Re: Cubase SX or Pro-Tools M-Powered?

What you'll find as you look at these programs is that the vocabulary
isn't standardized. To me, a "region" is the part of a file (which
could be the whole file" that plays at a specific time. I don't know
what a "pool" is.

the pool in cubase lingo is basically an overview of the media involved in a project. whether recorded or imported, all media is visible in the pool - its just a list, with info about sample rate, bit depth, file locations and the like, with additional functions like finding a particular file within the arrangement/project, previewing, deleting, resampling etc

But ultimately just about all programs can do the same things,
the differences are in how they label, display, and locate things.

absolutely

Correct me if I am wrong, but Cubase's work flow seems aimed more at
electronic type composers, MIDI editing, sound stretching etc while
ProTools work flow seems to be aimed more at a huge virtual tape
machine.

I think that's a reasonable way to look at it.

besides a history lesson and marketing targets, they all employ a 'hyper-tape' type setup unifying audio, midi, and automation in one interface, but obviously going beyond the abilities of tape. That said, they all have weaknesses, but with enough thought there's usually a solution - and often more than one.

Both have dongles, which sucks but that's life these days.

The difference is that Cubase will work with just about any hardware
and the dongle only enables the software. If you decide to change out
your sound card for something with better converters or more I/O or
DSP monitoring, Cubase will still work with it whether it's another M-
Audio interface, or a Mackie, a Presonus, Focusrite, Lynx, or Prism
Sound. ProTools would restrict your choice of hardware.

besides hardware differences, its about your style of working. It can take years to become fully fluid in any of these powerful tools as there are simply so many things that you can do with them, but if you know what you want to achieve, its often just a case of understanding the nomenclature, so that 'muscle memory' can take over, creating the smoothest path from ears and imagination to finished product. The more 'invisible' an interface becomes, the more powerful it will be, but thats so much down to personal preference, so, if you find a particular tool intuitive, and the hardware side works for you, within budget, go for it.

fwiw as primarily a cubase user, I can generally use logic, protools, cooledit and so on - the problems occur when vocabulary changes from one platform to another.


hth
daz
xxx
.

Relevant Pages