Will LOGIC Replace PRO TOOLS?

[zimv20]

exactly how is PT better at mixing?

to be fair, i haven't played w/ Logic since Logic 5, but i found it confusing as hell. PT is very straightforward, especially for those who came from an analog background.

i include in mixing tasks like writing/changing automation and comping tracks. PT has some useful tools for doing this stuff (though i'm always game for better comping). it may be that Logic has come a long way, and i do intend to have another look someday, but it's learning curve better be close to zero if it has any chance of winning me over.

PT LE - how can an application that's so limited be better at tracking? It definitely can't be the number of available tracks

it's not the number of tracks, i rarely track more than 2-3 at a time, anyway.

functionally, it's just straightforward. i can get signal into PT in no time. i have to think Logic has come a long way since 4, which is when i was scratching my head wondering how to get in a signal.

PT is just quick. when you hit record or stop, it just happens. the waveform draws immediately. the cursor goes back to the beginning of your section, so if you need to re-record you can do so right away. these may seem like minor bits, but they all add up to making the workflow very easy and the tool just staying out of my way when working w/ talent.

in that regard, it's rock solid. i never have to *worry* about it, and its default behavior is to do something reasonable and expected.

i reckon Logic fans will say the same about their product, and that's great for them. and it's why i say one should try both and pick the one that fits their workflow better. i don't think that a feature-by-feature comparison should be the sole determiner when buying, because what if you don't like what you've bought, or it's confusing?

and that's also why i don't think one will *kill* the other. the only way that Logic would kill PT, for me, is to work exactly like PT. dunno if that will ever happen.

 

[dLight]

what if you don't like what you've bought, or it's confusing?

Then don't use it!

Logic can do all the things you mentioned, but if what you want is Pro Tools - or if Logic suddenly did everything the same way PT does, I still can't see that would make you want to change.

I don't think one of them will 'kill' the other either.

 

[Killyp]

From what I can tell having been in some top studios in Unis over the last few weeks, the only advantage ProTools has over Logic is reliability. People I speak to have said they've never had ProTools crash for 'no reason' (ie, just crashing mid-recording). Everyone seems to prefer Logic for anything other than just clicking record and leaving it going.

 

[Mashiach]

I don't think I can vote on this because i still think they are just too different in the way they work. Logic is just amazing when it comes to composing and using AU/ midi. but pro tools audio editing capabilites are the best especially when doing drums. Logic is making leaps and bounds with its audio editing capabilities though but i think Pro Tools is still the desired choice for me. Pro Tools though lacks when it comes to midi i find. where Logic excells. I think using them together which I have done for the past 4 years is the best way to work.

 

[WinterMute]

From what I can tell having been in some top studios in Unis over the last few weeks, the only advantage ProTools has over Logic is reliability. People I speak to have said they've never had ProTools crash for 'no reason' (ie, just crashing mid-recording). Everyone seems to prefer Logic for anything other than just clicking record and leaving it going.

Protools is a better audio editing and mixing environment in my book as well, it handles the workflow of commercial recording much better than Logic, and as you say is very reliable.

I wouldn't contemplate an album project in Logic, but that's just me, I have friends who have completed major projects on Logic.

Which Uni were you at?

 

[offshoresa65s]

Hi

It's all about marketing really. I've used PTLE since 2001, it really blew me away back then. I was multitrack recording for the first time in my life on the budget of, as we say here in OZ, "the smell of an oilly rag".

Over the years I've developed in skills and depth of project. Protools at the LE end of the market has not kept pace, yet I can't justify the enormous expense of PT TDM system.

I was doing post production work with PTLE v 6.4 and refused to spend the extra $AU700 for Digitranslator or $AU1500 for DvToolkit.

I've since bought Logic and comfortably do Post for the grand price of $AU650, ie that's the cost of the whole bloody program.

I think Digi are arrogant and perceive that their top end gear's reputation will carry them forward. Their website braggs about them selling 1500 Icon's, I think that it just becomes tech wank for a lot of people. As a Digi customer for 7 years I felt locked in.

Now, I've discovered that at my price point, There is a whole lot more scope to create with different products.

I also hasten to add that my new RME FF 800 craps out my PTLE system completely.

However, the upside is that I now have skills in Logic and PT and that can't be a bad thing.

But lastly, I can't tell you how un-sufficating it feels not to be locked into Protools gear anymore.

