| Author |
Topic: Power Tracks vs. Pro Tools |
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 7:56 am |
|
I’ve been using Power Tracks since version 5.0 (currently 8.0). Usually 12-16 stereo tracks per song. The merged waves after mix-down are made into red book CD with CD Archtech 5.0. My productions are all fund-raising projects, for schools and community organizations, usually just 300-400 CDs per project. For me, Power Tracks is fast, clean, efficient, easy to edit, and economic.
I lost the opportunity to collaborate with a producer in another state because I don’t use Pro Tools. My guess is because of the file format difference. At the time, the main vocalist wanted to utilize 2 remote studios due to driving distance issues.
I would like to know if anyone on the forum has made this change, from Power Tracks to Pro Tools. My questions are:
Is the user interface concept similar?
What particular Pro Tools program is good for starting out?
Thanks for your responses.
Mike
|
|
|
 |
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 11:44 am
|
|
I believe there is still a Protools Free version.
Go and search digidesign.com
it will likley be there, but depends on your platform too.
At least this one can get you used to it,
and may do much of what your current program does. |
|
|
|
Glenn Austin
From:
Montreal, Canada
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 12:54 pm
|
|
| That someone doesn't want to collaborate with you because you don't use Protools is absolute crap. Even amongst Protools studios standard practice is to line up all your tracks to begin at the same point in time on the screen. Most people don't have the same plug ins, or even the same versions of the software, so basically what you are left with is importing audio files, at that point it doesn't matter what you use. Conversion from one file format to another isn't an issue at all any more. If Powertracks works for you then stick with it, because frankly, Protools doesn't really sound all that good for mixing. If you were producing audio for video or Tv, then I would say go with Protools for compatibility, but on music projects it doesn't matter at all. I think you should tell this "producer in another state" to pull his head out of you know where. |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 3:24 pm
|
|
David, I couldn't find a free version on the Digidesign website. They may have discontinued it, unless I missed it somehow. Their site design is kind of weird. Thanks for your response.
Glenn, that's an interesting take on mixing with Pro Tools. When you consider the cost comparison of Pro Tools & Power Tracks, one would think that Pro Tools would be yards better. A wave is a wave no matter how or where you import it. I see your point on that. Thanks for your response.
I can mix down fast in Power Tracks, I think because my ear has been tuned to it for so long.
Mike |
|
|
|
Jim Phelps
From:
Mexico City, Mexico
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 8:28 pm
|
|
What about this, it says it IS Pro tools, but is not at Digidesign:
Click here: Click Here |
|
|
|
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 9:41 pm
|
|
M-Audio is a Digi development partner,
this looks like PT in a simplified version bundled with an M-Audio interface.
I agree against the guy saying he wouldn't work with you
because you are not on PT.
He should have tried it before saying; no I won't.
If you make ALL your tracks start from point 0,(zero)
then even in a formate change they should line up pretty well.
The big change is different plug ins etc.
You can burn tracks with their plug in automation included.
I find for these cross distance sessions,
doing a 2 channel mono pair of a mix,
and sending that out,
(PT can import a stereo pair mix too.)
and then getting the parralel recorded
additional tracks back, is usually drag,
drop and line up to reference point.
If you can output AIFF files these will be generally seamless in practice cross platform.
|
|
|
|
Olli Haavisto
From:
Jarvenpaa,Finland
|
Posted 16 Sep 2006 10:11 pm
|
|
" Protools doesn't really sound all that good for mixing "
OK , I guess 90 % of the worlds major studios must be missled or just don`t hear a difference...  On what do you base this opinion , Glenn ?
------------------
Olli Haavisto,
Finland
[This message was edited by Olli Haavisto on 16 September 2006 at 11:12 PM.] |
|
|
|
Steinar Gregertsen
From:
Arendal, Norway, R.I.P.
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 3:19 am
|
|
| Quote: |
| For me, Power Tracks is fast, clean, efficient, easy to edit, and economic. |
Then stick to it. The 'best' software is the one that you're most comfortable with. All these "software wars" are a complete waste of time, it's the engineer that matters, not the program.
| Quote: |
| I lost the opportunity to collaborate with a producer in another state because I don’t use Pro Tools. |
If that's the case then the producer in question didn't know his tools well enough and/or was insecure about how to import 'foreign' formats.
This is usually no problems at all - a while back I collaborated with a producer on Iceland, I recorded all my tracks using Nuendo on a PC, he importaed them in to ProTools on a Mac. There are no problems with this, as long as you make sure all the individual tracks you export start at the exact same place.
