Thinking on Switching to Pro Tools???

[nelsonortiz]

I want to switch to Pro Tools LE. I have and use as my main Instrument EWQLSO. Can I use it in Pro Tools and Set up mult Channel Set ups to use at least 3 instanses of EWQLSO. I can't seem to get EWQLSO to show up in my Midi Channel after loading it in an Aux Channel. Can't figure it out. Does anyone know what I may be doing wrong.

[nickbatzdorf]

Yeah there's an RTAS version of the plug-in. Pro Tools 7 has Instrument tracks - you don't need to put it on an aux input anymore - but I don't think there's any way to get separate outputs.

[matto]

Hey Nelson,may I ask what you're switching from and why you're switching? Cause if your main work is midi orchestral mock-ups using EWQLSO...well PT is still not exactly the most powerful midi sequencer, although it's gotten a lot better.Just curious.

[nelsonortiz]

I did hear that somewhere before and the more I find out the more Disappointing Pro Tools is becoming to me. For Industry standard Recording It sure lacks in alot of areas of interest. Right now I am using FL Studio 6 Producer Edition. Maybe I need To look at Sonar or Cubase a little before committing to Pro Tools. Which would you prefer?

[matto]

Well I use Cubase...have been since the old Atari ST days , so you may not get the most unbiased answer from me ...I think Dave Walton uses Sonar....Basically they are both very powerful packages. I think for work that relies largely on midi sequencing, with maybe just a few acoustic instrument added every now and then, either of these is a better choice than PT.If your music was mostly acoustic recording with some midi added, or if you frequently needed to mix music you write at home at a commercial facility, then I would tend to recommend Protools.I would definitely check out both Cubase and Sonar before making up my mind. They basically do about the same thing...just a little differently. Each has a few minor advantages and disadvantages over the other...so it's a tough call.I'm very happy with Cubase, never had the urge to switch to anything else.matto

[davewalton]

Hi Nelson,I use Sonar as well as EWQLSO. At the level that Cubase and Sonar are at, if I can't do justice with one, I won't be able to do justice with the other. Either one is considered pro gear and no one I know is "limited" by the feature set of either one. Certainly not me. Dave

[53mph]

Hi Neslson,I started off using Cool Edit years ago (now called Adobe Audition) which was only an audio recorder (no Midi). I tentatively made the move to Midi using Cakewalk Home Studio (because it was cheap) and then upgraded to Sonar Studio then Sonar Producer (mainly because I got a discount upgrading). Sonar is a great program and it run lots of instances of EWQLSO.The audio studio I used to work at upgraded to Pro Tools and I found it less user friendly than Sonar for the solo musician...but....if you think you might need to take your sessions to an external studio then concider Pro Tools. Because it's industry standard you can migrate your sessions with ease. I live in Europe and I don't know any studios that use Sonar usually they use Pro Tools or Cubase (or Reason sometimes). I remember some functions in Pro Tools that were much better for the studio professional especially for mastering and rendering audio tracks post production. I don't know the LE version though.Basically it depends how far you're looking into the future. Once you start using one system it becomes more difficult to switch. It's a bit like changing you're guitar playing style from Country to Flamenco....once your doing one thing it's hard to change the way you do it. That's why I'm sticking with Sonar now.You can try out a free version of Pro Tools here if you want to try before you buy:http://www.digidesign.com/ptfree/

[bc]

Hi Nelson,I agree that Sonor and Cubase are the top choices if you're primarily a midi minded musician. Cakewalk was my first purchase years ago, and I went the Sonar upgrade route. Sonar in particular is (IMO) very user friendly. However, because I work in a variety of studio environments I switched to PT LE. It has been very convenient to simply show up with my axe and my Glyph external hard drive and go to work. The newest PT LE upgrade to version 7.0 is more midi freindly. Good advice from 53mph; demo the different applications available and go with the software that you are most comfortable with. Good luck -- bc

[nickbatzdorf]

While I was reviewing PT 7 I tried hard to think of a reason you couldn't use it for sequencing, and I really couldn't think of one. That's not to say that I do - I use Logic mostly but also DP on Mac - but I use PT all the time for a lot of things it does really well.

[nomiyah]

Ditto Nick. I've used PT for sequencing and it seems to work well (though I'm really an MPC addict).