Cheers

Ofshore

 

[neverownedapc]

not to laugh out loud, but seriously, do you have any clue about recording industry?

now take a deep breath, sit down, and look at this link: http://www.usedvideogear.com/catalog/digidesign-pro-tools-hd-1-99001854400-p-2282.html, and then tell me how much you spent on what you use. you have no idea what the standard is, or what the programs your using actually do. sorry to be a dick, but KNOW what your talking about before you post it.

 

[junior]

not to laugh out loud, but seriously, do you have any clue about recording industry?

now take a deep breath, sit down, and look at this link: http://www.usedvideogear.com/catalog/digidesign-pro-tools-hd-1-99001854400-p-2282.html, and then tell me how much you spent on what you use. you have no idea what the standard is, or what the programs your using actually do. sorry to be a dick, but KNOW what your talking about before you post it.

I don't quite understand the point you're making, nor do I understand the point of the link you provided.
Care to expand on it?

EDIT
Or are you talking about the previous poster buying cheap gear and comparing that to the cheap Digi equivalent, all the while ignoring the fact that the 'standard' in the industry is in a completely different league the world of cheap gear he's used to?

 

[dLight]

I don't quite understand the point you're making, nor do I understand the point of the link you provided.

Me neither...

The link shows that a system so short in DSP power still lists for that ridiculous price (without an I/O) - which definitely is part of the reason that some of the people I know went from using Pro Tools HD to Logic natively. I'm not sure if that's the point neverownedapc is trying to make, or if he suggests that more expensive always means 'better', and never 'outdated'.

I'm an ex Pro Tools user myself, and if it's true that you always get what you pay for, the hard drives I considered buying circa when I first started to use Pro Tools (circa $10,000 for 500 mb) must have been truly brilliant.

 

[neverownedapc]

i was just trying to make a point that the "standard" equipment used by real pros is really expensive and most people don't even know it exists and think that the pro tools that they bought at guitar center is what you would find in a multi million dollar studio. they may have pro tools, but it's not the digi 003. i don't even think apple has something that intense, at least i've never seen or heard of it. does that clear things up?

and you do get what you paid for, seriously. with that in question, what do you own? a mac or a pc?

 

[WinterMute]

The 003 range is still LE, the main issue with LE is the native processor limitation.

The HD TDM systems use proprietary hardware that includes heavyweight DSP and is expandable, it also features multiple analogue and digital IO solutions, sync solutions and very good archiving and backup solutions, none of which are available to Logic. Clock sync alone is much easier to achieve.

Most of the pros I know who use Logic (and there are many) will lay Logic over HD TDM hardware.

The logic/protools argument is easy to make at the bedroom studio level, Logic wins hands down, however, get to a higher level and Logic has nothing to answer the C24 or Icon, and simply cannot support pro connections without significant hardware support.

In the end you use what you choose, get on with making some decent music.

 

[dLight]

they may have pro tools, but it's not the digi 003. i don't even think apple has something that intense, at least i've never seen or heard of it.

Apple aren't making their own I/Os or controllers, but work closely with Apogee and Euphonix, both known for making high end audio/DAW related gear. Logic has supported the EuCon protocol since long before Logic 8. And - like WinterMute wrote: Digi 003 isn't the version of PT that traditionally has been used in most high end studios anyway - that's Pro Tools HD, which costs many times as much. The higher prices have been possible both due the fact that people have been willing to pay more to get access to this power, and because the chips used in a pro Tools TDM system were considered 'heavyweight DSP' (if you had enough cards) when these products were designed (and the prices were set).

More about the Apogee Symphony I/O system here:
http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/symphony.php
More about the performance in an 'old' natively based Apogee system here. This comparison was made on much less CPU efficient version of OSX and Logic - and I'm sure it's made one a single card Pro Tools HD system as well, maybe even a (non-Accel card?), so the comparison isn't fair for any of the parts, especially since the current 8-core Macs run in circles around the Dual Core 2.66 Mac used in that test. Still, even in this 'vintage' test, the native Logic system can run 200 instances of the same plugin that the DSP card based Pro Tools system can run 35 of. Logic costs $500, PTHD starts at $8000.

and you do get what you paid for, seriously.

That's almost always wrong in terms of computing power, because both prices as such and the "DSP power per dollar"-rate jumps in more or less 'quantum' leaps regularly, and most people who have spent ten thousands on Macs and Pro Tools HD (and PT HD hardware updates) - or even bought a regular PC just before a new model was introduced - know that there isn't a constant ratio between price and performance in anything based on computer chips.

