DAW comparisons, suggestions and thoughts please...

lightningad · Post by **lightningad** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:07 am

I am currently working on a Protools HD1 rig (192 I/O, Sync I/O, ProControl) and previously worked on a Motu 896/DTP/DP4.12 combination.

Now I am about to change jobs and my first task is to spec and purchase a video edit suite and audio post suite. I know the video kit i want, but I am unsure which way to go with the audio. Digidesign may be the industry standard but it is also ridiculously expensive. My only stipulation is that whatever i get must be on a Mac.

The work will be mainly TV ads, with some corporate stuff thrown in too.

So - which way would you go, and why?

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this as my head is ready to burst with all the differing bits of kit that need taking into account on such a project.

thanks
adam

stephentayler · Post by **stephentayler** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:02 am

I would go with a DP rig with MOTU hardware, simply from a cost point of view you get so much more for your money. Oh, and pretty great surround features straight out of the box.

But for the tiny extra cost it is always worth also having an MBox2 with PTLE for those odd editing features that seem better. I find I do most of my work in DP, but occasionally save up the odd tweak to do in PT.

I like having different softwares for different things anyway.

all the best

Stephen

lightningad · Post by **lightningad** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:32 am

stephentayler wrote:But for the tiny extra cost it is always worth also having an MBox2 with PTLE for those odd editing features that seem better. I find I do most of my work in DP, but occasionally save up the odd tweak to do in PT.

Intriguing...what kind of editing features do you prefer in PT?

buddhabelly · Post by **buddhabelly** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:50 am

One of the biggest features that PT has that I like for post is the slide tool. Which will be addressed wit DP5, along with some other good editing updates. Don't forget, that if you doing serious work, you'll need an SMPTE timeline, which PTLE doesn't offer unless you by the DV production tool kit at an additional $1200. DP5 is going to have streamers realtime on QT movies which is a boon. And you get surround, though for TV that's not a big deal.

Go with DP and a good noise reduction suite like Soundsoap Pro. The only way I'd go PT is if I got a TDM system, which unless you have the steady clients, is too much bread to pay off in a good amount of time.

2•.

lightningad · Post by **lightningad** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:17 am

to be honest, I am not too bothered about the cost side of things (it ain't my cash!!). If i got Pt it would need to be HD/TDM as i will be doing final mixes on the system.

I suppose i am looking more for operational ideas/thoughts.

I have worked with both le/digitranslator and hd version of pt so am very familiar. But its a long time since i used DP, and when i did, it was still a bit limiting in some of its post features, such as Insert Measures - useless if you work in a frame based environment.

I reckon a DP setup with a Mackie Control Universal would be great. As for the interface...i like the look of Apogee's new Ensemble unit, but i don't know if it would work with DP. Which interface would people recommend?

m2 · Post by m2 » Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:41 pm

I do both music for TV and film and audio post production. A group of freelance sound editors and rerecording mixers sometimes joining me on the post side of things.

I started my career doing music only and have used Performer and then DP since the late 80s. When I got into more serious audio post for picture I found that after trying many formulas and a couple DAWs [to eventually replace the DA-88s and such] that I finally wound up with a ProTools rig.
For music production DP is the bomb. Period. The idea of separate cues [chunks] to picture within one file is the only way to go. I run it on top of the Digidesign hardware [HD2+SyncI/O etc.] for the digital audio part of it. For audio post it's 98% ProTools. All the plugins that I use are HTDM subsequently.

We get so many sessions from studios from both coasts and Canada and they are invariably a PT session or an OMF. The OMFs for whatever reason are so much easier to inport into PT than DP. Therefore it seems that ProTools is really the deFacto standard that other post places are using. There are some places that are using Fairlight and even one guy out east that cut a dialog session for us for this feature we are working on, in Final Cut Pro [?] Ok whatever, but he finally sent me an OMF. I have also gotten sessions that were cut in Nuendo - audio only, no MIDI of course - and they came into PT just fine.

On the post side PT's 'workspace' window makes searching for SFX and audtioning them quickly really fast. It would be great to see if someone here is doing that in DP in some way that allows you to quickly audition hundreds of possiblities and then simply drag and drop into the time line in one move. My editors wouldn't have it any other way.

And that's another thing. You have to figure out if you can easily get folks who are facile with the DAW you have. That has to also be part of your decision process.

Good luck! Keep us posted as to what you decide.

martian · Post by **martian** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:40 pm

audiofinder is the answer to the digibase feature you are missing for searching SFX then dragging and droppping to your session.

And is very cheap - if that's all you want it it do it is free! It has more features which are deacrivated after a trial period.

lightningad · Post by **lightningad** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:56 am

i have pretty much decided that the way to go is to get ProTools LE with DVToolkit 2. This running on one mac, with Virtual VTR running on the FCP Mac to provide the high quality images on the large monitor.

I'm not a musician, and whilst i really like a lot of the features in DP, its not really geared towards serious post work. You are probably thinking neither is PT LE - well its more suited for the stuff i'll be doing.

And if truth be known, I was hoping that DP would have evolved enough to justify me using that instead of PT. Sadly for me, it hasn't...yet.

sdfalk · Post by **sdfalk** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 7:04 am

lightningad wrote:i have pretty much decided that the way to go is to get ProTools LE with DVToolkit 2. This running on one mac, with Virtual VTR running on the FCP Mac to provide the high quality images on the large monitor.

