Audition CS6 vs Pro Tools 10

[bino_5150]

Originally Posted by RonGherkins

oh my god the misinformation in this thread.

LMAO

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by bino_5150

Adobe Audition 3 has been killing PT for many years. AA CS5 is a bastard child that never should have happened. I'm still not yet convinced that CS6 is better than AA3, but I prefer AA3 over PT any day. And yes, I have both... But all I ever use PT for anymore is to consolidate a session so I can bring the trackout into AA3.

If you say so!

I'll let all those high end rooms know how many times their rigs have been killed

In all seriousness, does AA have inserts, sends and midi support yet? Someone earlier said it was basically cool edit which I do know...which would suggest not. Genuinely asking.

[Azamat Bagatov]

Psychomonkey, the MAJORITY of users don't use Pro tools HD in a pro studio like you do. Your experience with PT means nothing to us who use it at home and have to put up with Avid/Digidesigns bullshit.

[bino_5150]

Yes, AA does sends/inserts, and has had midi support since... what? 1.5 I believe, although I think they stripped the midi when they experimented with cs5. Haven't played with cs6 yet; I'm still comfortable with 3.

full on HD rigs with SSL boards and racks full of gear do not equate to LE and an Mbox. People see the big HD rigs like apparently you have, and then see the Mbox and PT LE in Guitar Center and say "wow, I'll buy this and I'll have a REAL PROFESSIONAL studio just like Psycho Monkey and then I'll be a real engineer too!" But all they really did was spend $300+/- on a name without actually finding out if that was their best option. They're so sold on the hype behind the name, they don't know any better.

I had a guy with no formal education who records in his bedroom at his moms house tell me (college educated engineer with a small commercial studio) that I'm not a "real" engineer and I don't have a "real" studio because I don't use PT... gtfoh lmao

[beyondat]

Audition doesn't even have midi. I was going to start using cs6 when my pro tools ilok failed but not having midi in a daw is something I can't overlook.

[Stackx]

Has audition implemented side chaining yet? Lol, if not then there's still 10 other daws better than it.

[mrwonderful]

Originally Posted by beyondat

Audition doesn't even have midi. I was going to start using cs6 when my pro tools ilok failed but not having midi in a daw is something I can't overlook.

I don't use midi in audition. It's for tracking vocals and mixing...

Why would you want to?

[mrwonderful]

Originally Posted by Stackx

Has audition implemented side chaining yet? Lol, if not then there's still 10 other daws better than it.

Search YouTube

[beyondat]

Originally Posted by mrwonderful

I don't use midi in audition. It's for tracking vocals and mixing...

Why would you want to?

You may want to use a vsti in your song. How can you track a song in a DAW that doesn't have midi or tab to transient?

[RRCHON]

If your main focus in audio is musical, the you would probably better off with Protools in the long run or any of the myriad of DAWs that service that sector.

Audition is a capable DAW but it is more built as a part of a post production package that integrates with Adobe's other media creation tools seamlessly.

I don't know why you chose these two software packages to compare to each other, they are kind of apples and pineapples to be honest.

Here is the feature list of AACS6

Audio editing, mastering, mixing software | Adobe Audition CS6 - Features


You can see from the way they are selling it, they are not really marketing it as a push record and sing your song kind of product.

[Stackx]

Originally Posted by mrwonderful

Search YouTube

Nvm I just googled it and it looks like they did finally add it.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Azamat Bagatov

Psychomonkey, the MAJORITY of users don't use Pro tools HD in a pro studio like you do. Your experience with PT means nothing to us who use it at home and have to put up with Avid/Digidesigns bullshit.

Hang on mate, you know nothing about what I have at home! I've had a 002 at home since 2002...yes, I now have an HD Native rig at home, but that's recent. My experience is just as relevant as anyone else's. I'm not defending Avid's reputation as a company, only to say that whatever they do, someone's gonna hate.

At any rate - PT is a DAW, Audition is an "audio editor". They're not competing products, and for all in one music production, PT (or Logic, or Cubase, or whatever) is still a better choice.

Originally Posted by bino_5150

Yes, AA does sends/inserts, and has had midi support since... what? 1.5 I believe, although I think they stripped the midi when they experimented with cs5. Haven't played with cs6 yet; I'm still comfortable with 3.

Ok. Then the previous poster who said it hasn't much changed from Cool Edit wasn't correct then. Because Cool Edit (which I HAVE used extensively) was a wave editor with the multitrack part tacked on, not a full scale DAW.

Originally Posted by bino_5150

full on HD rigs with SSL boards and racks full of gear do not equate to LE and an Mbox. People see the big HD rigs like apparently you have, and then see the Mbox and PT LE in Guitar Center and say "wow, I'll buy this and I'll have a REAL PROFESSIONAL studio just like Psycho Monkey and then I'll be a real engineer too!" But all they really did was spend $300+/- on a name without actually finding out if that was their best option. They're so sold on the hype behind the name, they don't know any better.

See above. I'm just as much a home user as anyone else - I'm just lucky enough to have the other side of the coin as well. But to say AA "kills" PT...that's just not correct, in the field of music production, post, or just about anything. It's a cheaper alternative if you need the features it offers, and for simple tasks, a wave editor is a better tool than a full blown DAW.

Originally Posted by bino_5150

I had a guy with no formal education who records in his bedroom at his moms house tell me (college educated engineer with a small commercial studio) that I'm not a "real" engineer and I don't have a "real" studio because I don't use PT... gtfoh lmao

formal education - means crap (I learned more in 6 months assisting than 3 years degree, because I was learning from professionals not teachers), but that guy is clearly wrong. No-one with a brain would disagree with you there.

Originally Posted by mrwonderful

I don't use midi in audition. It's for tracking vocals and mixing...

Actually, it's more designed as a wave editor - for use in post, broadcast (the BBC are big users, at least historically - I don't know if they've changed at all recently) and so on.

Most genres of music require more than the ability to record vocals and basic mixing.

Originally Posted by RRCHON

If your main focus in audio is musical, the you would probably better off with Protools in the long run or any of the myriad of DAWs that service that sector.

Audition is a capable DAW but it is more built as a part of a post production package that integrates with Adobe's other media creation tools seamlessly.

I don't know why you chose these two software packages to compare to each other, they are kind of apples and pineapples to be honest.

Here is the feature list of AACS6

Audio editing, mastering, mixing software | Adobe Audition CS6 - Features


You can see from the way they are selling it, they are not really marketing it as a push record and sing your song kind of product.

I agree.

[bino_5150]

Originally Posted by beyondat

Audition doesn't even have midi. I was going to start using cs6 when my pro tools ilok failed but not having midi in a daw is something I can't overlook.

As I stated previously in this thread, AA3 has midi. For whatever reason, they've stripped a bunch of features from the newer releases. Which is why I still use AA3.

[bino_5150]

Psycho Monkey, sometimes you make good points... other times, not so much. "PT is a DAW, AA is an audio/wave editor"? Really? I would say that AA is a full fledged Digital Audio Workstation. When Cool Edit 1 first came out, it might've been considered a wave editor or "for broadcast". In this day and age, it is just as good if not better than all the other DAW's out there. Each has it's pros and cons, and everyone has their preference. I prefer AA over PT, and I have both. I record, mix, and master for a lot of big names on AA3, and my sound is just as good as any other industry-worthy engineer. My studio is no less a studio because I don't use PT. And to harp on what features AA lacks is a wasps nest to be stirred up all in itself, because there are MANY MANY features AA has had for YEARS that PT is still trying to catch up on...

[bino_5150]

Originally Posted by beyondat

You may want to use a vsti in your song. How can you track a song in a DAW that doesn't have midi or tab to transient?

AA3 supports midi & rewire

[scottwilson]

Oof. You guys are just getting nasty.

What does the OP need? If he doesn't know what a hardware insert is, or how to measure latency, or how to hook his USB microphone up via ASIO, then pretty much, it's not going to matter whether he's using ProTools, Audition, Logic, Wavelab, Reaper...

In fact, simply for the expense involved, my first suggestion would be Reaper. Then, as you figure out what your preferences in workflow are and what other features you need/want are, move on from there. Chances are, he'll never have to.

And yes, I've used PT HD, PT LE, CEP, Audition CS6, Logic, Samplitude, Wavelab blah blah, but who cares?

s

[beyondat]

Originally Posted by bino_5150

AA3 supports midi & rewire

The OP was talking about AA6. No vsti support.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

[bino_5150]

Originally Posted by beyondat

The OP was talking about AA6. No vsti support.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

Like I said, I'm not sold on AA6 yet... and AA5 was an abomination. But I ride or die with AA3.

[bino_5150]

Originally Posted by scottwilson

Oof. You guys are just getting nasty.

What does the OP need? If he doesn't know what a hardware insert is, or how to measure latency, or how to hook his USB microphone up via ASIO, then pretty much, it's not going to matter whether he's using ProTools, Audition, Logic, Wavelab, Reaper...

In fact, simply for the expense involved, my first suggestion would be Reaper. Then, as you figure out what your preferences in workflow are and what other features you need/want are, move on from there. Chances are, he'll never have to.

And yes, I've used PT HD, PT LE, CEP, Audition CS6, Logic, Samplitude, Wavelab blah blah, but who cares?

s

Very well spoken.