We simply don't know when something cheaper, better and more future oriented will be launched. The most common thing we see nowadays is rather "same or lower price, but much more power" every 18 months or so.

with that in question, what do you own? a mac or a pc?

A Mac.

The 003 range is still LE, the main issue with LE is the native processor limitation.

That may be an issue with Pro Tools LE. PT LE is made by Digidesign/Avid, which historically have made lots of their money on selling DSP cards. They may not even want people to know how efficient (other) native systems have become lately, which again may explain why the native versions of Pro Tools haven't seen the same degree of optimizations as the latest versions of Logic and OSX.

Most people will agree that if you can run 150 stereo 24 bit tracks on Apple's least expensive Mac Pro model - using the 32 buffer and 600+ plugins, and still have more than 30% of your available computing power available, it doesn't make much sense to pay a lot extra for Digidesign DSP chips, which were designed and priced so many years ago that they are considered 'old' in any relevant context today.

5-6 years is considered a lot of time in the computing industry, and Digidesign's TDM concept - which still is a smart solution, at least if you have a 1998 computer or are dependent on using 300 mHz chips in your DSP cards - was designed more than 10 years ago. There's no reason to believe that Digidesgn or any other company would have designed something as awkward (by today's standards) today. Due to the hardware limitations in these systems, simple things like offline bouncing, support for interleaved stereo files or dynamic DSP allocation isn't even possible.


No computer manufacturer would put ca 300 mHz chips in computers nowadays either (not even many of them), when Apple and others deliver 8-core 3.2 gHz computers for less than what one of Digidesign's cards lists for.

The HD TDM systems use proprietary hardware

That's part of Digidesign's problem: they rely on 'old' chips that....
1) can't just be replaced by other newer chips with more power per chip. However, the PT HD systems were replaced by PT HD Accel systems - with more power and a steep upgrade price - but that was apparently due to supply problems from Motorola.
2) they may be in serious trouble if they design a new set of DSP cards with other, newer proprietary DSP chips as well, because they need to know that even if these chips won't come in faster versions every X months, at least they will have to be manufactured in 2-3 years from now. How many DSP chip manufacturers can promise to produce the same kind of chip for three years??

If the same thing happens with audio as we have seen with video, where 'native' has been taking over large parts of the market already, Digidesign may simply encounter that their current or future systems rely on 3rd part chips that aren't being produced anymore, which is why I think they will start to rely on 'mainstream', multicore chips from Intel or AMD in the not too distant future.

that includes heavyweight DSP

See above. What Digidesign offer isn't considered 'heavyweight' by today's standards - especially not for the prices they are asking.

....and is expandable, it also features multiple analogue and digital IO solutions, sync solutions and very good archiving and backup solutions, none of which are available to Logic.

All of this is available to Logic, and since Logic natively is based on CoreAudio, and not a standard which is "Logic-proprietary", one can use Logic with all interfaces that support Apple's CoreAudio standard, which literally means all I/Os out there - except Digidesign's. If you need to (I doubt that you do), you can even "expand" Logic to work with Digidesign's non-CoreAudio based systems, which Logic has been supporting since back when these systems were needed if you wanted to make any serious work at all.

Clock sync alone is much easier to achieve.

Clock sync is based on the hardware capabilities of the interfaces and other sync relevant gear you use, and in spite of having used both Pro Tools high end hardware and Logic since version 1 of both Logic and Pro Tools (before I went all Logic/native a couple of years ago), I haven't heard that there are sync problems with non-TDM hardware, and I can't understand why sync should be technically difficult to achieve either.

The logic/protools argument is easy to make at the bedroom studio level, Logic wins hands down, however, get to a higher level and Logic has nothing to answer the C24 or Icon

Have you had a look at the high end EuCon based Euphonix controllers?

and simply cannot support pro connections without significant hardware support.

I'm not sure which 'pro connections' you are thinking of here, but just like with the most 'pro' Pro Tools systems, native systems also need hardware in order to have 'significant' hardware support. Digidesign's top model is the 192 I/O, but with Logic you can use a multitude of solutions from Apogee, Lynx, RME and many others. As a matter of fact, many Pro Tools TDM users choose eg. Apogee interfaces over Digidesign's own hardware anyway - because of it's reputation for sounding better. This is possible because - in spite of the fact that Digidesign's protocols are proprietary - others have been able to 'reverse engineer' their I/O protocols.


Whatever Digidesign or Avid may want people to believe, there's nothing 'bedroom' over Logic or Final Cut Pro, and frankly - if it was, why would "most of the pros" you know use Logic - either natively or as a front end for their TDM hardware? Why would eg. Rolling Stones or Joss Stone use a 'bedroom' solution when recording their live shows? Some people may not always get what they want, but with all the successful artists who use Logic, it's pretty clear to me that they use Logic because they want it, and not because they prefer a bedroom solution or can't afford systems that costs a few thousand dollars more.

I started to use Pro Tools hardware in 1991, and like most others I know, I've been spending thousands of dollars upgrading my PT hardware: from the original 4 voice system in 1991 to Pro Tools III in 1994, Pro Tools 24 in 1997 and Pro Tools HD in 2002. It feels like I had to buy a new recording system every 3rd year, really - and with upgrade prices that are closer to what a new system should cost than what people normally consider an "upgrade price", it hasn't been cheap.

The great thing about native systems is that the DSP power is dynamically allocated, and that you won't only get a lot more DAW power automatically if you buy a new and faster Mac, OSX is regularly being optimized for audio as well. There are major performance benefits for native audio applications only between 10.5.2 and 10.5.3, and between 10.5.3 and 10.5.4. OSX 10.6 apparently will be even more optimized for multi-core Macs then Leopard is, and we'll probably see 12- or even 16-core Macs very soon (and quad core portables within a few months). If I would have owned any Avid/Digidesign stock, I would have sold it before 2005, when desktop computers started to get really powerful.

Having written all this, Digidesign may come up with a high end, non-crippled native version of Pro Tools one day, fully supporting Apple's standard formats (Core Audio, AudioUnits...). The problem is that if they wait too log, the OSX/Logic developer team may have optimized Logic and OSX even more for audio work than they already have...

I admit that it's a somewhat 'unfair' situation: Digi is dependent on continuously adjusting to Apple's OS tweaks before they release new PT versions, while Apple owns and controls the development of both the OS, Logic and the computer hardware. If Digidesign waits too long with making a high end, native version of Pro Tools, too many people may have found out that they don't need PT in order to do professional audio work, and go for an all Apple solution (plus CoreAudio compatible hardware from the two companies Apple wisely have decided to team up with). In case you don't know, Apogee and Euphonix hardware has been used in many of the best studios on the planet long before Apple started to work with them, which is why I think it's better for Apple to rely on these two (and other companies) for pro audio hardware than to tell their engineers to start to make something better.

 

[neverownedapc]

this guy is good. now if i'd stop being a broke ass and get over my $100 version of cubase.

 

[A Pittarelli]

probably not, it can supplement it - but wont replace it in the near future. as a logic and pro tools users I can sure footedly say this. Personally I like Pro Tools significantly more than logic, and it uses rtas plug-ings.

most pro tools user will not use logic because it isnt really like pro tools at all.

 

[Vaphoron]

There is absolutely no chance of Pro Tools being dethroned within the next few years. If they start to lose sales, all they will have to do is lower prices in order to bring customers back. The fact that they have such a huge install base and offer a complete DAW solution with audio I/O, control surfaces and software means they aren't gonna go away. I love PT and have been using it for 10 years now but I really do wish they had some better competition. The software isn't as stable as it used to be and there are still performance issues that seriously need to be addressed.

 

[WinterMute]

loads of good intelligent comment.

I think the main issue with the Bedroom/pro analogy is the deliberate blurring of the marketing from Apple regarding the Pro status of Logic, out of the box and on the most powerful of Mac Pros it doesn't offer the kind of interfacing you and I would expect to use in a "pro" situation. Of course your correct that adding 3rd party interfaces offer pro connections, but it's extra expense in a project environment, and the average user, having just shelled out for a Mac and Logic Studio won't be too keen to discover the cost of adding multiple inputs to a logic system.

Digi's biggest problem has been the quality of their AD/DA offer, the 192's were a step up a few years ago and improved on the unacceptable 888 interface, but they were quickly surpassed. Digi's policy of locking in with hardware is the least attractive part of their business model. Yes their processors are old, but I think a high card count HD system is still worth looking at if you have the wherewithall, still the OP wasn't concerned with HD, and I still maintain that Logic (and DP5, Live and a few others) blow PT LE out of the water in any serious comparison except for productivity and workflow is certain key situations.

I still use PT LE as a tracking and editing feeder for HD because it makes more sense to me as a recording studio analogue, I find the convolution inherent in the more complex platforms to be counter-productive. I can work much faster on PT than I can on Logic.

I was at Euphonix last month, looking at their controller systems for Logic and Protools, they are excellent solutions, but are still only controller surfaces, however clever they may be. I haven't had the chance to use the IO module, but from my experiences with the 3000 4000 and 5000 consoles, I'd bet they are pretty damn good. The "baby" controller (Artist?) is a neat piece of work indeed, the use of IP networked comms is an excellent idea. The Hybrid 5000 console is an expensive, but very well designed audio solution, and if I had the money I'd buy one.

Euphonix may have climbed into bed with Apple, but they still play very nicely with Digidesign's kit. Euphonix systems are expensive and very good, and they have the intelligence to allow them to work with whatever platform is connected, I saw the System 5-MC switch between controlling Logic on a Mac to PT HD on a PC in the time it took to boot the Mac, lovely stuff. They are definitely in our plans for future studios. The ancillary sync and IO modules look good too and they aren't limiting the users choice

Ideally Digi will drop the hardware lockin and let the software speak for itself, I think PT for audio tracking, editing and mixing is still a superior environment to Logic. I think you're on the right track with the non limited native PT offer, but I doubt we will ever see it.

For the record, I still prefer 2" 16 or 24 track analogue tape for tracking, and a stack of great pre's with a good console (one without the letters SSL, unless followed by a J...!). I've been persuaded by Protools, and use it in most situations. Once you have the requisite IO in place the software GUI becomes the most important feature.

However, at the level that most of the users here work at, the argument is done I think, but I'm not sure it's as clear-cut as you make out for high end solutions. Not having access to an 8-core Mac Pro (can't get near the ones at the Uni, students need them for some reason...) I can't comment authoritatively on the number of tracks or plug-ins useable on a native system, but your numbers sound high to me, I wonder how it would fare with Altiverb or Space Designer, not the channel EQ band Apple usually quantify these things with...

The bedroom comments were aimed at the casual user, Logic is a very competent system but requires additional support to rise above it's project roots, Protools LE is crippled and less flexible (no 5.1 still...) but has the same GUI and workflow. My comments were aimed at the OP and responders, I didn't expect them to be addressed by the pro element.

Many people see through Digi's claims to be the "standard" for pro-audio, yet they still choose to use Protools for the workflow and productivity. I think it more likely that the death of the large scale audio studio will cost Digi dear, and the rise of the computer based integrated environment will force them to reconsider their approach.

 

[Chairman Plow]

Many people see through Digi's claims to be the "standard" for pro-audio, yet they still choose to use Protools for the workflow and productivity.

I agree.

I think it more likely that the death of the large scale audio studio will cost Digi dear, and the rise of the computer based integrated environment will force them to reconsider their approach.

I also agree here, but this will be a much slower process. All large scale studios won't just go belly-up at once.

 

[dLight]

out of the box and on the most powerful of Mac Pros it doesn't offer the kind of interfacing you and I would expect to use in a "pro" situation.

Your comments about '3rd part' and 'out of the box' are interesting...

Let's look at a Logic/Symphony system vs. a Pro Tools HD (+ Mac) system. Both systems require interfaces, a PCI(e) card, an OS, DAW software and a Mac.

On the Apple/Symphony system, the OS, Mac, the DAW software and the drivers aren't '3rd part' - the actual interface (and it's PCIe card) are from a '3rd part' manufacturer - Apogee.

On the Apple/PTHD system, one could say exactly the same, because a 3rd part (Digi) is making the DAW software, the I/O (if people choose Digi's I/O, but as we know, many don't), the PCI(e) card, and the drivers (DAE). Or - if you want, you could say that Pro Tools system is the actual main hardware, and that they (from a Digidesign point of view) use a '3rd part' manufacturer to deliver the actual OS and computer - Apple.

Logic is designed from scratch to work with hardware produced by non-Apple owned companies like Apogee, RME etc, just like Pro Tools is designed to work with a non-Digidesign owned computer.

Apple has recently also bought a chip manufacturer (Semi PA), and have announced a major product transition coming up within a few months. I doubt this will mean using own chips for the high end Macs in the near future, but this could change.

