Hiya,
Can any one tell me the difference between Protools and Creamware Scope hardware if being used with Logic Audio Platinum 5.3.0 + Logic Control on my PC?
I think for semi-pro and home use PT might be a little overdone, but CW isn't cheap either.
PT comes with a dedicated sequencer, but like I said I have Logic with Logic Control so I'd rather use the more advanced MIDI oriented Logic
Both have onboard DSP for, FX, eq, synths, etc. Creamware can record at 24/96 but so can PT (don''t think I'll ever need PT's 192Khz)
Advice would be welcome
Thanks in advance,
Ronald
Pro Tools or Creamware on PC
-
King of Snake
- Posts: 1544
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
- Contact:
Hey another dutchman! 
Welcome!
I've never worked with Pro-Tools but don't they have these sort of consumer-level packages called Digi-01 or Digi-02 or something? Maybe that's more like CW price-wise, although I don't know exactly what comes with those packages.
It may all depends on what you want to do and how you want to do it, but a creamware system with enough DSP pretty much has it all, except, as you say, a sequencer. It has free and easy signal routing and very good quality synths and fx.
Welcome!I've never worked with Pro-Tools but don't they have these sort of consumer-level packages called Digi-01 or Digi-02 or something? Maybe that's more like CW price-wise, although I don't know exactly what comes with those packages.
It may all depends on what you want to do and how you want to do it, but a creamware system with enough DSP pretty much has it all, except, as you say, a sequencer. It has free and easy signal routing and very good quality synths and fx.
-
hubird
pass the dutchy by the lefthand side... 
I once used too work on PT SoundDesigner2, good and stable stuff but I agree with Ken, and CW offers mutch more, and isn't expensive at all TMO.
(I decided to by Pulsar2 card when I had to buy a new mixer like the Mackie-16-4, the price was about the same, with all the advantages of CW's virtual studio).
I once used too work on PT SoundDesigner2, good and stable stuff but I agree with Ken, and CW offers mutch more, and isn't expensive at all TMO.
(I decided to by Pulsar2 card when I had to buy a new mixer like the Mackie-16-4, the price was about the same, with all the advantages of CW's virtual studio).
-
kensuguro
- Posts: 4434
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: BPM 60 to somewhere around 150
- Contact:
The cheaper PT systems aren't really worth it in that it's more or less just Pro Tools LE (I think) packaged with a Digidesign IO. So it's just a "recording" package. Whatever effects it's bundled with is all native. (so it's a no DSP package)
Though they do have some impressive native effects, as far as I know, what's good about a PT system is supposed to be their hardware accelerated effects, and only the full PT system has it.
Though they do have some impressive native effects, as far as I know, what's good about a PT system is supposed to be their hardware accelerated effects, and only the full PT system has it.
Back again,
A friend of mine has a PT Digi 001 and likes it that much that he thinks of upgrading to a full PT system with real DSPs.
I already have a PowerSampler and a Luna II and was just wondering what the real differences between our systems then would be.
I almost bought an extra XTC, but after waiting for 6 weeks for it to be delivered, I changed my mind and bought Logic Control, not too bad either. 12 DSPs would have been nice, but LC rocks bigtime!
Don't worry, I'll stick to my CW cards.
Mzzl
Ronald
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: RoonSmits on 2002-10-26 13:11 ]</font>
A friend of mine has a PT Digi 001 and likes it that much that he thinks of upgrading to a full PT system with real DSPs.
I already have a PowerSampler and a Luna II and was just wondering what the real differences between our systems then would be.
I almost bought an extra XTC, but after waiting for 6 weeks for it to be delivered, I changed my mind and bought Logic Control, not too bad either. 12 DSPs would have been nice, but LC rocks bigtime!
Don't worry, I'll stick to my CW cards.
Mzzl
Ronald
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: RoonSmits on 2002-10-26 13:11 ]</font>
Comparing Pulsar and Digidesign is like comparing apples and pickled heering. I have both PT HD and Scope/SP in my studio and have installed a number of Digi systems around town.
The two systems are miles apart. Digi is very rock solid, but no-frills and a little too overpriced. Also, if you decide to use Logic you wont benefit from the major point of choosing a Digi product: the ProTools software, which is the best software available for audio editing, period!
If you're on a budget you'll probably look at either getting a Pulsar II or a Digi001.
Digi001 has eight analog, one ADAT and one S/PDIF i/o but no DSP on board. It has two preamps and a monitor control and can connect directly to a poweramp or powered monitors. The Digi001 was a winner product two years ago but time has begun to show and it's bigger sibling, the Digi002 is a different fish altogether, and at 2500 USD not really an option.
Pulsar II has more digital i/o channels than the Digi001, but only two analog i/os which is fine for your computer only studio, but not so good if you want to add a few hardware instruments to your setup. The Pulsar II biggest advantage is that it has six SHARCs which will give you all those funky creamware plugins and instruments on your PC or Mac.
Both systems have MIDI i/os.
So what is best?
Pulsar gives you more for your money, but it's not as reliable as Digi001 and if you have a fast computer you might be perfectly happy just running VST plugins. But if you don't need the extra analog i/os and would rather have more DSP (one can never have enough!) I'd say the Pulsar even if it's a little crash-prone on bad code days. And you probably wouldn't be here if you didn't lean that way....
The two systems are miles apart. Digi is very rock solid, but no-frills and a little too overpriced. Also, if you decide to use Logic you wont benefit from the major point of choosing a Digi product: the ProTools software, which is the best software available for audio editing, period!
