Audition CS6 vs Pro Tools 10

[Zachariah]

Pro Tools

Unless you want to go the hardware route. It's up to you J-Money!

[JoRillo]

Whichever one you work the best in.

From a generic perspective though, Pro Tools is more... Pro... and Adobe is a bit more Prosumer.

[btown]

Originally Posted by Joon Lee

Which, for most purposes, is better for mixing tracks (compression, eq, panning, etc.)?

pro tools... so many advantages by now... and if you want to use 3rd party plugins i'm not sure if Adobe supports that but Pro tools has a lot of RTAS 3rd party plugins that can help you mix more efficiently

[Joon Lee]

Originally Posted by btown

pro tools... so many advantages by now... and if you want to use 3rd party plugins i'm not sure if Adobe supports that but Pro tools has a lot of RTAS 3rd party plugins that can help you mix more efficiently

Can it receive input from non-ASIO driver-using devices? (For example, if I plug an XLR mic into an interface that does not require ASIO drivers and uses the standard USB driver)
I ask because some DAWs like FL Studio 10 (when I used to use that not-too-good software) will only receive input through an ASIO driver.

[btown]

Originally Posted by Joon Lee

Can it receive input from non-ASIO driver-using devices? (For example, if I plug an XLR mic into an interface that does not require ASIO drivers and uses the standard USB driver)
I ask because some DAWs like FL Studio 10 (when I used to use that not-too-good software) will only receive input through an ASIO driver.

no... pro tools has been using ASIO drivers for a long time so even though pro tools 10 is open to almost all interfaces I'm pretty sure it has to be an ASIO interface, on the flip side most popular interfaces are mostly ASIO i think, look into what interface you want and the company should be able to say if it supports pro tools... it may differ from mac & pc as well, i can play pro tools through my computer speakers no problem on mac, but using windows i have to install "Asio4all" in order for the computer to recognize my speakers

[Stackx]

Definitely protools!

Idk what's different about cs6 cause I never used it. But I tried cs5 and it didn't even have side-chaining! :/

Protools has way more advantages. I give adobe props for photoshop though they nailed that!

[Zachariah]

Originally Posted by Stackx

....I give adobe props for photoshop though they nailed that!

lol

[DirtyMan]

Originally Posted by Joon Lee

Can it receive input from non-ASIO driver-using devices? (For example, if I plug an XLR mic into an interface that does not require ASIO drivers and uses the standard USB driver)
I ask because some DAWs like FL Studio 10 (when I used to use that not-too-good software) will only receive input through an ASIO driver.

can i ask what your issue is with asio

[Johntron512]

Why is everyone so confident in Pro Tools being better if they haven't used Audition?

I have been using Audition since before it was bought by Adobe, when it was called Cool Edit Pro. It has always been VERY capable software.

Admittedly, I have yet to use Pro Tools, and Adobe hasn't added much to the software since it was CEP. My guess is that you'll find ProTools to be more polished, and potentially have some nice workflow elements, but Audition is more than capable for tracking.

I work in marketing and graphic design for a day job, and so I have purchased full Adobe software suites for years, so I'm using Audition for now... and dabbling with Reaper.

My main gripe with Reaper is that, last I checked, it doesn't have a waveform editor, which is pretty damn essential in my opinion.

[Johntron512]

Originally Posted by Joon Lee

Can it receive input from non-ASIO driver-using devices? (For example, if I plug an XLR mic into an interface that does not require ASIO drivers and uses the standard USB driver)
I ask because some DAWs like FL Studio 10 (when I used to use that not-too-good software) will only receive input through an ASIO driver.

FL Studio supports non-ASIO audio drivers. It's also awesome

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Johntron512

Why is everyone so confident in Pro Tools being better if they haven't used Audition?

I have been using Audition since before it was bought by Adobe, when it was called Cool Edit Pro. It has always been VERY capable software.

Admittedly, I have yet to use Pro Tools, and Adobe hasn't added much to the software since it was CEP. My guess is that you'll find ProTools to be more polished, and potentially have some nice workflow elements, but Audition is more than capable for tracking.

I work in marketing and graphic design for a day job, and so I have purchased full Adobe software suites for years, so I'm using Audition for now... and dabbling with Reaper.

My main gripe with Reaper is that, last I checked, it doesn't have a waveform editor, which is pretty damn essential in my opinion.

The last version I had of cep didn't even have real time fx!

Cep was really a 2 track editor with multitrack capability bolted on.

Pt is by far the best of the 2 choices, and if your USB interface doesn't have asio drivers, I suggest a new interface be added to the shopping list.

[Melvin III]

For people recording over 2tracks (instrumentals) who don't have much knowledge but want to get their music created Adobe but in the long run if you go to a bigger studio your going to run into protools but for ease of use adobe even though I have pro tools down! My workflow is amazing I'd have to learn the shortcuts on other daws but I have friends who still use CEP 2.1 til this day they don't want top quality they want ease of use

[rmaier]

Adobe's restoration tools are nice. Not a Protools user - do they have anything comparable?

[btown]

Originally Posted by rmaier

Adobe's restoration tools are nice. Not a Protools user - do they have anything comparable?