I think one reason we see these dramatic performance boosts on the native platform, is that Apple is (at least currently) using Intel for producing their DSP hardware. While Digi is 'stuck' with their oldish chips, Apple's developers are focusing on optimizing the OS and Logic for Intel's rapid flow of new and more powerful processors, and I have personally done tests that confirm that we are actually seeing real, dramatic dramatic power increases in Logic setups - several times, actually, over the last few months. But for some reason Apple don't mention much - if anything - about this. Some people criticize Apple for not adding a lot of new features these days, but they seem to stubbornly focus on performance and stability - which is what we all know is in high demand in recording studios.

Of course your correct that adding 3rd party interfaces offer pro connections, but it's extra expense in a project environment

Since both PTLE, PTHD, Logic native and Logic + TDM require both a computer, a DAW and interfaces, I don't agree that Logic requires more extra expenses than eg. a PT LE setup (if that's what you're suggesting). The difference is mainly - as we a agree in - that with non-PT systems, you have a wider choice of interfaces to choose from.

I guess we both are old enough to remember all the studio owners claiming that tape would never disappear, or that analogue mixers will always be used. Some even claimed that Adats and Tascams had come to stay. Or vinyl. Or VHS. Standards simply change, and whether Digi/Avid likes it or not, 'native' is the next big thing... wait, it's not even 'next' - it's here already.

Now the real competition is about having the best user interface, stability and features, not about which platform ("native" vs. "DSP based") you use. Apple is quite good at developing easy-to-use software, Digi has improved a lot, they have bought Sibelius - and while Apple is loaded with cash, Digidesign has had better PT support than Apple has had Logic support (since the Apple takeover). Digidesign has dominated the high end, pro audio market for some time, but Apple is damned good at redefining what's considered 'standard'. It's not a black and white situation at all.

I can work much faster on PT than I can on Logic.

I'm sure you and all experienced PT users can work faster in PT than in Logic, but it's the other way round as well. Up to Logic 8, I agree that PT 'appeared' more professional; Logic looked more like 'musician's software' while PT looked like a pro audio app. This changed when Logic 8 came out. PT also was more professional back then, due to the lack of available, native DSP processing power, stability and high price (read: demanding customers).

PT is currently better at dealing with beat editing (Elastic Time, Beat Detective) and file handling (PT have had unique file ID system for all recorded files for a while), and is even better at monitoring (due to the existence of DAE, you never need to deal with a 3rd part mixer). Apple/Logic doesn't have similar solutions - yet. However, all this can be changed by updating the software and OS, and Apple's/Logic's most important plus is that they own both the DAW, the OS and the computer hardware. Digi could produce a new DAW with an integrated PC, but they aren't even in their childhood when it comes to producing computers or operating systems...

I think PT for audio tracking, editing and mixing is still a superior environment to Logic.

Well - this is the interesting part! If people prefer PT they should of course use PT. In my experience, most PT (and Logic) users haven't used competing products enough to know why they prefer one of them, and speaking for myself, I used Logic as a front end for my PT hardware even if I had PT installed on my Mac, so I'd be very interested in a list of what exactly it is that you think PT does better than Logic 8 - in terms of editing, mixing and tracking.

I'm sure this would make the thread more interesting to read for people with less DAW experience than ourselves as well, because in the near future, all it boils down to are software differences (including performance and stability). Awaiting a Top 10-list from you or anyone else with some time to waste now...

I can't comment authoritatively on the number of tracks or plug-ins useable on a native system, but your numbers sound high to me, I wonder how it would fare with Altiverb or Space Designer, not the channel EQ band Apple usually quantify these things with...

These are my own tests, using both a Channel EQ and a Linear Phase EQ (and more) on every single of the 150 tracks AND having ten (!) Space Designers active at the same time. The Mac was yawning. The numbers seemed high to me too, because... they are high. I was truly surprised myself.

Even if 150 stereo 24-bit tracks and 600+ plugins is more than most people need for mixing (no analog studio I've seen have hundreds of rack units in use in during a session anyway), I'm sure they still work hard on optimizing the OS/Logic/drivers, for three reasons:

1) Current and future soft-synths (will) eat a lot of CPU
2) Recording sessions need a lot more DSP than mixing sessions (important if software monitoring/low buffer settings are being used).
3) They want to offer a package that lets you take normal-sized sessions over to a laptop for further recording/editing


My tests were done using the 32 buffer - which, by the way, I don't think matter much since I wasn't recording when I was testing the power of my system. If I would have been using a higher buffer, I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem at all to have 1000+ plugins and much more tracks - even on my "low end" (2.8 ghz) Mac Pro with "only" 8 gb RAM.


Both PT and Logic have their pluses and minuses. The two most significant pluses with a Logic system is that Apple owns both the OS/hardware/drivers and the DAW, and that if/when someone eg. replaces their 8-core with a 16-core, they'll automatically get much more powerful DAW. No need to pay Digi ridiculous amounts of cash just to get a differently shaped PCI card or a tad more power.

Digi's biggest force is probably that they are working hard to keep up with the native competition, and that their pro user base won't accept that essential functions like eg. automation doesn't work reliably every time. The threads over at the DUC still show that PT has bugs and issues like all other software.

In spite of AVID's 'pro' profile, they have already lost a lot of the pro video market to Final Cut Pro. The kind of strange thing is that they have lost more of it's video market than their audio market, even if pro video requires a lot more horsepower than the pro audio market. Pro Tools is/was probably "betterer" (more better?) than the competition - from a 'pro' perspective than AVIDs video solutions were better than it's competition. The explanation is probably that the video market has been used to freeze/render tracks for a long time, but audio people want everything to happen in real time.

Software is software, and unless the main Logic coders have been set to write iPhone apps or left the audio dept. for working on the next version of OSX instead, the future, IMO, looks brighter for Apple/Logic than it currently does for Avid/Pro Tools. The existence of this poll confirms this, because 5-6 years ago, one wouldn't even discuss if a native application like Logic would replace Pro Tools systems costing $12,000 without an audio interface. (HD3 was a minimum requirement for serious work back then).

 

[WinterMute]

dLight, you have some serious free time there my man!

I'll get back to you a little later, I have stuff to do today.

A couple of points:

I'm surprised as to how efficient the Mac/Logic synergy has become, a function of the ram power of the processors then I expect, still being able to code for 8 cores (or 16, 32...) undeniably gives Apple the edge.

I have to spec systems for students entering HE in London, they have very limited budgets and often simply can't afford to go down the 3rd party interface route plus buying the Mac and Logic, many use MBP's or even MB's, iMacs are very common.

Digidesign offer a 40% discount if a student takes their 101 entry level certificate, this is cleaerly designed to bring PT into line with Logics aggressive Edu pricing. They get the interface (m-box or m-audio) and the software, and many will pick up Logic too. The students are then left to choose what to use when. Most use Logic for musical composition and programming, no surprise, but the majority switch to PT for Audio Post work, (my teaching area) and are reporting a better experience, often because of specific Post plug-ins like VocAlign.

It's a shame the bog standard M-box is such a crap unit, I had to ge the M-box Pro in order to be remotely happy with my mobile system, and I still rack a 003 for remote location recordings, only taking the Pro out for locations without power.

Anyway, gotta run I'l come back to this later.

 

[dLight]

dLight, you have some serious free time there my man!

I only do this to stay away from the real work I need to do.

I know the lack of VocAlign has been a bottleneck for many, but... alas! here it is for Logic as well (soon):

BETA Testers wanted for VocALign AU

I'll get back to you a little later, I have stuff to do today.

So, are you saying that you actually do the work you're supped to do? You're simply a better man than me then.

 

[neverownedapc]

since logic 8 was pre-installed on my mbp when i got it, i guess i'll play with it for a while and see how i like it. then i'll come back and vote.

 

[WinterMute]

I only do this to stay away from the real work I need to do.

I know the lack of VocAlign has been a bottleneck for many, but... alas! here it is for Logic as well (soon):

BETA Testers wanted for VocALign AU

Aha! VocAlign for Logic, that will solve some problems, although the TDM version is a much better product that the LE (or project) version, I wonder which Logic will get...

So, are you saying that you actually do the work you're supped to do? You're simply a better man than me then.

Only when I have to clear a backlog before I take a 5 week vacation, academia has it's advantages!

I'm clearing up end of semester problems, trying to get a couple of colleagues onto the Logic Trainer course and fielding last minute requests for kit from the techs. From 5pm tonight, I'm a free man.

 

[dLight]

The HD TDM systems [...] is expandable

I forgot to mention that both Logic (using it's so called 'node' system), Final Cut Pro and Apple's OS as such are 'expandable' as well. For a rather extreme example of how you can connect Apple computers to another to get more power, look here!

From 5pm tonight, I'm a free man.

That sounds great (of course, as long as you won't be so free that you won't tell us what tracking/editing/mixing features you think PT does better!)

