I Second that!
Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most about
it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own preference,of what
they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I don't like
the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but the ONLY
thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't support VST
Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use them on
everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-ins are
not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get your heart
and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of money
selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With out
midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can get my
ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really hope
you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd buy
4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's cool.

George Ware
Tony Mac
Ron Jones
Billy Townes
Mac Money Studio
and
Shade Records

tad wrote:
>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if Vegas did
>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I miss midi
>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost completely
and
>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has to be
>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price that
SF
>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than any of
the
>>German aps.
>>
>>-Tad
>>
>> >>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>little flat.
>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>what a moron I am ;)

Tad, I'm with you as far as the interface is concerned, less is more.
The problem with Vegas is, you're paying more for less. I'm a
guitarist so I don't do a lot of midi sequencing, but when I do, I
don't want to use one app for my audio, and one for my midi shit.
That just doesn't make any sense, especially when you need all your
tracks at the same time for editing and mixing. Vegas is cool, it's
pretty, it's user friendly, it's powerful at certain things, and it's
too much money.

tad wrote:
>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if Vegas did
>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I miss midi
>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost completely
and
>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has to be
>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price that
SF
>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than any of
the
>>German aps.
>>
>>-Tad
>>
>> >>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>little flat.
>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>what a moron I am ;)

I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier. What
a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt the
most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the most
musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral score)
on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture changes,
and producers who want to try everything and hear it immediately.
Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the PC,
but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.

George Ware wrote:
>>I Second that!
>>Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most about
>>it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own preference,of what
>>they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I don't
like
>>the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but the
ONLY
>>thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't support VST
>>Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
>>Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use them
on
>>everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-ins
are
>>not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get your
heart
>>and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of money
>>selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
>>easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With out
>>midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can get my
>>ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really hope
>>you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd buy
>>4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's cool.
>>
>>George Ware
>>Tony Mac
>>Ron Jones
>>Billy Townes
>>Mac Money Studio
>>and
>>Shade Records
>>
>>tad wrote:
>>>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if Vegas
did
>>>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I miss
midi
>>>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost completely
>>and
>>>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has to
be
>>>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price that
>>SF
>>>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than any of
>>the
>>>>German aps.
>>>>
>>>>-Tad
>>>>
>>>> >>>>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>>>
>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>>>little flat.
>>>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>>>what a moron I am ;)

What? Pro Tools is intuitive? Give me a break! I'm certainly not
going to say Pro Tools sucks, because that would be rediculous, and
it's been around A LOT longer. BUT, how can you call Pro Tools
intuitive? I haven't seen 5.0, but everything prior to it is a pain
in the butt. Crossfades, for one, are a pain in the ass. Naming
conventions are annoying, as well as the clutter in the bins. File
format support? a joke. Speed? also a joke. Granted, it's stable once
you can figure out what computer it's compatible with, what hard
drives it supports, and what operating system it supports. Talk about
inflexible! Also, unless you're doing only 2 track recording, you
have to spend about ten times the cost of Vegas to do anything.
That's the beauty of PC software, especially when it's well written
and stable like SF's. Any hardware that works in the operating system
is ok. Hard drive support? Anything goes. Multimedia, Sonic rules on
this for file support and Internet delivery. How about instant
changing of project sample rate and being able to mix and match any
format on a track in REALTIME. How about unlimited tracks? How about
the amazing new edit tools in 2.0 (alt-drag in an event, plus
variations of that)?

Ok, Vegas still needs work on it's post-production for video side.
They're weak on the external monitor support, they're weak still on
sync and the file-management still could use some improvements.
Overall, though, for the money, Vegas is outstanding. No clutter.
Just an intuitive, robust environment for the multitracking audio
(and now video) professional.

Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
What
>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt
the
>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the
most
>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
score)
>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
changes,
>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it immediately.
>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the PC,
>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.
>>
>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>I Second that!
>>>>Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most about
>>>>it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own preference,of
what
>>>>they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I don't
>>like
>>>>the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but the
>>ONLY
>>>>thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't support
VST
>>>>Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
>>>>Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use
them
>>on
>>>>everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-ins
>>are
>>>>not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get your
>>heart
>>>>and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of money
>>>>selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
>>>>easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With out
>>>>midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can get
my
>>>>ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really
hope
>>>>you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd buy
>>>>4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's cool.
>>>>
>>>>George Ware
>>>>Tony Mac
>>>>Ron Jones
>>>>Billy Townes
>>>>Mac Money Studio
>>>>and
>>>>Shade Records
>>>>
>>>>tad wrote:
>>>>>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if Vegas
>>did
>>>>>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I miss
>>midi
>>>>>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost
completely
>>>>and
>>>>>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has
to
>>be
>>>>>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price
that
>>>>SF
>>>>>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than any
of
>>>>the
>>>>>>German aps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-Tad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>>>>>little flat.
>>>>>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>>>>>what a moron I am ;)

Well, I guess you sure told me. Too bad it's all bullshit.

