Cubase 6 vs Pro Tools 9.

What is the best daw? Explain why.


A serious studio should have both.
Pro Tools seems to be the industry standard purely because, being more widely used, of a feeling of more security using file transfers when using several studios to complete a project.
Generally both will have strengths and weaknesses the other hasn’t.
The few times I have encountered PTools to use myself I have found it different but pretty much intuitively friendly. I can’t be sure it’s easier to use or that, because I’m used to Cubase already that I had a pretty good grasp of the design principles, that it would be a different learning curve for either if you had no experience of both.
It does seem to me that PTools is the more workmanlike of the two DAWs whereas in Cubase there is more scope for creative usage.

The best daw is the daw you know the best. In pro tools you’ll won’t have the pitch correction tools nor the arranger track (amazing tools). Nor loop mash 2 (another amazing tool). You can achieve professional projects in both. Also think about your friends or partners : what are they working on ?

A daw is a daw in my opinion??

Personaly I dont think you can beat Cubase when it comes to midi…I think were all realy lucky to have so much choice whatever it be Reaper,Studio one,Logic ect and their all going to be good at what they do.

God knows fight it out amongst yourselves…

In my opinion,
Cubase is an excellent creative and music tool.
ProTools in an excellent mixing environment.
Both have their strength and weakness, any software does, use what works best for you to get the job done.

I use both. I really would like to have a mix of both :slight_smile:

For what I’m used to, edition is simplier with PT. It’s true that Cubase is ahead for MIDI (and VSTi), but I have to say that MIDI in PT 8 and 9 is now quite good. It doesn’t have advanced features like Cubase has, but it is possible to achieve your work quite easily now. Video support is better with PT.

If you have to do post, I suggest PT. Otherwise, both have nice features.

I also use both. What reeled me in was the Elastic Audio feature. It sounds so good and natural. I do know Cubase better, but Pro Tools seems to be pretty easy to get around. For some reason, I think my recordings done in Pro Tools sound “better” with my same hardware. It must be the Audio engine… I like both. What can I say. It would be nice if the 2 companies would come together and create a powerhouse DAW! That would be AWESOME!


Lets not start the Pro-Tools sounds better than Cubase debate (again) please.

This question is like asking which tastes better, onions or garlic? Its very subjective, and whilst it is interesting to get people’s opinions, you won’t ever get a definitive answer. So, what’s the point really?

But asking is free! :wink:

No reason not to have both. They’re both excellent. And everyone who owns and uses both will have their own reasons why they use one vs. the other for different projects.

I use PT9 for mixing, post-production and for projects that require compatibility with other studios. It’s not the best at any of those things, except compatibility with other studios, which does matter. Note that even though it’s not the BEST at those things, it is quite good. PT9 has really become a solid product and good tool. While its MIDI has been improved over the years, it’s still far behind the depth and power of MIDI tools available in Cubase. Those who wish to argue on that topic have simply not taken the time to deeply understand the MIDI features and tools available in both.

I use Cubase primarily as a compositional tool. It does quite well with mixing and post too (in some ways better than PT9, in other ways not quite as good), so if I don’t want to migrate the mixing phase over to PT, then I do it all in Cubase, and it does beautifully. The only problems have been when working with other studios who don’t have Cubase. That means I need to move the project over to PT, unfortunately. But otherwise, Cubase 6 has been superb for me. It just fits the composer workflow for me extremely well, and the MIDI tools – if you really get to know them – are among the most powerful and deep of all DAWs.

I agree, no reason why you can’t use both :slight_smile: …and I do. I love Cubase and in all honesty, I use Cubase most of the time.

I find budget a fairly good reason :confused:

lol, but for that you need windows which isn’t cheap either :smiley: ( I know audacity works in linux, don’t bother :wink:)

       Cubase: 6 - ProTools: 9


      Cubase x 6 = ProTools x 9


Is there a Mac Version? :smiley:

Check out Dream Studio Linux, its the first distro I’ve found that runs the real time kernel and Jack straight out of the box, Ardour works just fine, if it can access your hardware. (found my internal laptop sound system no prob). Ardour is also available for OSx

But I digress!

Boy Avid and Steinberg must have jacked up their marketing budgets to get everyone in here to say “use both.” :smiley:

What type of “studio” do you have? Project (read: hobby)? Small pro? Etc. That’s the first question that should be asked.

If it’s a hobbyist studio then only 1 is needed. Save the money and buy another microphone.

Good points! I guess the first questions really should be about what the user’s needs are. Since everyone has different needs, then the answer will be different for everyone. Some people will benefit from both… others more from one or the other, depending on their circumstances. But I totally agree, that if you are a small project studio or hobbyist you really only need one of them, and it’s a great idea to save money and buy other important gear.

As I always mix “in the box” the big drawback for PT has always been that is only does real time export. For those who use lots of external gear, it does not matter.
For those hobbyists, yes only one makes sense.
I will say, that I think PT has some real nice included plugins.