Pro Tools HD 9 vs Nuendo 5

Question

I'm building a surround mixing room over the next month and I am trying to decide between Protools HD2 and Nuendo 5. The room will primarily be for commercial work and sound design (not mixing) for indie movies and feature films. We will also have a nice VO booth as part of the setup. For I/O I only need 8 in and 8 out. However, I need a whole lot of tracks within the program. A few other things that will definitely be in the room:

Mac quad or 8 core computer Storage/recording/playback drives will be on a 10TB server connected via Fibre Channel Either a Decklink Studio or an Aja LHi for video playback AD/DA converters will be Mytek, Metric Halo, or Apogee Control surface will be a Euphonix MC Control, MC Pro, or some Digidesign desk. Genelec 8030 surround monitors with matching sub Dangerous Music monitor controller (unless the control surface we get does talkback and surround monitoring) And we'll need some surround reverbs, dynamics control, EQ's, various other effects, etc.

I've been a Nuendo user for many years and there are a lot of things about it I really like. For example, the lanes function, I like the work flow, and I'm just simply used to it. However, it is a Native software so it takes a smokin' computer to record with less than 5ms latency in order to get the various mixes in the control room and the VO booth.

Protools HD systems have the core card doing a lot of audio processing so latency is never an issue. It's also the industry standard so file exchange with other studios, albeit rare, is a nice thing to have. Having Protools also offers the ability to have other engineers walk in, sit down, and start working far more easily than Nuendo.

I've been doing recording/mixing/producing/and sound in some form full time for 12 years and I have somehow managed to avoid EVER learning Protools. I'm pretty sure I get a medal for that accomplishment.

As a note...Protools Native isn't worth it to me. If I'm going to get a Native program I'll just stick with Nuendo. Protools HD is a much more robust system for commercial work.

So...thoughts? Comments? Feelings on Protools HD vs Nuendo?

Answer 1

Good choice on Nuendo. I run Nuendo 4 @ home in a small 5.1 setup, plus on a laptop for sessions on the go, with SSL Pro Convert always at hand. I use both PC and Mac. Most of the last six years has had me on set for a number of TV shows and features ranging from very low budget to very high, so my Nuendo system gets neglected quite a bit at home. But Last summer I got the phone call of a lifetime which offered me a position to mix second unit for a huge blockbuster film called Cowboys and Aliens.

Most of my time was spent recording explosions and fight scenes, gun shots, etc. for the action and stunt scenes, but for six day I worked along side sound recordist Mark Ulano on first unit recording music that was performed live during specific dialogue scenes. I used Nuendo 4 on a my MacBook Pro that was jam synced to Mark Ulano's timecode off his Deva. I created a simple record session containing a few tracks for the instruments on set.

It was very simple; piano for one scene and Fiddle for another. Because the musicians were in the scenes while film was rolling I had to conceal the microphones. I used Lectrosonics SMa wireless transmitting to a venue rackmount receiver running on my cart rig. I mixed the sessions on a Yamaha O1V96V2 sending audio feed into Nuendo via the Yamaha FireWire Bus Card. Timecode sync was performed via midi timecode. I have a midi patchbay with SMPTE I/O that accepts all SPMTE frame rates. Nuendo has a native function that allows for your sessions to slave off incoming SMPTE timecode which causes the record files to start and stop on the timeline automatically in sync with external timecode. Pro Tools requires a Sync I/O with Digi Translator, plus another post purchased feature to do the same thing Nuendo ships with natively.

For the Piano I had two mics placed in a stereo configuration (Left @ left/center of the lower register; Right @ right/center of the high register) at the back of the upright piano on the outer rear frame allowing the mics to sit off of the sound board. I placed a third mic in the center of the keyboard (just behind the front cover; which was open; one of those old mid 1800 style pianos with the small door on the cover) where the pianist was performing to get the sound of the keys being touched. For the Fiddle scene I placed one mic on the chest of the fiddler (on the edge of his vest; westerns always have nice soft clothes) and a second mic in his hair with the mic capsule hanging on his ear facing down toward the fiddle. The performer fortunately decided to play the fiddle in the style of the day where you'd place the body of the fiddle below the chest on the stomach, instead of on the shoulder. This helped incredibly as both mics were able to capture the resonance of the instrument from a prime position.