Charles de Montebello wrote:
>>What? Pro Tools is intuitive? Give me a break! I'm certainly not
>>going to say Pro Tools sucks, because that would be rediculous, and
>>it's been around A LOT longer. BUT, how can you call Pro Tools
>>intuitive? I haven't seen 5.0, but everything prior to it is a pain
>>in the butt. Crossfades, for one, are a pain in the ass. Naming
>>conventions are annoying, as well as the clutter in the bins. File
>>format support? a joke. Speed? also a joke. Granted, it's stable
once
>>you can figure out what computer it's compatible with, what hard
>>drives it supports, and what operating system it supports. Talk
about
>>inflexible! Also, unless you're doing only 2 track recording, you
>>have to spend about ten times the cost of Vegas to do anything.
>>That's the beauty of PC software, especially when it's well written
>>and stable like SF's. Any hardware that works in the operating
system
>>is ok. Hard drive support? Anything goes. Multimedia, Sonic rules
on
>>this for file support and Internet delivery. How about instant
>>changing of project sample rate and being able to mix and match any
>>format on a track in REALTIME. How about unlimited tracks? How
about
>>the amazing new edit tools in 2.0 (alt-drag in an event, plus
>>variations of that)?
>>
>>Ok, Vegas still needs work on it's post-production for video side.
>>They're weak on the external monitor support, they're weak still on
>>sync and the file-management still could use some improvements.
>>Overall, though, for the money, Vegas is outstanding. No clutter.
>>Just an intuitive, robust environment for the multitracking audio
>>(and now video) professional.
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
>>What
>>>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
>>>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt
>>the
>>>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the
>>most
>>>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
>>score)
>>>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
>>changes,
>>>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it
immediately.
>>>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the
PC,
>>>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.
>>>>
>>>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>>>I Second that!
>>>>>>Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most
about
>>>>>>it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own preference,of
>>what
>>>>>>they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I
don't
>>>>like
>>>>>>the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but
the
>>>>ONLY
>>>>>>thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't support
>>VST
>>>>>>Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the
Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
>>>>>>Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use
>>them
>>>>on
>>>>>>everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-
ins
>>>>are
>>>>>>not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get your
>>>>heart
>>>>>>and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of
money
>>>>>>selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
>>>>>>easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With
out
>>>>>>midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can
get
>>my
>>>>>>ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really
>>hope
>>>>>>you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd buy
>>>>>>4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's
cool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>George Ware
>>>>>>Tony Mac
>>>>>>Ron Jones
>>>>>>Billy Townes
>>>>>>Mac Money Studio
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>Shade Records
>>>>>>
>>>>>>tad wrote:
>>>>>>>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if
Vegas
>>>>did
>>>>>>>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I
miss
>>>>midi
>>>>>>>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost
>>completely
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has
>>to
>>>>be
>>>>>>>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price
>>that
>>>>>>SF
>>>>>>>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than
any
>>of
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>German aps.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>-Tad
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>>>>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>>>>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>>>>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>>>>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>>>>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>>>>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>>>>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>>>>>>>little flat.
>>>>>>>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>>>>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>>>>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>>>>>>>what a moron I am ;)

I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".

Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical" thing
you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.

Thanks
Peter


Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
What
>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt
the
>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the
most
>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
score)
>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
changes,
>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it immediately.
>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the PC,
>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.
>>
>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>I Second that!
>>>>Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most about
>>>>it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own preference,of
what
>>>>they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I don't
>>like
>>>>the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but the
>>ONLY
>>>>thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't support
VST
>>>>Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
>>>>Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use
them
>>on
>>>>everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-ins
>>are
>>>>not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get your
>>heart
>>>>and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of money
>>>>selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
>>>>easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With out
>>>>midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can get
my
>>>>ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really
hope
>>>>you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd buy
>>>>4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's cool.
>>>>
>>>>George Ware
>>>>Tony Mac
>>>>Ron Jones
>>>>Billy Townes
>>>>Mac Money Studio
>>>>and
>>>>Shade Records
>>>>
>>>>tad wrote:
>>>>>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if Vegas
>>did
>>>>>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I miss
>>midi
>>>>>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost
completely
>>>>and
>>>>>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has
to
>>be
>>>>>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price
that
>>>>SF
>>>>>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than any
of
>>>>the
>>>>>>German aps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-Tad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>>>>>little flat.
>>>>>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>>>>>what a moron I am ;)

Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider Pro
Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to do
with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools.
Speaking of which, watch GEPPETTO on ABC Sunday night. I normally
wouldn't suggest anyone subject themselves to something like this,
but It's an example of a nightmare gig (a musical) that would have
been next to impossible without Pro Tools. An obscene number of cues
(underscore and song), hundreds of takes, 60 piece orchestra, 3
stages (mix and scoring), an army of Disney suits and bean counters,
primadona composers, several editors (of which I was one), at least
one Actor who couldn't sing to save his life, no time, no money, and
mass confusion. And worst of all, constant changes. UGH!
Let me know I it's possible to get another demo and I'll give it my
best evaluation. Thanks,
Bruce

Peter Haller wrote:
>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>
>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical" thing
>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>
>>Thanks
>>Peter

You don't even own Vegas?

"Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider Pro
Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to do
with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools."

If Pro Tools is all the things you claim,Why are you bothering with
Vegas? Bumming a nother demo? No one is saying Pro Tools is bad.I am
saying it works VERY well for me. All the leaps and bounds you talk
about were done on Mac's! This is not a PT bashing session but if you
feel that strong about PT why are you here?

George Ware


Bruce Swanson wrote:
>> Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider Pro
>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to do
>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools.
>>Speaking of which, watch GEPPETTO on ABC Sunday night. I normally
>>wouldn't suggest anyone subject themselves to something like this,
>>but It's an example of a nightmare gig (a musical) that would have
>>been next to impossible without Pro Tools. An obscene number of
cues
>>(underscore and song), hundreds of takes, 60 piece orchestra, 3
>>stages (mix and scoring), an army of Disney suits and bean
counters,
>>primadona composers, several editors (of which I was one), at least
>>one Actor who couldn't sing to save his life, no time, no money,
and
>>mass confusion. And worst of all, constant changes. UGH!
>> Let me know I it's possible to get another demo and I'll give it
my
>>best evaluation. Thanks,
>>Bruce
>>
>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>>>
>>>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical"
thing
>>>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>Peter
>>

You could download the Vegas Video beta. It is basically Vegas Audio
with a NLE Video tool. It has all the features of Vegas Pro and then
some. I believe the beta runs through end of June.

I guess my question is if you state that Vegas is not musical, this
implies that you have used Vegas before. (I really assumed you were a
licensed user considering you major bashing of Vegas.)

Anyway, I leave it to you....

Peter



Bruce Swanson wrote:
>> Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider Pro
>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to do
>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools.
>>Speaking of which, watch GEPPETTO on ABC Sunday night. I normally
>>wouldn't suggest anyone subject themselves to something like this,
>>but It's an example of a nightmare gig (a musical) that would have
>>been next to impossible without Pro Tools. An obscene number of
cues
>>(underscore and song), hundreds of takes, 60 piece orchestra, 3
>>stages (mix and scoring), an army of Disney suits and bean
counters,
>>primadona composers, several editors (of which I was one), at least
>>one Actor who couldn't sing to save his life, no time, no money,
and
>>mass confusion. And worst of all, constant changes. UGH!
>> Let me know I it's possible to get another demo and I'll give it
my
>>best evaluation. Thanks,
>>Bruce
>>
>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>>>
>>>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical"
thing
>>>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>Peter
>>

It's funny that... for years all my musician friends had Macs and
swore by them. They'd never think of using a PC for ANYTHING, let
alone music. I, always had PCs, probably because I dug the games ;)
By the time I started recording my stuff digitally, I already had
lots of PC hardware and software. I thought It was cool. When I
started working as an editor in post, I was introduced to Pro Tools.
I couldn't believe it, compared to what I was used to on the PC side
of the fence, it was like getting out of a straight jacket. I've
worked on a lot of shows, and I can't imagine doing that work on any
PC software, I've seen. However, I still have quite a bit of PC gear
in my home project studio. I have a keen interest in Sonic Foundry, I
think they're an excellent company. ACID is GREAT, it's the kind of
product that makes Mac-only fanatics cry.
There you go, now you know my whole pathetic life story. And, no I'm
not trying to bum another demo. Matter of fact, I want these guys to
give me an unrestricted version of 2.0 so I can help them make it
more sweet:)

P.S. ever think of starting a software company called Georgeware?

