LDB AUDIO BLOG

Pro Tools is one of the most revered and highly-compatible audio recording and production software programs on the market.  Most commercial recording studios use it.  Many home-based recording set-ups also emloy this “industry standard” software platform as the center of their DAWs (Digital Audio Workstations).  But, is the program itself inherently “better” than other 24-bit, digital recording solutions on the market?

As an audio professional operating in a major music market, I definitely use Pro Tools in the studio facility that I do most of my recordings in.  To not use, or shoud I say offer, Pro Tools in a commercial setting could be catastrophic, if for nothing but perception alone.  However, I also use other platforms (i.e. Cubase, Sonar, etc.).  The other engineer at our facility is a big fan of Logic.

I remember two scenarios that really have shaped my thinking on the truth and/or fiction about Pro Tools: 

The first scenario took place at a live music venue at which I was doing a live recording of more than 10 jazz-oriented bands.  It was a beautiful day.  Everything was going perfectly.  Every band got mic’d based on their own unique sound and personnel make up.  I plugged the mics into an audio snake that fed into my analog mixing board.  From there, I ran a direct-out from each channel, into a unique input channel on my 10×10 Edirol FA-101 Audio Interface.  I actually opted to use Cubase as my recording platform because of my decision to use the FA-101 as my interface of choice.  All of this was being handled by a PC running Windows XP Professional.  About half way through the recording, some guy (he never did tell me his name, nor did I ask) started pestering me about my choice of recording aparatus.  “I use a Mac”, he said.  “And, Pro Tools is the only thing I use in my studio,” he continued.  I nodded, pretended to be paying attention to what he was saying, and went on about my business.  “I can’t believe you’re doing this recording on a PC, and you’re not using Pro Tools”, he went on, and now sounded a little disgruntled that I was paying no credence to his opinions.  Now, keep in mind, this guy was in the audience.  He was not part of the concert, or part of the technical crew in any way.  But, because of the fact that he had a Mac and Pro Tools, which many DigiDesign-endorsed magazines and recording facilities trumpet, that somehow anyone who was not using them, were in some way inferior.  Never mind the end result.  I eventually let the guy know that it’s cool that he has what he has, but great recordings are not solely about the equipment used.  Needless to say, the recording came out very well.  The musicians and concert venue were happy and we continued an almost year long relationship.

The second scenario was more subtle, but nonetheless points out the ridiculousness of inexperienced, non-technical, engineering newbies who feel that they’ve become experts because they’ve been in a room in which Pro Tools was being used.  I have a very good friend who is employed by a major music enterprise.  Now, she is not an engineer, artist, or musician.  She is, however, creative in her own right.  Pro Tools is used at her place of employment.  I, personally, have been producing music and designing sound (audio engineering) for more than ten years, using everything from Pro Tools, to Sonar, to Cubase, to Nuendo, etc.  I’ve also recorded hundreds of projects on a commercial level.  On one occasion, I mentioned to my friend that I was involved in a certain recording project.  The week prior she had had the opportunity to work at her employers studio. So, she asks me, “Are you using Pro Tools?”  I told her that I wasn’t for this particular project.  She then got on her soap box, and “tried” to convince me that Pro Tools was the only program to know, and that she really wanted to learn it because that’s what all of the “professionals” are using.  OUCH.  Had I asked her about microphone technique, signal flow, proper recording levels, or compression and e.q., she probably would have stared at me, eyes glazed over.  Needless to say, I didn’t.  However, I did let her know that good sound designers are not beholden to any one recording platform. 

Don’t misunderstand me.  Pro Tools is a nice program.  However, in the world of digital recording, the quality of the audio is definitely NOT determined by the software.  DigiDesign (the manufacture of Pro Tools) is a brilliant marketer.  First off, you can’t even run Pro Tools without one of THEIR propietary Audio Interfaces (M-Box, M-Box Mini, Digi 003, etc.).  And, believe me, the jury is still out as to the inherent superiority of their audio interfaces over some the other audio interfaces out there.  Once you’re recording at 24-bit, it gets pretty standardized.  It’s just like digital cameras.  If you are looking at different cameras that take pix at 10 mega pixels, the quality is going to be pretty similar.  The difference however, will be in whoever is taking the pictures.  The difference with recording, is determined by who is doing the recording.

The reason to at least have Pro Tools is compatibility.  We can make a recording today in Philly using Pro Tools, and you can go to many countries in the world, and their studios will probably also have Pro Tools.  But, even if you don’t use Pro Tools, you can simply export the individual WAV files of the session and still use them in ANY program.

One area that I think Pro Tools is strong in is sampling and audio editing.  However, at the end of the day it comes down to what the engineer is comfortable with. 

Good Recordings Are Not Determined By The Software Used.  Today’s Audio Engineers Must Focus More On The Craft, Art & Science of Audio Engineering, And Less On What Everyone Says You MUST Use To Be Good.  This And This Alone Will Lead To Better Recordings And Greater Respect For The Craft.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?