After recording the sessions I made sure to have all tracks labeled with instrument/mic placement etc. Then I labeled all the recorded files individually with scene name/take #/instrument/mic placement, etc. I then converted all the record sessions into Pro Tools sessions using SSL Pro Convert. Within Pro Convert you just select the session you want to convert and tell Pro Convert what type of session you want to create; in this case Pro Tools 7. You confirm your selection...and next thing you know you have the guys at DreamWorks telling you your Pro Tools sessions were great, and they dropped into the timeline of their Pro Tools sessions in perfect sync.

I have to admit...Pro Tools is great, but I really love Nuendo!

Answer 2

Every industry, including our own, has an 'industry standard' software that is used across the board. This brings a certain level of synchronisation to the industry and makes project transfers easier. However, not everyone is obliged to use it. If all your projects are dealt with in-house from start to finish, with no need to open the project on another system in another studio then I'd say stick with Nuendo. If you've been mostly using Nuendo then your workflow will be most efficient with this software. And can you really afford the time that it would take to get up to speed with Pro Tools HD9?

Inversely, it's well worth being aware of the difficulties that people have experienced when trying to open Nuendo-exported OMFs in a Pro Tools project. See this post for more info. If you will need to open up projects across different systems then maybe you need to go the Pro Tools route.

To conclude, I'd go back to the old saying 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. In other words, if you're happy using Nuendo and there are no cross-platform issues that will be encountered, then stick with Nuendo.

Answer 3

I never try ProTools, but worked 10 years in Nuendo. I saw a real setups in cinema production where RME gear + Nuendo simply shined with 100+ tracks and surround channels. From my point of view, if you like and used to Nuendo - go with it. 'Smoking computer' isn't a question with Mac quad or 8 core. Again - you have to work fast and have a friendly environment. I vote for Nuendo in your situation.

Answer 4

I too fall on the Nuendo side with 3 post rooms plus 2 composition rooms running Nuendo and Cubase. I came from ProTools and still keep a rig updated "just in case" but honestly I haven't needed it in a couple of years. That old chestnut of an argument that "ProTools is the standard so you have to have it" just doesn't hold water unless you are actually going to be exchanging sessions with other studios that use ProTools. There's just not enough of a difference between them and if your workflow is Nuendo, why change it unless you have to? John.

Answer 5

I do primarily game audio, and have more than 7 years on each system. Most recently I am a Nuendo guy but have done several PT jobs this year.

Here are some pros and cons (I use NU4 and PT 8 LE and you will see that i lean to Nuendo)

NU4:

• "offline process history" function is AWESOME!!! - for those who don't know, every thing you do to a region gets saved in order and you can disable, delete, reorder, and (my fave) create a batch that re-executes the whole list in 1 go. Amazing for Game audio, but also good for creating a vocal effect using multiple plugs and applying to a set of lines, then changing that effect down the line and re-applying it to all the lines quickly

• great integration of sound fx search lib and editing (its built into Nuendo).

• Keyboard shortcuts are easy to set and save/load

• Better/more flexible video options (not sure about PT9)

• more hardware options (PT9 changes this)

• Session XFER is a major pain (not because of NU, but because of PT)

• Harder to find engineers if you need to bring in someone to work

• On the PC only, NU is definitely more solid and has quicker load times

• Less expensive

• I like multi-region editing (if you select several regions and change the fade-in, the fade-ins for all the regions change

• I like having an easy to use volume level for each region. Reduces the need for automation and uncomplicates mixes a bit.

PT 8 LE

• Industry compatibility

• easier to find engineers

• More options on FX search engines and I have heard networking is easier as well (no experience myself)

• Many of my favorite plugs are RTAS (and TDM)

• FOr those who like hardware controllers (HUI/COntrol/etc) there are more/better options

• On average, PT is more expensive

• I really like the smart tool

• I find the hardware i/o system less intuitive, but once you learn a system it doesnt really matter that much

Answer 6

Nuendo users Unite!

I too, am quite privy to Nuendo. I do have some experience with pro tools LE, but i find that you can get more done with fewer steps in Nuendo. If you're worried about cpu resources you can always apply plugins directly to audio clips. And if you need to change any settings to the effect just go into your offline processing history and modify the effect for the clip.

I do wish there was more cross compatibility between avid and stienberg. It would be awesome if pro tools exported and imported AES31 files.

Answer 7

I've worked in Post for many years using both Pro Tools and Nuendo. I'm a fan of both, but I think Nuendo has an edge and if it's what you know go with it. Compatibility is always an issue, but even with Pro Tools to Pro Tools sessions there can be problems - different plug-ins and different engineers being the two biggest! Most often I've taken OMFs and recreated mixes anyway. Get some good RME hardware and Nuendo 5 - you can use the money you save to buy some hot plug-ins!