George Ware wrote:
>>You don't even own Vegas?
>>
>>"Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider Pro
>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to do
>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools."
>>
>>If Pro Tools is all the things you claim,Why are you bothering with
>>Vegas? Bumming a nother demo? No one is saying Pro Tools is bad.I
am
>>saying it works VERY well for me. All the leaps and bounds you talk
>>about were done on Mac's! This is not a PT bashing session but if
you
>>feel that strong about PT why are you here?
>>
>>George Ware
>>
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>> Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider
Pro
>>>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
>>>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to
do
>>>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools.
>>>>Speaking of which, watch GEPPETTO on ABC Sunday night. I normally
>>>>wouldn't suggest anyone subject themselves to something like
this,
>>>>but It's an example of a nightmare gig (a musical) that would
have
>>>>been next to impossible without Pro Tools. An obscene number of
>>cues
>>>>(underscore and song), hundreds of takes, 60 piece orchestra, 3
>>>>stages (mix and scoring), an army of Disney suits and bean
>>counters,
>>>>primadona composers, several editors (of which I was one), at
least
>>>>one Actor who couldn't sing to save his life, no time, no money,
>>and
>>>>mass confusion. And worst of all, constant changes. UGH!
>>>> Let me know I it's possible to get another demo and I'll give it
>>my
>>>>best evaluation. Thanks,
>>>>Bruce
>>>>
>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical"
>>thing
>>>>>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>Peter
>>>>

I don't need to start my own company
Sonic Foundry makes great software for windows.And you do not get the
POINT! PT works for You Cool,I had PT Mix, but Vegas works for me.
George Ware


Bruce Swanson wrote:
>> It's funny that... for years all my musician friends had Macs and
>>swore by them. They'd never think of using a PC for ANYTHING, let
>>alone music. I, always had PCs, probably because I dug the games ;)
>>By the time I started recording my stuff digitally, I already had
>>lots of PC hardware and software. I thought It was cool. When I
>>started working as an editor in post, I was introduced to Pro
Tools.
>>I couldn't believe it, compared to what I was used to on the PC
side
>>of the fence, it was like getting out of a straight jacket. I've
>>worked on a lot of shows, and I can't imagine doing that work on
any
>>PC software, I've seen. However, I still have quite a bit of PC
gear
>>in my home project studio. I have a keen interest in Sonic Foundry,
I
>>think they're an excellent company. ACID is GREAT, it's the kind of
>>product that makes Mac-only fanatics cry.
>> There you go, now you know my whole pathetic life story. And, no
I'm
>>not trying to bum another demo. Matter of fact, I want these guys
to
>>give me an unrestricted version of 2.0 so I can help them make it
>>more sweet:)
>>
>>P.S. ever think of starting a software company called Georgeware?
>>
>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>You don't even own Vegas?
>>>>
>>>>"Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider
Pro
>>>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas demo
>>>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt to
do
>>>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools."
>>>>
>>>>If Pro Tools is all the things you claim,Why are you bothering
with
>>>>Vegas? Bumming a nother demo? No one is saying Pro Tools is bad.I
>>am
>>>>saying it works VERY well for me. All the leaps and bounds you
talk
>>>>about were done on Mac's! This is not a PT bashing session but if
>>you
>>>>feel that strong about PT why are you here?
>>>>
>>>>George Ware
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>> Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider
>>Pro
>>>>>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas
demo
>>>>>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt
to
>>do
>>>>>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools.
>>>>>>Speaking of which, watch GEPPETTO on ABC Sunday night. I
normally
>>>>>>wouldn't suggest anyone subject themselves to something like
>>this,
>>>>>>but It's an example of a nightmare gig (a musical) that would
>>have
>>>>>>been next to impossible without Pro Tools. An obscene number of
>>>>cues
>>>>>>(underscore and song), hundreds of takes, 60 piece orchestra, 3
>>>>>>stages (mix and scoring), an army of Disney suits and bean
>>>>counters,
>>>>>>primadona composers, several editors (of which I was one), at
>>least
>>>>>>one Actor who couldn't sing to save his life, no time, no
money,
>>>>and
>>>>>>mass confusion. And worst of all, constant changes. UGH!
>>>>>> Let me know I it's possible to get another demo and I'll give
it
>>>>my
>>>>>>best evaluation. Thanks,
>>>>>>Bruce
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical"
>>>>thing
>>>>>>>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>

I would say it is totally depending on what you do with the programms
and what programms you can afford.
I use vegas since sept 99 and i have done several gospel-music
productions with vegas; and there we had about 60 tracks with alot of
plugins on tracks and about 8 busses and 6 auxes it was no problem
to have it "musically" produced.
if you want to here something from these productions i can send it
to my e-mail: walter.till@crossnet.at
i'm very intrested in the products from you Bruce
thank you and have a nice weekend
walter