3rd party plugins... cmon its pro tools of course they do

[ronned2tm]

I have been a happy Adobe Audition user since Audition 1.5. I just recently installed CS6 trial to run along 3.0. I would have to say that 3.0 is by far my favourite DAW, and IMO have a better and more smooth workflow, or at least comparable to that in ProTools. AACS6 has some nice features over AA3.0, though AA3.0 was more stable for me though it is outdated and lack significant features like multicore processing. AACS6 supporter VST3 and I do like it a lot so far, though I am having some problems on my Windows 7 DAW, though I suspect that may be due to my FireWire card or old firmware for my soundcard.

The mixer in AA is IMO superior to ProTools, and is easier to use and more logically designed. AA is also a very excellent DAW for editing sound clips right down to individual sample editing. Furthermore AA uses and have been using 32 bit floating point audio for ages. ProTools on the other hand, has some more advanced features in the multitrack enviroment and supporter MIDI (which AA lost in the transition from 3.0 to CS5.5)

My votes for Adobe Audition for prosumer tasks. If you wan't to go in the Pro league, you will probably need to go the ProTools route, as people/customers probably think AA is unprofessional.

I have tracked and mixed a bunch of music on AA, especially 3.0 and have tracked and mixed at least a couple of records on ProTools and both have their strengths and weaknesses, both get the job done painlessly and easy, so ind the end it all comes down to your own skills

[RonGherkins]

oh my god the misinformation in this thread.

Pro tools, especially if you're a student. You can get 4 yeas of free upgrades while learning the (most) typical DAW.

[RonGherkins]

Originally Posted by Melvin III

For people recording over 2tracks (instrumentals) who don't have much knowledge but want to get their music created Adobe but in the long run if you go to a bigger studio your going to run into protools but for ease of use adobe even though I have pro tools down! My workflow is amazing I'd have to learn the shortcuts on other daws but I have friends who still use CEP 2.1 til this day they don't want top quality they want ease of use

sounds like you should be doing more reading, and A LOT less recommending. You aren't actually saying anything in this post.

edit - 2 tracks are a pretty small part of the recording/creating process, and you don't need audition if that's all your doing. You can get something much cheaper.
He also asked what was better for mixing in the op.

[RonGherkins]

Originally Posted by ronned2tm

The mixer in AA is IMO superior to ProTools, and is easier to use and more logically designed.

I can't at all agree with this. Pro tools has one of the most basic (layout wise) and best mixers. It's what I compare all others to when I fire up a new DAW.

Furthermore AA uses and have been using 32 bit floating point audio for ages. ProTools on the other hand, has some more advanced features in the multitrack enviroment and supporter MIDI (which AA lost in the transition from 3.0 to CS5.5)

Pro tools has 32 bit floating point as well. Audition doesn't even have midi??


My vote is for the program that won't cripple you when you try to do something more than "prosumer"

[ronned2tm]

Originally Posted by RonGherkins

I can't at all agree with this. Pro tools has one of the most basic (layout wise) and best mixers. It's what I compare all others to when I fire up a new DAW.

Pro tools has 32 bit floating point as well. Audition doesn't even have midi??


My vote is for the program that won't cripple you when you try to do something more than "prosumer"

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.

[RonGherkins]

Fair enough. I will take another look at the audition mixer. Personally, as long as the mixer doesn't get in the way (and it's v. surprising to me how many do), it's a strong mixer so it sounds like audition is pretty good about that. Especially if it only handles audio I would expect it to be!

Anyways, I'm not trying to discount audition at all, but I think you hit the nail on the head when you said they are targeting the post production market.

[Joon Lee]

Originally Posted by DirtyMan

can i ask what your issue is with asio

Nothing, except I will be using a USB mic till I get more skilled at mixing

[rmaier]

Originally Posted by btown

3rd party plugins... cmon its pro tools of course they do

What are they?

[Sound Thief]

why has no one mentioned that when editing waveforms that between the two DAW's, Pro tools is like a childs crayon while audition goes right down the individual sample

[mrwonderful]

I prefer tracking and editing in Audition. But I'd rather mix in Pro Tools. I can run both and love both. But honestly I would rather use FL for all 3.

[Hellaciousj]

I was a huge fan of Audition 3, but since audition 5 I have been very disappointed with Audition. I love to mix and track in Audition 3! My first choice. Audition 5 and 6 are great for tracking and fairly decent for mixing, but PT is better than 5 or 6 for mixing. If you can get Audition 3, I'd go with it over PT10 though. This is coming from a very frequent user of both

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Sound Thief

why has no one mentioned that when editing waveforms that between the two DAW's, Pro tools is like a childs crayon while audition goes right down the individual sample

Because you're completely and utterly misguided. PT can ALSO go down to the sample! just because audition might put a great big square on it, doesn't mean PT isn't sample accurate editing.

Audition isn't really a DAW in the same category as PT. It's more of a direct competitor to Wavelab.

[Hobbs_Won]

lol @ FL Studio "not so good"


smh

[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.

[bino_5150]

what's "pro" and "prosumer" or "home studio" etc, is more an issue of who's controlling the software, not the software itself...