SAW VS Pro Tools 9.0

[Discipled1]

I'm working with a small club that just purchased a Presonus Live and now they are considering using Pro Tools 9 for mixing. My comment was that there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does. Is there a link on the SAW forum that an A/B comparison was done?

Thank You
Greg

[cgrafx]

I'm working with a small club that just purchased a Presonus Live and now they are considering using Pro Tools 9 for mixing. My comment was that there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does. Is there a link on the SAW forum that an A/B comparison was done?

Thank You
Greg

They are really two very different tools.

SAW studio is a virtual mixing console and a multi-track recorder designed to be software based replacement of those physical hardware components.

ProTools is a Digital Audio Workstation. Yes it records and mixes tracks, but the mixing console is not a virtual version of a full-mixing desk.

In its base configuration, there are no gates, compressors, EQ's or actually any processing at all.

If you want an EQ on a channel, you have to patch it. If you want a gate on a channel you have to patch it.

ProTools does not do faster than real-time processing. So when your done mixing and you want to build a final mix.. you have to wait through the entire session to get the end result.

SAW will build a mix as fast as the system processing will allow. In many cases its easily 5x to 10x realtime (or more). That can be a huge benefit if your going to mix long sessions. Instead of waiting 45 minutes to process a 45 minute set, you can be done in a few minutes.

Both are tools that can be used for recording and mixing, but the workflow is different.

Of coarse there are many options that could be used for session mixes (logic, protools, cakewalk, reaper, Nuendo, tracktion, SAW studio).

All of these products can and are used successfully for the task you are asking about. All of them have their strengths and weaknesses. The real question is who will be doing the session mixes and what are they going to be most comfortable with.

I made a choice to use SAW/SAC as I found the interface metaphor of a fully configured real mixing desk easy to relate to and the sonic quality was/is excellent. But that was a personal choice for me, others may relate better to the interfaces of ProTools or the other software, in which case that could be a better fit. Again, its really going to boil down to who is going to be using the system.

[Grekim]

I'm working with a small club that just purchased a Presonus Live and now they are considering using Pro Tools 9 for mixing. My comment was that there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does. Is there a link on the SAW forum that an A/B comparison was done?

Thank You
Greg

An A/B of what? Soundfiles of a mix or are you talking about features?

First, you can't do an A/B of a mix, because there are plug-ins that run in SAW that you can't run in PT and vice versa. If you restricted mixes to plug-ins that are common to both and set it up right, you'd hear the same thing. But, I really like the unique plug-ins in SAW.

PT has the edge on features with regard to time stretching regions and preserving pitch or changing pitch but preserving region length. And PT has beat detective type stuff to slice up your rhythm track and align to a grid. It's designed to help fix crappy performances. Ideally, you might have a PT rig to do some fixing and then SAW for mixing.

I think the workflow of SAW is much nicer for mixing and in general. Especially with volume automation which is usually the most time consuming part of mixing. Also for example, in SAW you can engage a high pass filter instantly on a whole series of channels. In PT you'd have to copy plug-ins across tracks. SAW has nice mix and channel template features. Lots of good well thought out stuff.

[Dave Labrecque]

An A/B of what? Soundfiles of a mix or are you talking about features?

I understood him to mean a PT vs. SAW feature comparison chart-like-thing.

Nosir, I don't believe there is such a chart anywhere. Maybe someone would like to make one? Boys and girl?

[soundtrack2life]

I'm working with a small club that just purchased a Presonus Live and now they are considering using Pro Tools 9 for mixing. My comment was that there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does. Is there a link on the SAW forum that an A/B comparison was done?

Thank You
Greg

In your first sentence you said you wanted to use PT9 for "mixing". Is this to run live sound or to record a live show and mix afterwards? If live sound is the case then I would say neither PT9 or SAW and your should be looking at SAC. As for SAW & PT9 What cgrafx said is very true "They are really two very different tools" & "Both are tools that can be used for recording and mixing, but the workflow is different". As far as SAW & SAC go you should download the demo http://www.sawstudio.com/downloads_demos.htm and see what they have to offer. Although I use (in a studio setting) Pro Tools & Logic now as my primary tools for creation, recording & mixing (FWIW I used SAW since the mid 90's up till a couple of years ago). I think for what you are looking to do in a live club setting I would hands down recommend the SAW/SAC combination! The SAW / SAC combo if paired up with a good computer & audio interface are solid as a rock!! PT9 is a decent program however I will be the first to tell you it is a CPU hog & can be finicky compared to SAW/SAC. Plus another issue would be that you would have to tote an iLok with you for PT9! FWIW I do love the iLok technology but the bottom line is no iLok = no PT9 (and any associated plugin's). Although that may not be an issue for you. . . . .
Joe

[UpTilDawn]

In your first sentence you said you wanted to use PT9 for "mixing". Is this to run live sound or to record a live show and mix afterwards? If live sound is the case then I would say neither PT9 or SAW and your should be looking at SAC...

Personally, I think this comment of Joe's is KEY to the discussion.
Until we know what the OP actually meant to say and ask, this thread just reads like all the other PT vs. SAW threads...... and the debate goes on, and on, and on,..........

[cgrafx]

Personally, I think this comment of Joe's is KEY to the discussion.
Until we know what the OP actually meant to say and ask, this thread just reads like all the other PT vs. SAW threads...... and the debate goes on, and on, and on,..........

He was very clear.. they have a Presonus Live board they just purchased to mix on.

PT9 would be for recording/session mixing not LIVE use.

[soundtrack2life]

He was very clear.. they have a Presonus Live board they just purchased to mix on.

PT9 would be for recording/session mixing not LIVE use.

FWIW I have a Ramsa DA7 that I used as a front end for SAW and now Pro Tools. . . . . BTW I never mixed down song one on it. And the original post says "now they are considering using Pro Tools 9 for mixing" no mention of the Presounus Live board to mix on. . . . . . I take nothing for granite
Joe

[Microstudio]

I'm working with a small club that just purchased a Presonus Live and now they are considering using Pro Tools 9 for mixing. My comment was that there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does. Is there a link on the SAW forum that an A/B comparison was done?

Thank You
Greg

I think you mean they want PT9 to Record and Mix the recording? As for your comment "there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does" is not true, in fact there is a ton of things SAW can't do that PT9 does.

[Fulvio fullcode Politi]

As for your comment "there is nothing that SAW can't do that Pro Tools does" is not true, in fact there is a ton of things SAW can't do that PT9 does.

Thats right... however up till pure mixing (not editing) is involved, there are a couple of things that SAW can do that PT9 can't

Fu