
This is true. You don't see a lot of PCM 3348s in operation anymore for exactly this reason.

Best,

Geoff
 
robgb said:
There is never any reason to choose Pro Tools, except possibly when sharing files with some other Pro Tools user. Look, it was once the greatest DAW on the planet, but those days are long past. Logic, Cubase and, most of all, Reaper, surpassed it a long, long time ago. Industry standards are not always the best standards.
Click to expand...

I don't think some people understand how being a 'professional' works. In your home studio or whatever you are free to use anything you like. When somebody is paying you to record a session and they expect to see a ProTools rig then that's what they get. If the Dub Engineer wants to receive a ProTools session then that's what they get. To do otherwise is just dumb. It's really quite irrelevant if another DAW has a do-dad that ProTools does not. The efficiency of having a lingua franca in a high-pressure, high cost, highly time-sensitive business that requires extensive collaboration vastly outweighs any marginal advantages of the latest tech-du-jour. Avid understands this which is why the bastards milk it for all its worth.
 
SwedishPug said:
Supposedly Pro Tools is the industry standard but I don't understand why that would be the case over logic pro. Is the audio quality different? Is it faster or easier?
Click to expand...

I got my start in ProTools and rarely ventured out. I’m not opposed it, but I have invested into Avids ecosystem already. I do mostly multitrack recording and sound design. OMF imports and mixing for video never was a problem.

One quirk I’ve noticed while composing is that the edit window and midi window seem to operate independently. I’d rather be able to click in the edit window and have it seamlessly track with the midi window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom