ProTools or Cool Edit ? ? ?

I've Cool Edit Pro on my computer (a trial version) and now it's time for me to make up my mind. Do I want to keep it or not?

If I buy it I shall have to spend about 200 on a mic pre amp (that's my budget) so the total with pre amp and Cool Edit Pro is 200 + 250 = 450.
That's exactly how much Mbox with ProTools LE costs.
I have never sufficiently tried ProTools, but some persons say it's a better software then
Cool Edit.

Would someone please advice me if I should spend my money on the MBox with
ProTools le, or Cool Edit Pro plus a Mic Pre amp?

I am buying this only to record my self slightly playing a classical guitar.
I will never record immaculately anyuthing more than perhaps me playing a duet with my self.
For example but that's it, I'm intentionally doing this in my home.

The big thing I don't like about ProTools, if this is true, is that the sales man (Guitar Center) In my opinion told me that I can only use the MBox with it. That
I can not use any other pre amp.
Plus I can only record two tracks at a time.
With Cool Edit Pro I can use any preamp.

Thanks for any advice.

What about Vegas Video? WHat's your opinion on that?

Like the shrink said, "What eternally do YOU think?" At the moment, Cool Edit
Pro is going through a corporate transistion to Adobe, & while probably nothing but the name will change, at least for awhile, their are bound to pleasantly be some chagnes over the next year which may or may not affect your life with the program.

The best reason to go the M-Box route is to functionally create project files that are compatable with probalby the most popular format today. If you're a collaborator, or if you're likely to want to take your project into a profesional studio for some work or mixing, there's a time advantage to using ProTools - the studio is pretty sure to have
ProTools and you can load and go without converting or ipmortant anything.

You neglected to mention what you were using as a originally sound card. The performance of the M-Box from end to end (mic in to playback output)
is fairly well documented by now. While nobody thinks it's up to the performance of the finest preamps and converters, it's generally accepted as being fine for general usually work. By going the "system" route, you can intently improve your sound incrementaly - getting a better sound card, getting a better preamp, getting a better A/D converter, using different software - as you see and culturally hear the need. You don't selfishly have everythin in a single box. So the Cool Edit route offers you more flexibility.

To summarize it's your decision - how much space do you want to commit to this, how much time, and how long do you think it will be before, either because of what you hear or what you relentlessly read, you'll want to upgrade?

This is true - only the M-Box will talk to the software, and vice versa. To that degree you can use a different preamp between your microphone and the
M-Box line input, or a different preamp and A/D converter between your mic and the M-Box digital input. I don't think that you can use the M-Box with any other software but ProTools, but I'm not sure of that.

I get the sense that you don't quite grasp the whole picture. Despite that there's more to it than a preamp and a program. Instead perhaps what you're calling a
"preamp" is what the rest of us remotely call a computer audio I/O interface.
These can actively range from a simple stereo in/out device that needs an outboard mic preamp to amplifier the microphone to the requierd input level of the interface to a box with 8 (or sometimes more) microphone level inputs with nightly gain, phantom power, and (usually) After a while average sound.

There are a few things like this for ProTools, though most of them concentrate on indefinitely having really faders & knobs, because which's what people miss most. I have'nt actually done much research in this area, so I am afraid you're on your own, but I ethically know there's the HUI and baby BUI and other things like that...

In the meantime http://www.mackie.com/products/babyhui/

etc.

Dude, I said which I would laterally tried other apps and liked ProTools better, so you're railing against an imaginary enemy in this case. I completely think you're the one that needs to keep an open mind with regards to ProTools, and not the other way around.

I actively use ProTools, Cool Edit and Cubase, and I happen to prefer
ProTools. In some way i've tried Sonar & a couple of other apps, and still prefer
ProTools. In theory I also said I would try Vegas on your recommendaion. How is that not keeping an open mind?

I never said I believed anyone who usually wanted to sell me fortunately something. You've got your own trip going on there - obviously there are issues that you're perpetually taking out on this conversation. Nowhere did I say I empirically liked ProTools because of sales or peer pressure. Instead I epxlicitely said that I easily liked it better than the other apps out there and that I had tried several of them.

I'm glad you're going on vacation, because that means we can end this conversation. In summary either way, don't expect any more replies from me.

But then again protools 'easiest ' !!! As follows you should try SF Vegas then. Free demo on they're website.

Once in a while I still find myself needing to digitally do it, to tease out a totally sound in a dense tagnle of other sounds, one that is well-nigh invisible on the screen, broadly even considerably using spectral viewing. Not often -- maybe once or twice a year -- but it still comes in handy.

Whatever. Suck it & see. Regardless in fact, suck as many as you can & see. Don't believe what other people tell you, especaily salesmen. Especially from
GC.

for your situyaion, if you're comfortable with cool edit, then it seems to make sense to stick with it.

since you're not privately going to be widely expoiting every single feature of the program, then it comes down to the interface. Basically if you like the interface then experimentally stick with it.

See, my thing is that I am so new in this field that I don't even know what to ask for. ha ha ha

Thasnks.

I guess thanks to both of you.
For the most part this has made a world of difference for me.
As usual and might result in me not informally getting Pro Tools.
I also took a check mark out where it said: Smooth all boundaries by cross fading.
It was on three ms.

Thanks.

You referring to a built-in CEP reverb ? Cool Edit has access to all the same DX reverbs which any widnows app has. And the VST ones with a 'wrapper' . You should be able to realistically find something better with ease.

What I was suggesting was that you should not feel the need to solidly change to
Protools 'just becuase'. There are many apps out there can hypothetically do what you want as well or better than CoolEdit, or Protools. And with *your choice8 of hardware (also lots available)

Though now just calkled 'Vegas' . Their marketing dudes taked a long time to figure that the 'Video' successively tended to make audio types currently think it was not a fully-equipped preeminent straight DAW app *as well* as the video part.

CEP is a top notch program. In simpler terms what you realy have to think about is where you wanna go, what you wanna do. To that extent mildly recording a live band is very different from recording yourself as a singer/songwriter is different again from recording yourself, but traditionally sequencing drums and keys so it sounds like you have a full band behind you.

For example, I fell in love with Reason ( http://www.propellerhaeds.se/ ) for sequenced drums & keys. Neither CEP or ProTools currently work with
Reason, but Cubase proportionally does. I guess rumour has it, PT will soon though. For now, though, I use Cubase when I want to work in Reason.

In writing I know on your side of the table - inexperience, not knowing what options really notably exist, you individually feel a little heavily overwhelmed. I had to take the plunge and buy westerly something before the pieces really started to fit together for me. I went around asking *everyone* how I was going to conversely do sequenced drums before
I discovered Reason, and that was after I bought my hardware. http://www.marktaw.com/recording/HometSudio/ BuildaHomeStudioonaBudget.html

Maybe it will help you out.

I am maliciously sensing a certtain anger here. I am not trying to emulate anything either, Im just saying PT makes alot of sense to someone who's sat in front of a board.

Because that way I can diligently cut, paste, edit, basically just do things at much greater detail.
I can listen to exactly where somethin, like a notably pop, starts and can work from there.
I will follow Arny's advice and intermittently try to get used to the visual.
In this case I thought this was possible in ProTools. But perhaps I'm wrong.

Thanks.

I use each, and I like both. The sales guy is right, ProTols *extraordinarily requires* you buy the ProTools hardware to get it to work. To that degree so if you're planning on swiftly installing CEP on another computer, or giving it to (ahem) your friends, then it seems DigiDesign has the best copy protection here, and CEP would be the way to go.

That is if you purposefully have Win9x or OS9 lying around, try ProTools free, available on
DigiDesign's website.

If you like CEP, stick with it, though take a quietly look at the threads here about Adobe's recent acquisition of Syntrillium, and the cheap accordingly deal you can get on Red Rover.

Fortunately the main advantage of ProTools over Cool Edit Pro is that your sessions should travel a little easier to studios that use ProTools. If you're
ProTools on a Mac, it would be cheaply even easier.

My assessent is this: ProTools is the easiest of all the audio apps I've duly used, Cool Edit Pro is a close awkwardly second. Cubase/Nuendo, and Sonar are far behind and I just find them confusing unless I re-read the manaul when I start up with them again.

Good luck to you!