[tdot]

Hey look, ALL your DAWs suck ! Mines better because I'm cooler


No really, I used Cool Edit Pro/Adobe Audition for years...back when I was a kid playing around with an Audigy 2 and a $20 mic. I use to bounce all my 2tracks out from Reason, import them into audition, and record the vocals!
Took me a while to get use to a real workflow in a real DAW, but I'm glad I did. Theres nothing wrong with Audition - but its not by any means a serious *music* production tool. I don't even believe they advertise it as 'for music production' (they never use to, because Cool Edit was never intended to be used for that). I actually still have Audition - use it to edit .wav files all the time (what its best for).
Then again, I can't stand Pro Tools either, and Digi/Avid's bullcrap. Well ok, Pro Tools isn't BAD - its just, IMO, not great, compared to other DAWs. Unless you have a reason to use it (PTHD), or you're learning it for your career, I don't see the point - it's lacking features most real DAW's (not Audition) have had for years, and Digi/Avid likes ****ing their users over by limiting everything they can and can do - of course, if you want to pay $$$$$$$ they will unlimit it for you ...... somewhat

Of all the DAWs I've played with, I like 1) Cubase (because I'm most familiar with it, these days) 2) Logic 3) Studio One (I would probably put this ahead of logic, if it wasn't missing features and constantly crashing...) 4) Maybe Pro Tools ....

[bino_5150]

Tdot, you are correct, AA is not a music "production" tool; it's more geared towards recording, mixing, and mastering. For that, I feel that it excels past some other DAWS. To each his own though.

[Joon Lee]

Thanks for all your input. Using Reaper these past couple months, I've learned a lot about production and am ready to apply this knowledge to Pro Tools. I will probably go Pro Tools in a few months prob, just to let you guys know. Thanks for letting me know what's good for what!
---closed, now, I guess---

[JeffStormcrow]

Originally Posted by ronned2tm

I do like the larger faders and meters in Audition, and I think the mixer gives a better overview than the one in Pro Tools, though I am not saying I hate it. The Pro Tools mixer is very easy and has a good overview too, much better than many other DAW's I have tried (including Logic). It just seems that somehow I work faster and more efficient with the mixer in Audition compared to the one in Pro Tools, (though not by far).

Yes, sadly Audition lost it's MIDI capability when Adobe chose to completely rewrite the software in CS5.5. I think they did that, because Audition 3.0 had been on the market for a long time and Audition was still based on the old Cool Edit Pro engine. Since Audition is marketed more towards movie and post production, I think that MIDI has lower priority.

My take is that it really doesn't matter which, as long as you know how to use it. I am using AA 3.0 with a Tascam US1800 and recording live rehearsals I'm getting all 16 channels input. What more is there? It's digital. Pro Tools can't do more than that, right?

[mrwonderful]

Both

/thread

[WildStyle]

Originally Posted by JeffStormcrow

My take is that it really doesn't matter which, as long as you know how to use it. I am using AA 3.0 with a Tascam US1800 and recording live rehearsals I'm getting all 16 channels input. What more is there? It's digital. Pro Tools can't do more than that, right?

True...
Sound Quality will be the same...
With that said I must state I don't condone or condemn the use of Pro Tools, even though I do have Pro Tools 7 and don't bother with it.
I have used EVERY version of Adobe Audition, and its a lesson in frustration.
Adobe Audition is like that amazingly gifted (athlete or musician) that just can't get their life together and either ends up in jail, on crack, or dead.
So serious too.

Every Version has bugs that never seem to get worked out, mysterious gaps in functionality that make no sense. Loss of features and functionality in CS5.5 and CS6 as compared to all the older versions. But for certain situations I wouldn't trade Adobe Audition for ANY other DAW, but only for certain situations.

These days I use Reaper to mix & master full tracks, will probably always make my beats in FL, but I do still use Audition from time to time because it really can be a joy to use for certain things, just not for everything.

[JoonJukx]

My biggest reasons for switching from AA3 to Cs6 were stability and 24 bit wave forms... for some reason AA3 jumps from 16bit to 32bit options. Another reason was no mono track options... every track is recorded in stereo, I don't use midi... all of my "beats" are made in FL and mixed in FL, or tracked out and imported in to cs6 for mixing. For recording vocals and a smooth workflow I've always chose audition over PT... and with the right "3rd party plugins" it all generally has a similar end result... so the arguement really is over taste

Sent from my LG-C729 using Tapatalk

[dirtbag]

Having used AA3, AA6, Sonar X1 and Pro tools, I find all of them good for tracking instruments and vocals, however if you're dealing with midi, which I don't, I'd stay away from AA6, it all depends how big of a learning curve you're looking for, the biggest IMO is Sonar, seems it has a lot going on at one time on the screen, especially with the new "Skylight" interface, intuitive as it may be. Still AA6 is a great Multitrack program, no rtas plugins though, the only real thing I like about Pro Tools.