Vegas vs protools and digi 002RACK vs Q10

scottshackrock wrote on 3/28/2005, 8:43 AM

So I dont know here...I'm not fully happy with my Q10 at the moment. I keep hearing a recording that is done on digidesign stuff (withere the mbox or the 002 / rack), and it's just got that space and clarity that isn't on my stuff. I even did some stuff myself with the Mbox at a buddies house. Hardley mixed the stuff at all, and it almost still sounded better...(almost).
Well.....I mean it sounded how it should have - sounded like higher quality equipment, and much worse mixing.
haha

anyway, am I just imagining this?! or does this REALLY seem to be the case? I gotta be sure before I cough up ANOTHER 400 to switch my Q10 with an 002rack....

and....

KNOWN INCOMPATABILITIES:
*Computers with motherboards containing SiS (Silicon Integrated Systems) chipsets
*AMD K6, K6-2 or K6-III, K7 processor based computers (newer AMD Athlon XP and AMD Athlon Thunderbird processors are supported)

Here's my computer, is this ok? haha.
-ASUS A7V333 KT333 MB W/ ATA133, USB 2.0, 5.1 AUDIO
-AMD Athlon® XP-2000+ Processor AS22

and one more thing...this one more about protools le vs. vegas.

So protools is in it's own little world really..right? can I use my DX plugins with it? VST?

I've read a lot of places that the 002 and 002rack have a lot of trouble working smoothly with any other ASIO applications (once you install the digidesign ASIO driver)....

Back to post

Comments

PipelineAudio wrote on 4/16/2005, 12:16 PM

scott, if you can solder there are some things you can do to really clean up for cheap. Also though Joe D's advice was presented somewhat meanly, there is a point to it. I heard an album done with Midiman Delta 1010's and 57's as the only mic and it kicked ass, but it was in the hands of someone who could probably whip my ass with a tascam 4 track cassette

jaydeeee wrote on 4/16/2005, 7:15 PM

>>seriously, for being 19 and having a little home studio, and being in school, $500 is a lot of money. for most people, that's a huge amount of money.<<

It's not the converters. I don't care how much you've thought about it. So again my point is (and others have said this as well in countless other posts) - save the $ and build on it, then get some decent pre's.
Add to this some decent mics (another post).
Sounds like you have a passable room to work with (true? or no?).

Other than that, if you want an answer for $500.00 right now forget it.
Your soul would be better off donating it, rather than wasting it.
If i can send one tip in life it's do things right the 1st time around whenever possible to solve a problem. Save your $, buy what's needed when it's needed.

adowrx wrote on 4/16/2005, 7:38 PM

57's as the only mic and it kicked ass, but it was in the hands of someone who could probably whip my ass with a tascam 4 track cassette

Actually, the sm 57 is really and undeniably the ONLY microphone anyone needs. In a blind test with comparable preamps and monitors, it'll work for 99 out of 100 situations. Jeff Baxter once did a clinic @ Berklee in the late '80's when I was there, and we had access to B & K, Nuemann, etc..............and the one thing he couldn't stress MORE was the only mic you need is the sm 57........Now this is not an end all, BUT the older I get and the more I learn the more I realize this is SOUND.

-jb

andyd wrote on 4/17/2005, 5:34 AM

Pro Tools Can Rot in Hell, it's not a good program.
No idea why it is the "Industry standard"
Probably because it was first to market or something.....
Vegas, Cakewalk and Cubase all destroy it in terms
of functionality......and they are not locked to a specific piece
of crappy hardware.

James Young wrote on 4/18/2005, 1:34 PM

... The sm57 is much like protools in the fact that they will both work in 99 out of 100 situations. Does that make them special or neccesary? No.