I have done several other projects like this, and it has never been a problem going from my Nuendo/PC rig to another studios PT/Mac rig.
They just can't open a ready mix with all the processing in place, that's all, they have to do a little mixing themselves since what they get is the raw tracks.
Steinar
PS - one thing; What's the samplerate limit of your soundcard? Most PT/Mac studios work with 48K or 96K, and if your soundcard is locked at 44.1 that may cause problems. But that's a soundcard issue, not a software...
------------------
"Play to express, not to impress"
www.gregertsen.com
Southern Moon Northern Lights
[This message was edited by Steinar Gregertsen on 17 September 2006 at 04:30 AM.] |
|
|
|
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 4:07 am
|
|
You can also output up or down sampled files.
He can import your 44.1 files into 48
if need be.
It may not sound quite as pristeen
as the other tracks, but in a mix,
likely not noticable,
or appearing intended / retro. at worst.[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 17 September 2006 at 05:13 AM.] |
|
|
|
Glenn Austin
From:
Montreal, Canada
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 7:43 am
|
|
| Olli, The mix buss on Protools is a common complaint. You can read about that on all the recording forums. The rest of the system works great. |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 8:49 am
|
|
Jim, thanks for the site, I can try it from there.
Steinar, I tried to collaborate with songs recorded at both 48 & 96. I use 96 when a horn section is in there, which isn’t often. I'm using an Audigy card (Win 2000 & WinXP).
I am going to give the free version a look-see, after I get these lesson plans written for the week & practice an hour or so! Maybe next weekend I’ll get into the Pro Tolls GUI, including mixing.
Thanks to all for your responses!
Further discussion is also appreciated.
Also, thanks to b0b for this section.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Russ Wever
From:
Kansas City
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 12:04 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| I use 96 when a horn section is in there, which isn’t often. |
Michael,
Why go to 96K when dealing with horns?
Is their wafeform content that complex that it requires Is there other instrumentation or other instances that calls for this as well?
Not that I question your procedure - just trying to lower my ignorance factor by a notch!
Thanks,
Russ[This message was edited by Russ Wever on 17 September 2006 at 01:05 PM.] |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 1:48 pm
|
|
Russ, I just think I get better reproduction of trumpet harmonics when it all has to go from 96KHz to 44KHz in the end. I'm using a synth sampled trumpet. When I record a horn section where the dominant horns are trumpet & sax, (now this is my ear talking) I can get cleaner harmonics and stereo separation. The same sometimes with a closed high hat. I hate it when a closed high hat just begins to sound a little like white noise at 44KHz.
But I'm not a pro at this. It could be that the Power Tracks algorithm is just not as good as other more expensive programs, like Pro Tools. This is my adjustment for that.
I imagine some may agree or disagree with me, but like I say, my ear perceives this, so I do the extra work.
Thanks for the interest.
Mike |
|
|
|
John Macy
From:
Rockport TX/Denver CO
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 1:55 pm
|
|
| I'll take a well designed, well clocked 44.1/16 bit convertor over a poorly designed, poorly clocked 96K convertor any day of the week... |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 2:28 pm
|
|
| John, are you saying that Pro Tools is far better in this regard? |
|
|
|
John Macy
From:
Rockport TX/Denver CO
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 3:28 pm
|
|
Actually, no. Sonically, I am not a huge ProTools fan at all, though I track a lot into it. I personally use an outdated system that Ensonic developed called PARIS. There are a few guys here on the forum that use it also--Tommy Detamore, Mike Smith, Bill Terry and maybe some I am unaware of. Anyway, there is something about it that just kicks every other system's but I have tried, so I stay with it, especially for mixing. I track a lot into ProTools, as it has become the standard in most pro studios, but I always use an external clock with it and 24 bit for sure. It is totally amazing to all my clients the difference sonically when it is imported into Paris--it just gets bigger, wider and taller. Can't tell you why, but it works for me.
I go back and forth between platforms all the time, and while there is a little bit of hoop jumping to do, it is fairly minimal as Glen mentioned. I do keep a ProTools LE system onsite just in case I get a session sent in that format, or need to deliver it in the same.
The other wise thing that was said is that if you are comfortable with your system, and happy sonically, why move unless it is costing you work? If Paris ever gets to that point, I will move for sure, but right now it is actually an asset to me--I get many calls wanting to hear it because of what my clients tell them. Vintage is good, sometimes ... |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 17 Sep 2006 4:19 pm
|
|
Very interesting, John!
