Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
So let me explain why:
First of all Pro Tools is not much of a MIDI sequencer. It?s designed for audio sequencing and it?s much better that way. Cubase and Logic for example are much better when working with MIDI. Have you ever thought why no one who is someone (when talking about electronic music) always use Cubase or Logic? Because they are better and easier MIDI sequencers than Pro Tools is
|
Agreed
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
1. The quantizing of the RM1X and Pro Tools are almost identical. Though it?s easier to use it on the RM1X.
|
Dont know b/c I haven't used RM1X in about 6 years.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
2. Everything has it?s own knob or button on the RM1X. The Pro Tools system works only with a mouse unless you deside to buy the control unit which costs a fortune. The RM1X is easier to use overall.
|
Whats wrong with using a mouse. Here it comes down to personal preference.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
3. Working with RM1X is very easy and fast because it hides inside functions that nobody thought when they were designing Pro Tools. It?s really clever when you get to know how to use it well. You can easily edit and/or copy&paste or create automations on anything you like with a few touches of buttons. Pro tools is more complicated. The edit mode in the RM1X is also easy as can be.
|
Am not arguing for pro tools on this one, but logic and cubase make automation, editing, copying and pasting, and everything else the RM1X can edit easier b/c everything is graphically represented, and not on a 2 line display with just values. Also, all it takes to edit in logic and cubase, is a mouse click.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
4. The analog-style step sequencer. Pro Tools has nothing to compete.
|
Logic has the hyperedit, and there avst plugins for step sequencers.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
|
Good article. From the first paragraph though: "
there?s also no denying that technology makes possible music that was never possible before, and can even provide the means to streamline its production. "
Comes down to personal preference and work style on this one, and how far you want to push your music.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
6. There are many badly designed functions in the Pro Tools. The sysex function for example sucks. We were trying to make the Pro Tools send sysex messages in our school with about 20 students and one teacher (who wasn?t using it for the first time). We never did...
|
Dont use pro tools, so I would be speaking out of my ass on this one.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
7. You really don?t need everything on the face of the earth to make songs. MIDI is extremely simple. Just put a note there and there and adjust the velocities and a little filter automation over here. Why did you think they have never developed a completely new system after MIDI arrived (Which was 1983 I think. A long time if you think how fast the technology evolves nowadays). So what do you need Pro Tools for? There?s nothing there that RM1X hasn?t. Without the easy use.
|
If it makes life easier, why would you not want to use it? Pro tools in my opinion is easier to use due to the graphical representations of the waveformms, or piano roll in the case of MIDI. I am no music scholar, so the visualization of the piano roll makes it easier instead of imputting C#4, D2, Bb7, etc.....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unio mystica
And why is Pro Tools better:
1. Polyphony is virtually infinite.
2. If you work with software only.
3. If you like to see everything on a big screen.
4. If you use a lot of audio material.
5. It?s more versatile.
6. It?s more accurate.
7. Pro Tools is Pro Tools.
|
Those are enough right there to make me want to use a software sequencer.[/b]