Answer 8

Buy SSL Pro Convert. I mentioned it at the end of my answer above. It will allow you to work in Nuendo and save your Nuendo sessions as Pro Tools sessions. It works great, once you learn how to use it. It took me a day to learn and the night I figured it all out I was creating Pro Tools sessions for a big picture from Nuendo sessions that I recorded on location. The PT sessions allowed post to drop sync all the record files into their PT timeline in perfect sync.

Good luck, and congratulations on the new system. Just reading your gear list is making me drool; Except for the fact that I love the Lynx Aurora converters instead of the others. They're all great, but the Lynx has been chosen by guys in the mastering world because of it's transparency and accuracy toward recreating the "Natural Analog" sound throughout the whole frequency spectrum.

There's a guy in the UK who decided to purchase the Lynx Aurora over Weiss, Prism, Mytek, Benchmark and all the rest after an extensive time of listening and testing all the available "professional quality" converters on the market. According to him the Lynx Aurora was the only converter he trusted to place in line with his Nuemann Lathe. It was his top choice for mastering all finished product from CD to DVD and LP's. He's one of the go to mastering engineers for the London Symphony Orchestra, Vienna Symphony Orchestra, and a host of other european symphony houses and major labels.

I decided to trust his word and I'm glad because I love my Aurora 16.

Have fun making sound for movies.

E. Santiago

Answer 9

The reaons pro tools became a standard is not that its soooo great sounding. its funny because all the mastering engineers say it sounds like crap thats why they just use it as a tape deck and use a SSL or Neve to get it to sound good.

In the old days of Audio there was the big dogs Waveframe,Fairlight and I think one other.

these where the go to systems that sounded great but was very costly. you had to choose these systems or settle for 2 inch Tape and a Large Console that was once again very costly.

Digidesign (now Avid) had there SoundDesigner Program. A 2 track editor program. Then they came with sessions 8 on the PC ( windows ) platform.

When the other big Dog systems decided to get deeper into the film world. The Audio ( music world ) Was kinda left with no aforable choices. This created an Opt for Digidesign they created ProToolsTDM

This provided all that wanted to play the Daw game to do this at a fraction of the cost compared to the Bigdog systems or Tape and a Desk.

Pro tools also for a while was also Mac Only. This also positioned Apple products in the Audio World as a standard.They was domimate already in Schools but now recording studios had macs and Pro tools and got rid of these Tape decks but did keep there desks due to feeling the sound of pro tools was kinda brittle. So for years most engineer with major credits used pro tools as the replacement of the studder but the mix and sound of the music was really from the Console.

because no one else stepped to the challange or when did so they failed so badly Pro Tools became the industry standard. These Studios did not want to abandon their cheaper 50 k investment so they just stayed loyal and just updated their systems ( bought DSP over and over and even bought new systems allout via hardware Tradeins )

The production world was full of choices and no real standard was there for Music production but then Logic Audio Came on the scene. Because Pro Tools had Limited if any Midi functions folks used Logic and Logic became the Production standard as far as a computer based Sequencer.

In todays Times Logic is still a choice but no longer "THE" Choice. The same reality is with Pro tools.

Steinberg came on and became the subject of many Logic vs Cubase wars. Steinberg was known for great midi and I found it to be very easy and Much better than Logic. It also ran on the mac. Strangly the folks that was pro tools users stricly used logic as their sequencer.I think thats due to a time when logic matured and supported TDM hardware. Cubase had a version that also supported TDM hard ware Cubase XT but was later scraped.

Cubased Matured greatly with Cubase Vst that opened the door for Audio but steinberg being such a small company, did not really understand how audio recording works and what engineers expected to see and how they expected to feel when mixing a record.

So Pro Tools dominated the Audio Mixing World and Logic Dominated The Sequencing Daw world.

Keep in mind pro tools domination was not in the area of sonic quality but in its editing ability. The SSL or Neve took care of the sonics.

Then along came Nuendo Orginally created for Silicon Graphics Machines, found its way to the PC platform ( Windows NT ) From Version 1 it was a Godsend! and Possed a real threat to Pro tools in the fact that it offerd a 500 track limitation Midi options and not being tied to expensive hardware.

Today Nuendo has matured greatly beyond anyones expectations.