 

[WinterMute]

Well, lets see...

Digi have been clever in designing PT to essentially emulate the signal paths found in traditional studios, so all us old school engineers understood it at a fundamental level pretty quickly, at the time Logic was in it's infancy and was still a development of C-labs Notator with an audio recording section, it didn't make any sense (although I freely admit that it does now).

You mentioned the major reason tracking is better in PT, the monitoring issue, PT is designed to emulate the Input/monitor switching of the Sync head on a 2" machine, so that switching between input monitor and playback for punching in and out is seamless, the hardware interfacing yields no latency at all when used with a console or as a stand alone system. Now I know that Logic offers the same features when used with 3rd party interfaces, but I have never been able to get Logic to operate as a "tape machine analog", a simple tracking machine.

Routing of signals within PT also seems more appropriate to my style of work, which uses no MIDI or soft-machines at all and only needs the platform to act as recorder/editor/mixer for audio.

Editing on the timeline has been a longtime feature of PT that has been superior to Logic, having to open a separate widow always struck me as counterproductive, again I'm aware Apple have fixed this in 8 pro, but it was a long time coming, and left me with a deep preference for editing in the PT environment. PT also handles beat quantisation and mass MT replacement much better than Logic. Elastic audio is a lovely unit for fixing timing errors in performances and for spotting FX in Post. I'm sure Logic will feature this soon.

Mixing is less to do with the platform, more to do with personal technique, I tend to use a stem-mixing technique learned from Post even in music mixing, so that routing the instruments to individual channels on a console allows the best of both areas to be utilised, I can insert hardware at the desk without penalty, but still retain the flexibility of automating at component level in the computer. Sure I could do this is Logic, but Logic's has come later to the party, and I choose not to.

I have mixed directly from Logic, and frankly the implementation of plug-in delay compensation doesn't work very well, neither does inserting real outboard over routed IO, now I aware that these issues pertain to PT LE as much if not more, but I'm using HD habitually and so must comment from that perspective. I prefer Altiverb to Space designer is Post applications, but it's 50/50 in musical work, I don't particularly like software plug-ins in replacement for (or emulation of) hardware and will strap a 1176 onto an insert before reaching for the Bomb factory version any day of the week. That said, the Sony Oxford suite, the Joe Meek units, Digi's Eleven and a couple more plugs are very useful in the mix. I find Logics FX units pale and uninteresting sonically, although BitCrusher is godlike for Sound Design...!

Plug-in automation is also an issue, having been a long time Control 24 user, I'm used to having parameter control and automation in front of me, Logic's multi-stranded automation displays are simply too much for my poor old brain to deal with, and I find the PT solution, whilst less impressive, to be much more effective. Logic under the Euphonic MC-5 controller is a different matter, and I have high hopes for that combination, we assessed the capability at Euphonix with a view to offering Logic/MC-5 combos in our production studios if and when the system matures. Currently the Icon is too expensive and too fragile, but we are getting good results from the C-24 surface.

In conclusion PT was first to market with a host of innovations, which has spawned a group of older engineer/producers who are loath to switch without very good reason, Logic has done an excellent job of catching up and it's clear that Digi will have to do some serious work to stay ahead of the game. I'm lucky in some respects in that I have the option to choose my platform, and I don't have to choose because of financial restraints, but I do choose PT for speed and simplicity of operation in music sessions.

I haven't addressed the Post situation much, because Logic simply doesn't feature in Audio Post that much professionally, the industry is still re-adjusting to PT from AMS Audiofile (or the like). However, as with music recording facilities, Post guys are realising the power of Logic native on a Mac pro for remote and location work, and I can see that situation increasing. Final Cut may be making headway is a similar way, but all of the top editors are still using Avid, however long this may continue is another matter, and Logic may well surf into Post on FCS coat-tails. My students complete Audio Post assignments for me using Logic, Protools, occasionally Abelton Live and very occasionally Soundtrack Pro, I make no demands about platform, we supply the systems and they make the choice. We do ask them to justify that choice, and the majority who are interested in Post as a career respond that PT is the defacto standard and it's a career choice. This situation may change, but is true at the time of writing.

It's a much more open field now, but I'm sure Avid and Digi want to stay at the top of the pile for as long as they can, we'll just have to see if they do.

 

[junior]

One fine post WinterMute. You should make that a sticky.
Yourself and dLight have made this thread a very interesting read. Good stuff.