I really don’t understand this comments what i read on the net saying that cubase is very limited when it comes to mix. Some say Pro Tools is better.
I used Pro tools before but i switched to Cubase since 2008 and I’m happy with what i can do on Cubase than what i did on Pro Tools.
Please advice me.
Obviously made by either Jealous Protool users or people that haven’t a clue about Cubase, just ignore them.
Protools is a religion just like iComputers. True Believers don’t even want to hear that there might be something better around.
yeah, sounds like someone who’s frustrated and trying to justify his purchase of gear costing as much as 5-10 times over a 20 year period compared to something that sounds just as good, and flies in circles around his gear when it comes to MIDI.
Cubase works. ProTools works. Reaper works … Pick one or two that work for you. That’s all.
They’re not interested in the best solution. They want the right solution. So they hold on to their “industry standard”.
Aloha and +1.
I have Pro Tools and Cubase.
I never use Pro Tools - its just too much hard work. If you set it up right and work in the right way, Cubase is as easy as it gets and can do pretty much everything.
A skilled engineer can work and mix on anything with a minimum of knowledge of the software. It’s all about the ears. Pick your DAW and get to work, simple as that.
An engineer (skilled or not) doesn’t need a DAW. He/she can use either DAW (any one of those) or tape+console or anything you can record sound into.
One of the problems nowadays is that many of those so called audio engineering schools don’t educate audio engineers, but ProTools operators.
That’s true. However, it’s hard to find a studio with proper high quality analogue recording facilities nowadays, unless you have a big bag of cash.
And I agree on your second point too. It’s a shame.
Come to my joint