What I will say to Yamaha and Steinberg is they need to learn and understand their strengths. Yamaha has been making consoles for years both Analog and Digital

They should take notes from The way Avid and Digesign worked with their product.

To Avids credit, they seem to really understand how the audio production world and mixing world works.They offer the engineer solutions that make him feel right at home. If a engineer thats been sitting in front of a desk for years, he will be reluctant to sit down in front of a Mackie Control and take that seriously. The only serious small format controller that I loved was the Original Mackie Hui. to this date there is no small format controler that offerd what this one did in the way that it did. Steinbergs level of support for controlers are so very lacking. they only support a few functions but dont go deep into the surface unless your willing to buy a System 5 Mc or Wk Audio you must use the small format controlers. They are getting better. Smart AV has some nice desks. The gripe I have with alot of them is that when your looking at faders you want to look right above it for the name of that ch. not look at a choke of buttons, then some knobs, then the display. They dont get it that the user is constanly looking up and down over and over. even if they are looking at the desk. I have a Mackie Hui and I can look down at my faders and know where I am at all times due to the scrible strip being just above the fader!

Taken from the Logic of Euphonix industry standards are a thing of the past. standards are not standards of whats best its just standard meaning a base set. Some sware by logic, some Nuendo ( LIKE ME LOL ) and some ProTools.

I would say this Use everything you can get your hands on. I have Nuendo,ProTools Sonar,Samplitude everything. However the flag on my ship... "NUENDO"

Answer 10

I'm a Pro Tools guy. Not because it's the best, but because I want to do what Hollywood does. 9 times out of 10, it's PT. All platforms are capable of great things in the right hands, so I would go with the one which is considered the standard for whom you plan to be collaborating with. Good luck.

Answer 11

I have learned on Pro Tools and switched to Nuendo, because it just is a better software for post production. There are many reasons for that. Pro Tools is only the industry standard for historic reasons. When CPU power was still low, they provided a solution with their DSP power, so that you could do professional productions with a computer. But times have changes. Nevertheless, Pro tools is still the industry standard. So as many people here already said, if you have to exchange a lot of sessions with other studios, Pro Tools is almost a must have.

However, I wouldn’t go for an HD system. Now with Pro Tools 9 this is pretty much useless for Post production. The only remaining advantage is that you can record more tracks. But that is not really needed for post. Pro Tools 9 + complete production toolkit 2 will do. And then get some good hardware from RME to deal with the latency.

But if you don’t have to exchange a lot of sessions with other studios, do it like me. My main software in Nuendo 5, but I am running a simple Pro Tools system, for which I don’t even need an Mbox anymore in case I have to exchange a session with a pro tools studio once in a while, which of course happens.

Answer 12

If you are the only person who will ever use the room stick to what you know best.

If others need to use the room on a regular basis then choose the standard in your field, which is probably Pro Tools.

Answer 13

Nice choice you made. In my opinion Nuendo is of superior quality than PT9 (algorithm wise) and it can do a lot as a standard package. Industry standard is just a marketing concept, so don't be fooled by that and a lot of pro movie scores in Holywood are done in Nuendo these days for a reason. On the other side...ask yourself what do you really need. Everybody is always thinking in terms of 'what can it do', but the point is...what do you really (basically) need and what will you really use! Crappy recordings need a lot...good recordings don't need much. The less you do...the better the quality of the audio, bla bla bla, you catch my drift.

If you have a certain workflow with specific things around it, which works for you...and you can get it done in Nuendo, then stick with it. That mac monster you want to buy won't cost you tracks or other things. It will do just fine. Remember that learning/discovering new ways is always a good thing! So start learning PT9 too.

What I would like to add: Get PT9 native aswell and install it on a separate machine linked on your network (if you have one). Then go Edward Sandiago's way with SSL pro convert. This way you have both and engineers can use whatever works for them. But you must make sure PT9 is up and running, because clients don't want to come in and have a hassle to get things up and running. That situation will cost you.

PS Personally I noticed that in the US most studio's are PT based. In Europe & AustralAsia studio's are more Nuendo based. Learn both. Knowledge = power!

Answer 14

If you don't have to record lots of inputs or need really low latency, go with the platform you fell more comfortable. If you choose Pro Tools|HD and don't know it, you should budget the time you'll need to invest to learn it and find a workflow that works for you.

The real advise I can tell you is to watch out for sessions/projects exchange: most of the post studios have at least one Pro Tools machine to open, read, export works with the rest of the world; Avid doesn't make easy to exchange session between Pro Tools and other DAW so if you think that you'll have a lot of PT session to work with (from clients or other studios) think twice before choosing Nuendo (or find a proven conversion workflow).