George Ware wrote:
>>I don't need to start my own company
>>Sonic Foundry makes great software for windows.And you do not get
the
>>POINT! PT works for You Cool,I had PT Mix, but Vegas works for me.
>>George Ware
>>
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>> It's funny that... for years all my musician friends had Macs
and
>>>>swore by them. They'd never think of using a PC for ANYTHING, let
>>>>alone music. I, always had PCs, probably because I dug the
games ;)
>>>>By the time I started recording my stuff digitally, I already had
>>>>lots of PC hardware and software. I thought It was cool. When I
>>>>started working as an editor in post, I was introduced to Pro
>>Tools.
>>>>I couldn't believe it, compared to what I was used to on the PC
>>side
>>>>of the fence, it was like getting out of a straight jacket. I've
>>>>worked on a lot of shows, and I can't imagine doing that work on
>>any
>>>>PC software, I've seen. However, I still have quite a bit of PC
>>gear
>>>>in my home project studio. I have a keen interest in Sonic
Foundry,
>>I
>>>>think they're an excellent company. ACID is GREAT, it's the kind
of
>>>>product that makes Mac-only fanatics cry.
>>>> There you go, now you know my whole pathetic life story. And, no
>>I'm
>>>>not trying to bum another demo. Matter of fact, I want these guys
>>to
>>>>give me an unrestricted version of 2.0 so I can help them make it
>>>>more sweet:)
>>>>
>>>>P.S. ever think of starting a software company called Georgeware?
>>>>
>>>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>>>You don't even own Vegas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I consider
>>Pro
>>>>>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas
demo
>>>>>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt
to
>>do
>>>>>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If Pro Tools is all the things you claim,Why are you bothering
>>with
>>>>>>Vegas? Bumming a nother demo? No one is saying Pro Tools is
bad.I
>>>>am
>>>>>>saying it works VERY well for me. All the leaps and bounds you
>>talk
>>>>>>about were done on Mac's! This is not a PT bashing session but
if
>>>>you
>>>>>>feel that strong about PT why are you here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>George Ware
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>>> Peter, I'd be glad to give you some examples of why I
consider
>>>>Pro
>>>>>>>>Tools musical, but to be accurate, I'd need to get the Vegas
>>demo
>>>>>>>>again for comparison. If I get the demo (can I?) I'll attempt
>>to
>>>>do
>>>>>>>>with Vegas some of the things I do regularly with Pro tools.
>>>>>>>>Speaking of which, watch GEPPETTO on ABC Sunday night. I
>>normally
>>>>>>>>wouldn't suggest anyone subject themselves to something like
>>>>this,
>>>>>>>>but It's an example of a nightmare gig (a musical) that would
>>>>have
>>>>>>>>been next to impossible without Pro Tools. An obscene number
of
>>>>>>cues
>>>>>>>>(underscore and song), hundreds of takes, 60 piece orchestra,
3
>>>>>>>>stages (mix and scoring), an army of Disney suits and bean
>>>>>>counters,
>>>>>>>>primadona composers, several editors (of which I was one), at
>>>>least
>>>>>>>>one Actor who couldn't sing to save his life, no time, no
>>money,
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>mass confusion. And worst of all, constant changes. UGH!
>>>>>>>> Let me know I it's possible to get another demo and I'll
give
>>it
>>>>>>my
>>>>>>>>best evaluation. Thanks,
>>>>>>>>Bruce
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of
a "musical"
>>>>>>thing
>>>>>>>>>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great
too.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>>>

You crack fiend.

The Pro Tools software is a joke. It's a rip off of OSC's deck (in
fact, it was originally written by OSC back in the day). Digi has
been doing patch jobs on it ever since. 5.0 was a huge disappointment
to many Pro Tools users, including the greats like Teddy Riley and
Steve "Silk" Hurley who swore by 4.x.

Now, the strength of PT is it's hardware. HARDWARE.

With that, comes the cost of Pro Tools ... $15,000 will *maybe* get
you started (and as you know, or do you, that just gets us what goes
into the computer).

Vegas is good at what it does. It's not the best, but to say PT is
the most intuitive piece of software you've ever used sure does show
us how limited your experience is.

I guess I'm one of the few people that accept Vegas for what it is. A
1.0 release of audio software that will do everything it's advertised
to do. Yes, it's in no way perfect, yes it does not have MIDI support
(which I have no use for anyway), but what it does do is provide very
decent multi-track audio on a WIDE variety of systems (wider than
*ANYTHING* out there - save Cool Edit Pro).

A.) Can you deny that?

B.) Can Pro Tools do that?

Answer key:
A: No.
B: No.

I used to be a Mac lover too ... hell, I used to be an Atari lover.
I'm not saying that PC is better, but I sure as hell am not going to
suggest taht Mac is better. The Mac lost it's advantage in audio. And
after Mac users were abandoned by Apple awhile back (yes they were) I
could care less if they succeed or fail.

Couple that with the supposed innovation of the Macintosh audio
companies: Digidesign (what, is Sound Designer II even being patched
to work with new systems?), BIAS-Inc (when's Deck III coming out?),
Steinberg (we live only to support ASIO nothing else); how can you
say *all* PC music software is weak.

Maybe it's you, the user.

Group hug!

Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
What
>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt
the
>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the
most
>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
score)
>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
changes,
>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it immediately.
>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the PC,
>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.

Listen, there's no doubt Pro Tools has it's share of problems. It
isn't the "end-all", and it's not the only game in town, but let's
get real. Most "professional" studios, mastering houses, and
practically all of post production use it on a daily basis. Some of
your favorite CDs have been tracked and/or mastered with it, and
virtually all of your favorite movies and television (in the last 10
yrs.) have had all or part of their sound cut with it. How could that
be if "The Pro Tools software is a joke", as you say? I've worked in
both music production and post production for some time. Some of my
recent "limited" experience includes being the FX editor on the first
season of the Sopranos, and cutting sound on Buffy the Vampire Slayer
(that's in-between bowls of crack of course). Even more disturbing
than your feeble comments, is the fact that Sonic Foundry themselves,
can't seem to distinguish between Vegas and Pro tools, in terms of
power and utility. Vegas is easy because it's "dumbed down" for semi-
professionals and multimedia authors. Vegas is a good, albiet limited
product. It only seems like I'm bashing Vegas because I respond to
the absurd comparison between Vegas and Pro Tools. When everyone
switches over to Vegas I'll concede your vast experience, until then,
piss off!
:)

Peter Ramos wrote:
>>You crack fiend.
>>
>>The Pro Tools software is a joke. It's a rip off of OSC's deck (in
>>fact, it was originally written by OSC back in the day). Digi has
>>been doing patch jobs on it ever since. 5.0 was a huge
disappointment
>>to many Pro Tools users, including the greats like Teddy Riley and
>>Steve "Silk" Hurley who swore by 4.x.
>>
>>Now, the strength of PT is it's hardware. HARDWARE.
>>
>>With that, comes the cost of Pro Tools ... $15,000 will *maybe* get
>>you started (and as you know, or do you, that just gets us what
goes
>>into the computer).
>>
>>Vegas is good at what it does. It's not the best, but to say PT is
>>the most intuitive piece of software you've ever used sure does
show
>>us how limited your experience is.
>>
>>I guess I'm one of the few people that accept Vegas for what it is.
A
>>1.0 release of audio software that will do everything it's
advertised
>>to do. Yes, it's in no way perfect, yes it does not have MIDI
support
>>(which I have no use for anyway), but what it does do is provide
very
>>decent multi-track audio on a WIDE variety of systems (wider than
>>*ANYTHING* out there - save Cool Edit Pro).
>>
>>A.) Can you deny that?
>>
>>B.) Can Pro Tools do that?
>>
>>Answer key:
>>A: No.
>>B: No.
>>
>>I used to be a Mac lover too ... hell, I used to be an Atari lover.
>>I'm not saying that PC is better, but I sure as hell am not going
to
>>suggest taht Mac is better. The Mac lost it's advantage in audio.
And
>>after Mac users were abandoned by Apple awhile back (yes they were)
I
>>could care less if they succeed or fail.
>>
>>Couple that with the supposed innovation of the Macintosh audio
>>companies: Digidesign (what, is Sound Designer II even being
patched
>>to work with new systems?), BIAS-Inc (when's Deck III coming out?),
>>Steinberg (we live only to support ASIO nothing else); how can you
>>say *all* PC music software is weak.
>>
>>Maybe it's you, the user.
>>
>>Group hug!
>>

I LIKE PRO TOOLS
I LIKE VEGAS
I LIKE PRO TOOLS
I LIKE VEGAS
I LIKE PRO TOOLS
I LIKE VEGAS
I LIKE PRO TOOLS

Isn't this thread dead?

-Tad

Peter Ramos wrote:
>>You crack fiend.
>>
>>The Pro Tools software is a joke. It's a rip off of OSC's deck (in
>>fact, it was originally written by OSC back in the day). Digi has
>>been doing patch jobs on it ever since. 5.0 was a huge
disappointment
>>to many Pro Tools users, including the greats like Teddy Riley and
>>Steve "Silk" Hurley who swore by 4.x.
>>
>>Now, the strength of PT is it's hardware. HARDWARE.
>>
>>With that, comes the cost of Pro Tools ... $15,000 will *maybe* get
>>you started (and as you know, or do you, that just gets us what goes
>>into the computer).
>>
>>Vegas is good at what it does. It's not the best, but to say PT is
>>the most intuitive piece of software you've ever used sure does show
>>us how limited your experience is.
>>
>>I guess I'm one of the few people that accept Vegas for what it is.
A
>>1.0 release of audio software that will do everything it's
advertised
>>to do. Yes, it's in no way perfect, yes it does not have MIDI
support
>>(which I have no use for anyway), but what it does do is provide
very
>>decent multi-track audio on a WIDE variety of systems (wider than
>>*ANYTHING* out there - save Cool Edit Pro).
>>
>>A.) Can you deny that?
>>
>>B.) Can Pro Tools do that?
>>
>>Answer key:
>>A: No.
>>B: No.
>>
>>I used to be a Mac lover too ... hell, I used to be an Atari lover.
>>I'm not saying that PC is better, but I sure as hell am not going to
>>suggest taht Mac is better. The Mac lost it's advantage in audio.
And
>>after Mac users were abandoned by Apple awhile back (yes they were)
I
>>could care less if they succeed or fail.
>>
>>Couple that with the supposed innovation of the Macintosh audio
>>companies: Digidesign (what, is Sound Designer II even being patched
>>to work with new systems?), BIAS-Inc (when's Deck III coming out?),
>>Steinberg (we live only to support ASIO nothing else); how can you
>>say *all* PC music software is weak.
>>
>>Maybe it's you, the user.
>>
>>Group hug!
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
>>What
>>>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
>>>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt
>>the
>>>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the
>>most
>>>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
>>score)
>>>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
>>changes,
>>>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it immediately.

