Originally Posted by: maggior
I do any effects post processing, not realtime
That's my point exactly... I guess I should clarify, I've done quite a bit of multi-track recording in my time... from the early Tascam and Fostex PortaStudio stuff, right up to analog 24 track recording in a professional studio using full 2" wide tape, and then on to the digital stuff through the 90's to present day. So applying all effects post production isn't the norm... it is in terms of creating a final mix, but if you're setting up for vocal tracking, the vocalist is most likely going to expect some processing on their voice, and will likely want to hear more than just a dry mix to sing along with.
A real world scenario was when I did some recording with an Irish Low Whistle. I had a huge delay applied on it, along with some reverb, which really affected the way I played the piece... I was able to listen to the decay and work the effect to get the sound I wanted. That wouldn't be possible if everything was being applied in post-production. A savvy engineer would record something like dry on one track, and wet on another so they would have the option of changing the effect in post, or possibly blending the dry and wet tracks if desired. Point is, you can't do that with a system where all effects processing is applied in post.
You're making my point for me with what I quoted... as soon as you move over to the computer, you're immediately compromising where you wouldn't have to with a hardware based system. From what I've seen online, high end applications of Pro Tools see it being used it with hardware specifically dedicated to recording. The software is just the interface. There is still specific hardware being used for recording audio, and "outboard" effects as well. Which gets back to the OP's question... which is better, Pro Tools, or a dedicated unit for recording? I think the confusion people run into which you're touching upon Rich, is that there's a huge difference between using Pro Tools as an interface, and as a stand alone software based recording platform. People see Pro Tools in a fancy, high-end studio and think "hey, wow, and it only costs $1000!"... What they don't realize is there is a ton of specialized hardware that is also in play, that Pro Tools is controlling. There's tremendous benefits to having a software based interface like Pro Tools... just the sheer ease of editing, being able to import or export files are enticement enough... But there seems to be a point where if you don't have the appropriate hardware, then all you've got is a fancy editing software package on a computer platform that can't keep up. If that's the case, I think the stand-alone multitrackers are then the better call, but again, I'd sure like to hear from anyone with experience with Pro Tools as to where that proverbial line the sand might be drawn, if at all.
