# Cubase VS. Protools



## drpraetorus

So, those who have had some experience in these things, which is the better program? Which is easier to learn? Is there a different program that you would recommend? Any anecdotes?


----------



## WavesOfParadox

I don't have any personal experience, but from what I've heard, Cubase is probably the best DAW for orchestral.


----------



## Crudblud

I use Cubase 5. The MIDI sequencer is in depth and powerful, but clean, and the whole interface is flexible customisation wise. It has an automatic score writer, although if you are composing in the piano roll view it does not convert well unless you set note size manually for each note as you place it, or if you simply work in the score view from the beginning. Personally I think it's too much hassle (and I use a mouse rather than a MIDI keyboard for composing) and you should look to something like MuseScore or Sibelius if you want a proper score writer.

I had avoided posting in this thread sooner because I have no experience with ProTools, so I honestly can't say how it compares to Cubase. But yes, Cubase is a quality piece of kit that serves me well in pretty much every aspect and it does a whole load of stuff that I don't even know how to use, so there's plenty of expansion room. Just note that 32-bit Cubase becomes unstable when your RAM usage exceeds 70% (can be quite annoying when you take in to account Windows' idle RAM usage on machines with 4GB or less), so you might want to look in to the 64-bit version if your computer can run it.


----------



## PetrB

I haven't looked at these lately, but have an older version of Cubase.
Cubase, if you are 'driving' midi to play from a sampled instruments sound library, is just fine, and in many ways is much more straightforward, direct. It will of course do actual audio, and like Protools, has capacity to edit the 'performance' as well as the sound.
Protools, even minimum package, will of course do that, but is much more intensely about the sound editing, finessing and manipulating both the midi sounds as well as recorded audio.

Cubase was 'the first' and was brilliantly thought out for those who read as well as those who don't. Many of their visual map formats are 'imitated' by all others.

Neither has a brilliant program to render the music to score, for that you are looking at another sizable cost purchase of 
Finale (most widely popular) or 
Sibelius (advocated most by the in-depth classical users of score programs whom I know.)

If you are inputting to get a score only, do not need the audio editing and recording, etc. Consider the two software music scoring programs instead - they have more than decent midi, and will also 'drive' any midi virtual sound library for 'play. Too, they allow for playback of an inputted recorded 'performance' vs. playback exactly as scored.

N.B. I am a pianist; almost all my inputting is via a digital keyboard. For any manual inputting or editing, I would say anyone using either program or either score program will absolutely want a mouse. The editing you will do, whether piano roll format or any score software, requires the specific grabbing of many fine targets, which make any touchpad a cumbersome pain to use [Cubase has (or had, anyway) many very handy alpha numeric keyboard commands - which if done with the touch-pad, make you act like a one-person twister party.]


----------



## drpraetorus

Thanks for the info. If any one still wants to comment, please do. I have Finale and would be inputting from Finale to the DAW. If that makes a difference in your answers.


----------



## WavesOfParadox

For my music, I also use Finale. I then export the MIDI to Reaper - a nice DAW with a cool price.


----------



## Ravndal

If you want to work with live sound, and audio engineering - Ableton Live is the best.


----------