>>>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the PC,
>>>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.
>>

For me, because of it's simplicity, I find that I can think less of
the software program that I'm using and just concentrate on the track
at hand. That, to me, is musical. Less setup. Far more stress free
than Cubase audio, which I switched from.

I have my gripes, but unless Nuendo can blow Vegas away, I'll take my
chances with what I have.

Peter Haller wrote:
>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>
>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical" thing
>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>
>>Thanks
>>Peter
>>
>>
>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
>>What
>>>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a Pro
>>>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a doubt
>>the
>>>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also the
>>most
>>>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
>>score)
>>>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
>>changes,
>>>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it
immediately.
>>>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the
PC,
>>>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.
>>>>
>>>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>>>I Second that!
>>>>>>Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most
about
>>>>>>it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own preference,of
>>what
>>>>>>they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I
don't
>>>>like
>>>>>>the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but
the
>>>>ONLY
>>>>>>thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't support
>>VST
>>>>>>Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the
Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
>>>>>>Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use
>>them
>>>>on
>>>>>>everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-
ins
>>>>are
>>>>>>not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get your
>>>>heart
>>>>>>and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of
money
>>>>>>selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
>>>>>>easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With
out
>>>>>>midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can
get
>>my
>>>>>>ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really
>>hope
>>>>>>you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd buy
>>>>>>4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's
cool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>George Ware
>>>>>>Tony Mac
>>>>>>Ron Jones
>>>>>>Billy Townes
>>>>>>Mac Money Studio
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>Shade Records
>>>>>>
>>>>>>tad wrote:
>>>>>>>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if
Vegas
>>>>did
>>>>>>>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I
miss
>>>>midi
>>>>>>>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost
>>completely
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it has
>>to
>>>>be
>>>>>>>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the price
>>that
>>>>>>SF
>>>>>>>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than
any
>>of
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>German aps.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>-Tad
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>>>>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>>>>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>>>>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar to
>>>>>>>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>>>>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that inspires
>>>>>>>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>>>>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>>>>>>>little flat.
>>>>>>>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but it's
>>>>>>>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower price
>>>>>>>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell me
>>>>>>>>>>what a moron I am ;)

Sorry, at the time I wrote my previous post, I didn't realize the
post was so long. This thread is long enough.

Peace

Thomas Kay wrote:
>>For me, because of it's simplicity, I find that I can think less of
>>the software program that I'm using and just concentrate on the
track
>>at hand. That, to me, is musical. Less setup. Far more stress free
>>than Cubase audio, which I switched from.
>>
>>I have my gripes, but unless Nuendo can blow Vegas away, I'll take
my
>>chances with what I have.
>>
>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>I have heard this a lot. "Vegas is not musical".
>>>>
>>>>Please, define/explain this for me. An example of a "musical"
thing
>>>>you can do in PT and why Vegas can't do it would be great too.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>I love the way people say Vegas is like Pro Tools, only easier.
>>>>What
>>>>>>a joke! Vegas can't come close to the power and utility of a
Pro
>>>>>>Tools system. Not by a country mile. Pro tools is without a
doubt
>>>>the
>>>>>>most intuitive piece of software I have ever used. It's also
the
>>>>most
>>>>>>musical. Try cutting lots of complex music (like an orchestral
>>>>score)
>>>>>>on a dub stage, with Vegas (good luck). Try it with picture
>>>>changes,
>>>>>>and producers who want to try everything and hear it
>>immediately.
>>>>>>Vegas may be one of the better multitrack audio editors on the
>>PC,
>>>>>>but that's not saying much, most PC music software is weak.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>George Ware wrote:
>>>>>>>>I Second that!
>>>>>>>>Vegas may not have midi,Thats one of the things I like most
>>about
>>>>>>>>it,We run now 4 studio's each person has his own
preference,of
>>>>what
>>>>>>>>they like ie.Cakewalk Pro 8,Cubase VST/24,Logic Platinum.I
>>don't
>>>>>>like
>>>>>>>>the audio on any of these,too much work.We have them all but
>>the
>>>>>>ONLY
>>>>>>>>thing we will track audio with is Vegas,Yea it doesn't
support
>>>>VST
>>>>>>>>Plug ins I don't use them anyway.I like the
>>Waves,Timeworks,Sonic
>>>>>>>>Foundry,Cakewalk,Steinberg and Hyperprism stuff.And I can use
>>>>them
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>>everything that we have in the other studio's. No these plug-
>>ins
>>>>>>are
>>>>>>>>not free you get what you pay for.I've found what ever get
your
>>>>>>heart
>>>>>>>>and soul pumping go for it.I gave up Pro Tools lost alot of
>>money
>>>>>>>>selling it to a friend.Who's asking said man Vegas is so much
>>>>>>>>easer.Its a good system but I am much happier with Vegas.With
>>out
>>>>>>>>midi or VST its made me a lot of $ and the most of all I can
>>get
>>>>my
>>>>>>>>ideas down with out thinking about what I have to do.I really
>>>>hope
>>>>>>>>you find this in what ever program or hardware you use.I'd
buy
>>>>>>>>4ea.Vegas systems all over again.Good luck with Cubase it's
>>cool.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>George Ware
>>>>>>>>Tony Mac
>>>>>>>>Ron Jones
>>>>>>>>Billy Townes
>>>>>>>>Mac Money Studio
>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>Shade Records
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>tad wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>I agree with the open plugin aspect of your argument, if
>>Vegas
>>>>>>did
>>>>>>>>>>VST plugins I would be a happy camper. I can't say that I
>>miss
>>>>>>midi
>>>>>>>>>>however, this ancient standard could dissapear almost
>>>>completely
>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>>>it wouldn't bother me. As far as Cubase is concerned, it
has
>>>>to
>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>>>the trashiest program available, I would still pay the
price
>>>>that
>>>>>>>>SF
>>>>>>>>>>asks for Vegas. The user interface is so much better than
>>any
>>>>of
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>German aps.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>-Tad
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>target="external">www.peepstudios.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>As groovy (and potentially great) as Vegas is, I'm not
>>>>>>>>>>>>really sure what it's advantages are over a good audio
>>>>>>>>>>>>sequencer like Cubase. In fact, most audio sequencers
>>>>>>>>>>>>handle both audio AND midi in a mulitrack format similar
to
>>>>>>>>>>>>Vegas, and have fairly extensive editing functions. When
>>>>>>>>>>>>you factor in a robust and OPEN plugin system that
inspires
>>>>>>>>>>>>3rd party innovation, score creation, and in the case of
>>>>>>>>>>>>many sequencers, a much lower price, Vegas leaves me a
>>>>>>>>>>>>little flat.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't get me wrong, what Vegas does, it does good, but
it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>not revolutionary and it's narrow focus fits a lower
price
>>>>>>>>>>>>point. Don't freak, just an opinion. Now y'all can tell
me
>>>>>>>>>>>>what a moron I am ;)

I've owned and operated a sucessful, commercial recording facility
for over 20 years and in the past we, in our particular situation,
have found it more cost effective to rent PT on a project by project
basis, even though we have often done so for weeks at a time.

We certainly use PT when we need the features that it offers, but I
will say this in defense of Vegas Pro; since purchasing VP last
summer we have cut back on the cost of using PT for many of our
clients .. and we feel we have done this without a loss in quality
and without the loss of features that we typically took advantage of
on previous PT projects.

And, very importantly to a commercial facility owner (especially one
who has yet another daughter fast approaching the high dollar college
years), our accounting department informs me that our DAW running VP
has now paid for itself about 17 times over since purchase ... that
kind of return on investment is dear to my heart ... a fact that I
can attribute most DIRECTLY to our use of VP on that machine.

While we use PT for what it does, we also use VP for what it does. As
they say, your mileage may certainly vary, but we are very happy with
VP for what it has done for us, our clients, and both our bottom
lines ... and it has certainly earned a place in our operations.

KAC ...

Bruce Swanson wrote:
>>Listen, there's no doubt Pro Tools has it's share of problems. It
>>isn't the "end-all", and it's not the only game in town, but let's
>>get real. Most "professional" studios, mastering houses, and
>>practically all of post production use it on a daily basis. Some of
>>your favorite CDs have been tracked and/or mastered with it, and
>>virtually all of your favorite movies and television (in the last