I'm not familiar with PARIS, but I've only been doing this as a home hacker for about 8 years.
I like your philosophy.
Thanks,
Mike
|
|
|
|
James Quackenbush
From:
Pomona, New York, USA
|
Posted 19 Sep 2006 8:32 am
|
|
MB,
The older Pro Tools setups don't sound nearly as good as the newer Pro Tools setups......As far as sound quality goes, there are better , but as far as user and professional support , Pro Tools has it hands down .....You can take a project done using Pro Tools , and bring it ANYWHERE in the world and work on it ..It's used by more proffesional studios than any other recording media in the world ....John Macy mentioned Ensoniq PARIS .....It's one of the BEST sounding recording media's that I have had the pleasure of listenning to .....I was saddened to see it go ......RADAR is another great sounding media ....Both systems sound better than Pro Tools , but there are so many pluggins, and so much support for Pro Tools that a lot of Pro's use it ......It's easy to get around on also ...
If you have another way of working that you like ( Power Tracks ) perhaps looking to see if you could dump your Power Tracks project into Pro Tools might be an option .. It may be just what you're looking for ......There is a version of Pro Tools called Pro Tools LE ( light edition ) that will integrate just fine into the full fledged Pro Tools TDM version .....Put Pro Tools LE on your computer and dump your Power Tracks files if it can be done with not too much hassle ..... I transfer my works that I do in Digital Performer into Pro Tools for the same reason you need to be able to work with Pro Tools customers ..... I work easier in D.P. because I have used it for years.....Good Luck .....Jim |
|
|
|
Ray Minich
From:
Bradford, Pa. Frozen Tundra
|
Posted 19 Sep 2006 9:33 am
|
|
| ProTools Free would only work on a Win98 system. Not Win2K or WinXP. |
|
|
|
Bill Terry
From:
Bastrop, TX
|
Posted 19 Sep 2006 9:46 am
|
|
I tend to agree with John Macy's comments about PARIS, and 'old is good sometimes'. I first heard it at Tommy Detamore's place, and immediately thought it sounded great. (Tommy's engineering/producing/playing had nothing to do with it I'm sure ).
I bought my PARIS system after they were already discontinued, at bargain basement prices, and it does everything I need it to do. I believe the PARIS mix-buss is just magic somehow. So why change?
Sure, it's old and a bit clunky in some ways compared to the newest stuff out there, but nobody ever says it doesn't sound good.
I know that Tommy, like John, works with clients all the time who bring him material in all sorts of formats, and it never seems to be an insurmountable problem. I believe if you're making a living in the recording biz, you just work that stuff out.
|
|
|
|
Glenn Austin
From:
Montreal, Canada
|
Posted 19 Sep 2006 9:59 am
|
|
The newer Protools HD systems sound much better than the older TDM systems with the 888 interfaces, but you are talking about major expense here. Add all the bells and whistles and the price skyrockets.
Same thing goes with the Digi 002 LE system. You would need a new computer to start with, 2 screens, and you are talking only 16 inputs, 18 if you use the digital input. It's hard to track a band with only 16 inputs, and you can't add another interface to the Digi002. You can do this with the Protools HD and MIX systems, but it's expensive.
From what Michael wrote, I don't think it's worth the trouble and expense. Most clients don't know the difference, meaning you can play them back the same take twice in a row, and they will prefer one over the other. |
|
|
|
John Macy
From:
Rockport TX/Denver CO
|
Posted 19 Sep 2006 2:39 pm
|
|
Glen,
You mean the 666 interfaces, don't you.... |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 19 Sep 2006 4:30 pm
|
|
Gentlemen, thanks for your responses.
Man, after reading these posts, now I want to try PARIS!
Actually, as James suggested, I think my first goal will be to find a format in Power Tracks usable in Pro Tools (after getting a version upgrade).
I may try some experimental tracks in a month or so, after getting Pro Tools LE. Hopefully, I can afford it then (on a high school teacher's salary).
Thanks again for your replies. This thread is chock full of interesting information.
Mike |
|
|
|
John Macy
From:
Rockport TX/Denver CO
|
Posted 20 Sep 2006 5:36 am
|
|
| You might see if the Evil Empire (Digidesign) offers any educational discounts on ProTools... |
|
|
|
Michael Barone
From:
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted 20 Sep 2006 3:12 pm
|
|
Good idea, John. Thanks!
Mike |
|
|
|