I'm not a musician, and whilst i really like a lot of the features in DP, its not really geared towards serious post work. You are probably thinking neither is PT LE - well its more suited for the stuff i'll be doing.

And if truth be known, I was hoping that DP would have evolved enough to justify me using that instead of PT. Sadly for me, it hasn't...yet.

Hmmm
Have to really disagree with everything you just said.
To each his own though.
I've used DP for "serious" post work for years.

lightningad · Post by **lightningad** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 7:12 am

as you say "each to his own" - I too have used both quite extensively for post work, and much as it pains me to say it, PT is more suited to that work than DP.

There are certainly strengths and weaknesses in each, and for me, the balance just tips the PT way. And believe me - I hate digidesign, but i need to make judgements based on more than just that!

cooper8168 · Post by **cooper8168** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:27 am

lightningad wrote:as you say "each to his own" - I too have used both quite extensively for post work, and much as it pains me to say it, PT is more suited to that work than DP.

There are certainly strengths and weaknesses in each, and for me, the balance just tips the PT way. And believe me - I hate digidesign, but i need to make judgements based on more than just that!

Exactly right - well said.

I work 100% in post production, and one thing to consider is delivery. There is not a single music editor I work with that does not use Pro Tools at the dub (for those not familiar with the film-music chain - once score is mixed, it generally gets handed off to music editor). Since DP's timestamps are never on with PT (they are always off by at least 70 samples or so), it becomes critically important to have, as in our case, at least one PT rig to which we print mixes.

Also, the inability to pull down audio and video independently is a major weakness in DP vs PT.

m2 · Post by m2 » Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:09 am

i have pretty much decided that the way to go is to get ProTools LE with DVToolkit 2. This running on one mac, with Virtual VTR running on the FCP Mac to provide the high quality images on the large monitor.

I'm not a musician, and whilst i really like a lot of the features in DP, its not really geared towards serious post work. You are probably thinking neither is PT LE - well its more suited for the stuff i'll be doing.

And if truth be known, I was hoping that DP would have evolved enough to justify me using that instead of PT. Sadly for me, it hasn't...yet.

I have too agree with pretty much evrything you've said.

I've used DP for "serious" post work for years.

Sorry to disagree with you sdfalk but I really don't know anyone with the exception of some of the folks who post on this forum that use DP for "serious" post work. It's not an attack but an observation over many many years. If it works for you cool. DP for scoring to picture is still the strongest choice by far!

Good luck to all

sdfalk · Post by **sdfalk** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 7:29 pm

m2 wrote:
i have pretty much decided that the way to go is to get ProTools LE with DVToolkit 2. This running on one mac, with Virtual VTR running on the FCP Mac to provide the high quality images on the large monitor.

I'm not a musician, and whilst i really like a lot of the features in DP, its not really geared towards serious post work. You are probably thinking neither is PT LE - well its more suited for the stuff i'll be doing.

And if truth be known, I was hoping that DP would have evolved enough to justify me using that instead of PT. Sadly for me, it hasn't...yet.
I have too agree with pretty much evrything you've said.

I've used DP for "serious" post work for years.
Sorry to disagree with you sdfalk but I really don't know anyone with the exception of some of the folks who post on this forum that use DP for "serious" post work. It's not an attack but an observation over many many years. If it works for you cool. DP for scoring to picture is still the strongest choice by far!

Good luck to all

You don't have to be sorry..
I know what I've used for years, and have been fairly comfortable with
DP.
It certainly has it's shortcomings but it's served me well.
Having said that, DP5 appears to address some (if not all)
of those shortcomings.
As for Protools..yeah I'm well aware of the standards and Im completly
prepared for most (fingers and toes crossed) situations in that regard.

m2 · Post by m2 » Wed Apr 12, 2006 1:41 pm

You don't have to be sorry..
I know what I've used for years, and have been fairly comfortable with
DP.
It certainly has it's shortcomings but it's served me well.
Having said that, DP5 appears to address some (if not all)
of those shortcomings.
As for Protools..yeah I'm well aware of the standards and Im completly
prepared for most (fingers and toes crossed) situations in that regard.

Well put. I would love to be able to only have to babysit one DAW. And if it were DP all the better! If DP 5 comes on strong - I'm there. Even with the Digi hardware that I have. [ Which is not only the HD2 Accel rig in my first room but also a MixPLus in 'B' and a MBox at the house.] I would love to hear/see what/how folks are using DP in a post world.

It would be really interesting to compare a similiar project in each one. Work flow; speed; [time involved]; interfacing with the outside world, processing -DSP; and conforming; [and RE-conforming!] etc.

hmmmmm. . . . .

martian · Post by **martian** » Sun May 07, 2006 11:49 am

I've been working on a feature for 3 weeks or more now - and to be honest I am as comfortable on DP 4 as I am on a fairlight, protools or audiovision

Once you get your head around the curve it's ok

deliverables? distibutors are still asking for DA88 archives not protools files... they aint too interested in tweeking the cut off filter of the car pass half way thru reel 3.

If your room is balanced then sending off seperate stems isn't a problem - just a bit of organisation - ambience - hard FX - foley - dialog or more if you like... Last I heard protools was still accepting WAV files....

Nice we can bounce those out faster than realtime too .....

does TDm stand for tedium? Always feels tedious waiting for those bounces

Back to compatibility... additionally send them the OMF of the hard FX stem should they wanna get into hard editing on the main dub stage, but in all probability won't need to edit there majorly - cos thats what u been doing with the director for the last 3 weeks innit?

Audio finder and a good template will serve you well -