If you're on a budget you'll probably look at either getting a Pulsar II or a Digi001.
Digi001 has eight analog, one ADAT and one S/PDIF i/o but no DSP on board. It has two preamps and a monitor control and can connect directly to a poweramp or powered monitors. The Digi001 was a winner product two years ago but time has begun to show and it's bigger sibling, the Digi002 is a different fish altogether, and at 2500 USD not really an option.
Pulsar II has more digital i/o channels than the Digi001, but only two analog i/os which is fine for your computer only studio, but not so good if you want to add a few hardware instruments to your setup. The Pulsar II biggest advantage is that it has six SHARCs which will give you all those funky creamware plugins and instruments on your PC or Mac.
Both systems have MIDI i/os.
So what is best?
Pulsar gives you more for your money, but it's not as reliable as Digi001 and if you have a fast computer you might be perfectly happy just running VST plugins. But if you don't need the extra analog i/os and would rather have more DSP (one can never have enough!) I'd say the Pulsar even if it's a little crash-prone on bad code days. And you probably wouldn't be here if you didn't lean that way....
Hey, Starco, how is your system configured? Since I plan to take a studio in charge and I'd like to use both PT (as a multitrack), Logic as a midi sequencer and CW for other stuff, I'm really interested about how you manage it yourself. Could you give us some details and the reasons why you chose to set it up as it is?
Thanks for your insight!
Thanks for your insight!
Re. PT and Scope together...
Until now I've had PT HD 3 and Scope/SP together in a Mac QS 733 with a GeForce 4 Ti card running two SGI SW1600s flatscreens. Funny enough I haven't had any "PCI too slow" errors, except from Scope when I start up PT sometimes. I'm running a very clean OS 9.2.2 and use only ProTools. After I've installed the Scope board I can feel the Mac is under more pressure so I use very little softsynth and RTAS/HTDM. But with the Scope I have all the funk I need besides ProTools. Unfortunately, there's no internal audio link between the two systems possible (PT does not support ASIO or VST), so I'm just taking 8 ADAT channels between the Scope card and the 192 interface. MIDI is running via OMS but it's a drag since the Scope program has be running at all times or OMS gets mad!
But while everything is working OK, I'm not so happy about having PT and Scope in the same machine. It crashes a little more often and seems a little stressed. At the same time I've seen the benefits of two computers at a friend of mine, so I've decided to get a PeeeEEE-CeeeeEEE!!! to run Scope side by side with my Mac. This way I can run all sort of funky stuff on the PC without having to worry about f**cking up my Mac. Also, since the Mac platform is going to change a lot over the next year with OS X, I can compensate for the lack of funky OS X stuff by moving things over to the PC and just use the Mac for ProTools.
To complete the system I've bought a Gefen DVI switcher so I still only have one keyboard and mouse for both computers. My left SGI is also switchable between the Mac and the PC...
Finally, although putting PT HD and Scope/SP in the same computer has been working for me, I would like to warn that one could have a lot of problems and this setup isn't Digi approved at all. Also, because of the strain on the system I would feel happy about running Logic or anything like that, let alone trying to run multiple audio drivers, ESXs, VST, ESB, TDM and all sorts of stuff even if it would be paradise, 'cause there are to many snakes involved!
Until now I've had PT HD 3 and Scope/SP together in a Mac QS 733 with a GeForce 4 Ti card running two SGI SW1600s flatscreens. Funny enough I haven't had any "PCI too slow" errors, except from Scope when I start up PT sometimes. I'm running a very clean OS 9.2.2 and use only ProTools. After I've installed the Scope board I can feel the Mac is under more pressure so I use very little softsynth and RTAS/HTDM. But with the Scope I have all the funk I need besides ProTools. Unfortunately, there's no internal audio link between the two systems possible (PT does not support ASIO or VST), so I'm just taking 8 ADAT channels between the Scope card and the 192 interface. MIDI is running via OMS but it's a drag since the Scope program has be running at all times or OMS gets mad!
But while everything is working OK, I'm not so happy about having PT and Scope in the same machine. It crashes a little more often and seems a little stressed. At the same time I've seen the benefits of two computers at a friend of mine, so I've decided to get a PeeeEEE-CeeeeEEE!!! to run Scope side by side with my Mac. This way I can run all sort of funky stuff on the PC without having to worry about f**cking up my Mac. Also, since the Mac platform is going to change a lot over the next year with OS X, I can compensate for the lack of funky OS X stuff by moving things over to the PC and just use the Mac for ProTools.
To complete the system I've bought a Gefen DVI switcher so I still only have one keyboard and mouse for both computers. My left SGI is also switchable between the Mac and the PC...
Finally, although putting PT HD and Scope/SP in the same computer has been working for me, I would like to warn that one could have a lot of problems and this setup isn't Digi approved at all. Also, because of the strain on the system I would feel happy about running Logic or anything like that, let alone trying to run multiple audio drivers, ESXs, VST, ESB, TDM and all sorts of stuff even if it would be paradise, 'cause there are to many snakes involved!
Unfortunately, there's no software that does it all. Any program sucks if one use it for the wrong thing or doesn't know how to operate it properly and there are issues such as stability and compability to consider. I've been using a number of different audio programs on Atari, Mac and PC and have a company that gives advice on how to best invest in audio computing equipment. My job would be a lot easier if it wasn't such a jungle out there. But then again: it's in the jungle that one finds all the interesting plants!