The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Samplitude and Protools HD
Old 21st January 2007
  #1
no ssl yet 
Guest
Samplitude and Protools HD

Does anyone here have access to hearing these systems side by side?

A friend of mine ( WHo has owned Every Digi system) swears samplitude sounds much better

I don't have a way to test them.
Old 21st January 2007
  #2
Lives for gear
 
Sinewave's Avatar
 

Since Samplitude is developing a rep as a serious mixer, your friend may have heard the difference , but who knows.
Old 21st January 2007
  #3
Gear Maniac
 
Matteran's Avatar
 

I have access to both, and I feel that Samplitude does sound better. A little warmer if you will.

However, editing in ProTools is much better. So I'm kind of torn, I prefere working on Samplitude, because I like the interface, the sound, etc. But when it comes to editing, ProTools is much more powerful for me.

I have more experience editing in ProTools though, so maybe I just haven't been able to unlock a certain aspect of Samplitude. I'm also running Samp 8, so version 9 might have improved upon that.
Old 21st January 2007
  #4
Lives for gear
 

I record & edit (the object editor is it) in samp but prefer to mix on HD3.

samp sounds great- many mastering houses use that and sequoia
Old 21st January 2007
  #5
no ssl yet 
Guest
Warmer is exactly the description he gives of samplitude in comparison.

But since J prefers to mix on HD, it may all be subjective

(Though to hear him talk, Hearing the systems side by side is supposed to make an HD system sound like a toy by comparison, and Totally Kill a mix system)

I'll eventually get around to hearing a system.
Old 21st January 2007
  #6
Lives for gear
 

prefer to mix on HD because of the many plugins I have come to rely on & also the hardware I have hardwired to it. But I have done records with straight samp mixes for major projects.

Latest major label project we are doing is all samplitude mixes except for 3. 17 songs on album. partly because HD room was occupied but also because it sounds right.
Old 21st January 2007
  #7
no ssl yet 
Guest
So do you hear a substantial difference in sound J?

From what the guy is saying it's no small difference in warmth.

(OF course I'll believe it when I hear it, but it's cool to get other opinions since I don't have access to it)
Old 21st January 2007
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by no ssl yet View Post
So do you hear a substantial difference in sound J?

From what the guy is saying it's no small difference in warmth.

(OF course I'll believe it when I hear it, but it's cool to get other opinions since I don't have access to it)
I cant say i have heard a difference either way. But I will say that samp sounds great. Been a user since 5.1
Old 21st January 2007
  #9
Lives for gear
 

they sound different because of different plug-ins it has nothing to do the host sounding different.
Old 21st January 2007
  #10
Gear Nut
 

There always will be some discrepancies in the listening tests, as to objective comparasing of the hosts, so it's useless topic. What I disagree big time, though, is that that editing in PT is better. Samp rules in every aspect of editing. But that might be just a personal preference thing.
Old 21st January 2007
  #11
Lives for gear
 
pw8888's Avatar
HI,
I am using PT HD2 with Apogee DA16x (3) and I am recording my mixes trought a microsonics model one to the Sequoia.
I tried the other day to take the same file in both system connected both to the avocet digitaly.
I could hear a BIG difference between the 2 systems.something "wider" and the low was better in the sequoia.
But everybdy is coming these days with PT session and this is the main reason why we all use it.
Old 21st January 2007
  #12
no ssl yet 
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ifrit View Post
There always will be some discrepancies in the listening tests, as to objective comparasing of the hosts, so it's useless topic. What I disagree big time, though, is that that editing in PT is better. Samp rules in every aspect of editing. But that might be just a personal preference thing.
Hold on there man, don't say "It's a useless topic".

It may be useless for YOU, but I'm not asking for scientific tests or proof. Someone who's opinion I respect highly is saying that these systems sound substantially different. (And I should Add that he owns an HD system. Infact, I purchased a mix system from him years ago when he had 3 rooms and cut back).

He's not suggesting that mixes or plug ins sound different. He is saying that merely HEARing the same files played with nothing done to them will sound different/better in samplitude because the DAW itself sounds better.

I don't have a way to test it just yet, so I'm asking the "opinions" of others who use both.

OF course "better" is subjective as is the degree of difference, but if enough guys that I respect and regard highly say there is a difference, I will definately invest the time to find out.

Again, it is NOT a scientific test, and I'm not seeking to prove/disprove that either system is flawed in ANY way.

I'm not seeking proof on Anything.

Merely asking guys who have invested in both systems and have no bias to give their opinions.
Old 21st January 2007
  #13
Gear Nut
 

OK, sorry to be so rough.
As to me, Sequoia sounds better than PT HD as well. I would never use PT if not the compatibility issues. Sequoia has the least ear fatiguing effect to my ears, so I consider it "better sounding" fact as well.
Old 22nd January 2007
  #14
Lives for gear
 

ay poppie.
Old 22nd January 2007
  #15
Lives for gear
 

Using Sequoia here... For me, the difference in summing is that of a greater depth of sound in Samp/Sequoia that isn't in Pro Tools. It isn't a warmth thing at all, but rather my mixes sound the way I would expect them to sound. For me, the difference isn't subtle. Not to say that you can't do good work in PT- there are certain things in a Pro Tools system that are much easier to work with from a production and automation standpoint. Just really depends on what you like to work with.

As for the editing, I think Samp's editing trounces Pro Tools. For those that say PT is better, check to make sure you are in the asymmetric crossfade editor in Samp. You have much greater flexibility there. Then Sequoia stomps on Samp- the fade editor is fantastic. Once again, if you are used to the workflow in PT, you'll find stuff missing. For example for drum editing, Samp doesn't have a tab to transient function.

Work with what works best for you... In the end, they are all tools. For me, Sequoia is the daw that I work with most. I also record and and work on Pro Tools as well, but I really don't enjoy it.

--Ben
Old 23rd January 2007
  #16
Lives for gear
 
catfish11's Avatar
 

I own both, protools hd 7.2, samplitude 7.2

I will preference this by saying, I believed at the time, maybe three years ago, samplitude sounded noticably better than any daw I had used till that time, better enough so that I had ditched sonar in favor of samplitude. It was with much trepidation then that I awaited the arrival of protools hd, I feared that it would not sound as good, and would be a bummer, cuz of the $$$$ I had layed down.

Having stated this, I repeat I have never taken a project and imported it to samplitude to mix down, as a comparison. I did however just play 2 already mixed files and heard no discernable difference between them -
both sound open, and appear to have the same depth of field, at least on the mixes I just played

Having said this both programs have their strengths, but samplitude is one hell of a program, though the midi sucks in 7.2 w tons of issues,
but that may have changed.

I use protools for tracking and mixing, sometimes mixdown to samplitude thru my cranesong spider, going to samplitude like an external tape deck.

I use both for mastering, though the feature set in samplitude swamps protools in that regard, but I got some great plugs in protools that are not avilable in samplitude.

If you are just looking at samp for the first time, it is deep, deep, deep
and in my view, if there were a protoold killer for native, it exists, and is called samplitude.

But I like my protools rig pretty good too, and it has the control 24, which is one reason I bought it, there was nothing comparable at the time for samplitude, might still not be, I don't know. And of course it is windows only, kinda yucky, if you know what I mean

If then were now, with todays computers, I might very well have just stayed on samplitude, but there is alot to be said for having an hd rig, even today


hope this helps, of course YMMV, peace
Old 23rd January 2007
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Catfish11:

You should check out Ver 9. There have been some pretty massive improvements- especially in MIDI.

--Ben
Old 23rd January 2007
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Adebar's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fifthcircle View Post
As for the editing, I think Samp's editing trounces Pro Tools. For those that say PT is better, check to make sure you are in the asymmetric crossfade editor in Samp. You have much greater flexibility there. Then Sequoia stomps on Samp- the fade editor is fantastic. Once again, if you are used to the workflow in PT, you'll find stuff missing. For example for drum editing, Samp doesn't have a tab to transient function.


--Ben
Sequoia is better for editing than PT also in my view. A lot of Sequoias great editing features come were copied from Sonic Solutions. The new mastering software from Sonic is Soundblade - and it sounds good too.
Old 24th January 2007
  #19
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adebar View Post
Sequoia is better for editing than PT also in my view. A lot of Sequoias great editing features come were copied from Sonic Solutions. The new mastering software from Sonic is Soundblade - and it sounds good too.

Yup.. I started on Sonic Classic and flowed right into Sequoia when it was time to buy my own DAW. Generally been quite happy with it for years now. I have seen Soundblade and it is pretty impressive. I use PMCD on my mac/PT setup for CD burning.

--Ben
Old 24th January 2007
  #20
bap
Gear Nut
 

I use Samplitude 9.02 and am very comfortable with it. I would love to upgrade to Sequoia someday but it's a bit expensive for me at the moment.

I also have Sonar 5 XL and an old e-logic (windows) but don't use them. I have no need to look any further than Samp/Sequoia.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump