There's so much that can go wrong when you have to get all your files from Cubase (or whichever DAW you use) into the Pro Tools session. I would caution that you try to export/import OMF's back and forth a few times before you invest alot of time in a mix.It's that dreaded, exciting time - time for you to submit your Pro Tools session to the Screen Scoring Department so that you can conduct your scoring session! It's a daunting endeavor, getting that session ready to submit. Guys like Hans Zimmer (probably the most famous Cubaser) works like this (or at least similarly to this). So you should be able to work in Cubase (if you like) and export the OMF of your final mix and import it into PT and it 'should' be the same. If you have the same effects packages for both DAW's you're "supposed" to be able to switch projects from one to another (PT to Cubase and vice versa) and keep all your insert settings, fader and panning settings. If you're running both you might try exchanging OMF files. He made specific mention of Cubase's audio editing and it's midi suite as 'better' than PT (workflow, usability). One guy, using Cubase and PT, said that his 'perfect DAW' was PT for capture (audio) and mixing and Cubase for everything else. Like you, they don't use it enough to be comfortable with it and find it slows them down a bit when forced to use it.Ī while back someone posted a 'What's the perfect DAW' in /r/audioengineering and the answers, as you'd expect, were all over the place.
My local studio uses the same, but also has Protools. I have since used Nuendo/Cubase exclusively as my primary home platform. I started out on a REALLY early non-hardware version of Protools called "Session 8". I can't speak of the differences between Protools and Cubase today as I only use Cubase. Protools popularity today is rooted in part to those early mindsets of artists and non-engineers. This was back when Protools required significant hardware purchases to function, was insanely expensive, and didn't accept 3rd party converters and so on. "Ya got Protools?" "Yea, it's in that box in the corner" said the engineer.
PRO TOOLS VS CUBASE 8 PROFESSIONAL
That led to many professional studios purchasing a Protools setup just to add to their gear list and for the occasional mixdown that was tracked elsewhere in Protools. When I told them we used Nuendo, Cubase, and Wavelab, they looked unsure or uncertain about our ability to give them a great recording. When I was a studio manager, artists instinctively asked if we were using Protools. There may be hundreds of tissue brands, but many people just ask for a Kleenex when they need a tissue. It's similar to the Kleenex brand of tissues. In fact, they don't know of any other recording platform by name and tend to refer to them all as "Protools". There are, however, a large number of non-engineer/producers who find "Protools" to be synonymous with "DAW". I chose Cubase because my local studio was using it and I wanted to be compatible. Some prefer Logic, some protools, some Soundforge, and so on. It's more personal preference than anything else - everyone has their own reason for using what they do.
Many engineers use it for the functionality, plugins, and so on.
0 kommentar(er)
