MOTUnation.com

I heard there's this new kid on the block named Danny Elfman, kinda likes DP, might've even used its predecessor when he was boingoing to the oingo.

mhschmieder wrote:I heard there's this new kid on the block named Danny Elfman, kinda likes DP, might've even used its predecessor when he was boingoing to the oingo.

Ha!
I used to love Oingo Boingo. I heard them, but never saw them. At that time I didn't know who Danny Elfman was (or would become).
What did he play in the band? He wasn't the singer, was he?

"This is not the first time, you try to get awaaaay...."

I don't think I have thier cassette anymore

FMiguelez wrote: I used to love Oingo Boingo. I heard them, but never saw them. At that time I didn't know who Danny Elfman was (or would become).
What did he play in the band? He wasn't the singer, was he? ...

Yes and songwriter. He also composed the theme to The Simpsons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Elfman

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:...because everything people say on Facebook and the internet is true.

NOT!

C'mon man! Get real. Ask around the LA composers actually working in film. Big names and small names. They are mostly using DP and have for years. Only suckers and people working for post houses that are forced to use PissTools don't use it. Even the head guys at Pixar who use PT at work take stuff home to do the hard stuff fast and easy on DP. That's is straight from the horse's mouth.

Yeah, I'm a "fanboy" and with good reason. Look, if you don't want to use it, don't use it. But don't try to spread dumb ass comments here. Go back to Facebook and do your thing. We are not interested in your crap.

Duh!

As a music producer, I use it almost exclusively. But I think the fact that film composers use it is an old, over used point, even though it’s valid. I think the point is that it would be nice if more music producers used it. I know of way too few who do. I mean, can anyone here admit they would like to see more music producers and straight, music makers use it? I don’t know why lovers of DP can't easily speak of the desire for DP to be more ubiquitous in the non-film world? I would like to see more music producers using it. There, I said it...lol

As a composer and producer I use it for both except when going to print (then it's Finale 2014.5 all the way).

It's great for pretty much ANY musical needs but I do miss the old movie bounce options, especially reference movies. Now my drives fill up with full self-contained movies. What a waste of space in production when sending out reference clips.

raromatix wrote:I asked a question in a Facebook group

Peter Hansen No Digital Performer?
Like · Reply · June 4 at 4:40pm

Mixed by Marc Mozart. Sorry, no. We put in months of work into each of those, and very few people are still using Digital Performer. I know it's a great DAW and it's a pity many people dropped it for ProTools but the truth is they lost the game.
Like · Reply · June 5 at 3:50pm · Edited

More about ”the Mixing Mozart” here:
**LINK REDACTED BY ADMIN**

Meh, I know who Marc is and he's not an authority on software markets. That said, I understand why it would be pointless for him to develop his templates for DP. His stuff is largely for amateurs trying to pump out tracks imitating pop stars and EBM artists whereas DP is used largely by professionals who already know what they're doing and work in a pro workflow that involves real mastering tools if not a whole mastering department. So, "the game" DP "lost" is really just the wanna-be dance music producer game. It's a fad that's grown with the proliferation of cheap loop based software where people buy or steal it and then realize they have no clue what they're doing. Hell, there's probably more money to be made right now in selling music software tutorials than there is in music software although I bet people are stealing those too.

Anyone who calls themselves "The Mixing Mozart" really needs a hard slap across the face.

But that aside, when did this exodus from DP to ProTools happen, exactly? 20 years ago? I used ProTools for about 18 months back then, but ditched it when I wanted more tracks and discovered:

A: The ProTools "upgrade path" was a hilarious joke, consisting of something akin to "Burn your old hardware and buy new stuff at standard street."

B: MOTU had just introduced native hardware and Mitch Gallagher recommended it highly to me.

C: I had used Performer for some time before, and DP 1.7 was instantly familiar to me, being the best of both ProTools and Performer.

Now, like I say, that was along time ago, but anyone who still think that "the game" was lost to ProTools is dreaming. Avid is hanging on to their market share by the skin of their teeth.

A friend of mine who uses ProTools in his studio argues that for what he's doing he NEEDS to use PT because it's the industry standard and it's what his clients expect to see in a "pro" studio. I'm not sure I buy that argument. In fact, I've never had a client ask what software I use as an indicator of how "pro" my studio is. If they should ask about software, I tell them I use Digital Performer and explain why. I also explain that it's just as pro as any other DAW, and those that aggressively espouse the virtues of PT over DP simply haven't been paying attention. "Lost the game." I don't think so.

You can call me a fan boy if you like, but I've used both and my preference is Digital Performer by an overwhelming margin. It just fits my workflow like a glove. Just sayin'.

Phil

"The Industry Standard." Oy gevalt.

I compose music, instrumental music, classical/John Williams-type music. I'm not trying to produce the next vapid pop hit or "EDM-masterpiece" (is that an oxymoron?). For me, DP is the best DAW to realize my orchestrations. Its flow beats them all, hands down. DP is the only DAW (and I've tried many) that I can actually love.

Mike

Totally agree, Mike. Must be our training.

There are valid reasons to want to produce the next EDM hit in DP as well.

Say you want multiple versions of some pop song: one extended play for the clubs, one for radio, one for live performance. In other DAWs that's three separate projects.

Other noted DP users are Autechre, a two piece electronic act from England, not EDM really, more Warped records IDM stuff. They named it as their desert island pick years ago.

Michael Canavan wrote:There are valid reasons to want to produce the next EDM hit in DP as well.

Say you want multiple versions of some pop song: one extended play for the clubs, one for radio, one for live performance. In other DAWs that's three separate projects. ...

Now you're preaching to the choir.

In my world, it's one version for the CD, one for uploading to YouTube and a third for a certain radio format that uses 10W FM stations nationwide.

mikehalloran wrote:

Michael Canavan wrote:There are valid reasons to want to produce the next EDM hit in DP as well.

Say you want multiple versions of some pop song: one extended play for the clubs, one for radio, one for live performance. In other DAWs that's three separate projects. ...

Now you're preaching to the choir.

In my world, it's one version for the CD, one for uploading to YouTube and a third for a certain radio format that uses 10W FM stations nationwide.

If there's any feature of DP that simply has no real substitute in other DAWs it's Chunks. Caveats are there for sure, to do automation on V-Racked virtual instruments it's MIDI. Track Automation has it's benefits, (500 steps VS 127 etc.), but it doesn't make up for multiple Project files for the same song and clunky rearranging.

I think some here could be missing the point.
The point is PERCEPTION.
Not- how good is DP.
Most of you know of ADAT. Well, the TASCAM 38 I believe it was called, was better. But the perception in the music community was “ADATs are the future”, etc. Somehow, ADATS captured the music world’s attention and TASCAM did not.
And thus, the TASCAM 38 was only used by the highest caliber musicians/composers and sold way fewer units. I think the price was comparable between the two. The better product lost when it comes to sales.

So now theres a FALSE perception that Pro Tools is THE DAW to use.
And yet members here come on and argue the merits of DP. This is preaching to the choir. The point I and others make is this- “Let’s expand the choir”.
It’s not good that the general perception is Pro Tools is "THE DAW”.

It’s not good that DP falls to #4-5-6 on DAW lists.
So WHO is supposed to fix this?
MOTU I say. They sell a lot of hardware. Do they sell and promote DP’s deep set of features well enough? THAT....is the question. Not “is DP great program”. We all know it is.
But when I see ads, I see MOTU promoting hardware. I have NEVER seen an ad where various amazing DP features are promoted.