My 2c

all the best

Davide

Answer 15

They are both great tools to be honest. I am an avid (no pun intended) Pro Tools user. With Pro Tools 9, I see no reason to steer away from it. 128 tracks now in PT9, any interface (pretty much) will work.

Answer 16

So, here is what we decided for the new control room and VO booth:

Nuendo 5 for the primary software and we'll get PT9 Native when the need arises.
Waves 360 surround bundle Izotope Ozone 4 Audioease Speakerphone Waves Restoration Bundle Waves Vocal Rider Mac Pro tower with dual 27" monitors, 12GB RAM for now, Fibre Channel so the video and audio can stream from our server. Euphonic MC Control v2 with additional 8 fader expansion Neumann U87Ai Focus rite Red 7 Genelec 8030.LSE surround speakers Dangerous Music ST/SR surround controller Mytek 8x192 converter with Lynx AES16e PCIe card

Plus a variety of other gear to round out the needs. I'm sure we'll be tweaking and adding on gear as we go. When/if the need arises we'll add PT9 Native at that point.

Answer 17

For me Nuendo is good choice. I recommended this article http://www.boxoftoys.ca/?p=198, where author explain that is absolutely does not matter what sw you choose. But sometimes is necessary to think with whom you going to cooperate.

Answer 18

Nuendo is fantastic for vo recordings, ADR and foley, the lane set up is brilliant and the easy to use shortcuts allows you to switch between all of them in seconds.

You can also edit volume and fades instantly, so gives you a chance to do a quick edit for anything you recorded.

Pro tools is the standard, but it doesn't mean it's the best. I always record in Nuendo and mix/edit in pro tools.

Answer 19

I have read most of all the comments that suggest Nuendo as your solution and I also agree! As far as compatability, I am compatable with the world and I strickly use nuendo. You dont need to buy anything new to enjoy the ability to go back and forth with Pro tools Guys!

Dont use OMF sometimes that dont work. The 100 % way for things to work is to simply if they are in protools sending you back files tell them to consolodate and provide tempo info. if you are sending files to them you just bounce audio ( this is not the same as bounce to disk in pro tools ) this is the same as pro tools consolodate command. you bounce all your files ending up with no gaps in audio and just provide the tempo info and just send them the stems and your set. what they would get is 24 Bit 48 k ( or higher )broadcast wav files or aiff it dont matter.This way they are just importing the files and setting the tempo. thats it takes only seconds.

The biggest issue with pro tools for me is that the bounce to disk in in real time..so as the the other person said that its easy when doing a 1 hour project to open it up for changes, yea he forgot to tell you that once he makes this change he must also do a bounce to disk. This means a real time 1 hour long wait for the session to bounce down.If there is any glitch what so ever the bounce to disk can be stoped then you must start all over. In nuendo you have a choice to do this real time style mix down or you can sum the mix. Its way faster. The biggest advantage that pro tools has is in the area of Large format Controlers. Euphonix was nuendos Gateway into that world but Avid bought them so now the beloved protools has access to this console as well but The new Team at avid is not the same thinkers as the old DSP heads as now Pro tools can enjoy native abilities and any hardware of your choice including of course there own. So Thanks Avid for being Open and allowing for options.

you should check out a guy name Jon Ross he has a very large Nuendo/Euphonix rig like 88 faders. He uses nuendo. if you notice pro tools is trying to catch up with everyone else. pro tools users used to talk down the fact that nuendo had automation lanes but now they have them. The one thing thats awsome of pro tools is the automation that thinks logicly. Nuendo has the same functions now but still is not as easily accessable via a controler The basic Read/Write are there but finding Trim and xover from a desk is missing in addition to not having these modes from the surface avaible per ch.

thats the thing I wish nuendo would change even in its software was the accessability of the automation modes on the mixer and the arrange view not a big change just add the other automation buttons on the mixer and ch strip view and arrange window view.

so you end up with R W TR L tch xov if this it to many buttons then leave it as is and just use a window pop over when you click on the R or W while holding a function key. but from a surface you should be able to just have buttons for each function. anyway sorry for the rant.. Nuendo Still is the best Choice. I would challange any ProTools user to a Dual heheh

Answer 20

I've worked with Nuendo for years and think Protools is simply over rated, I know EVERY feature & function on Nuendo from front to back and recored hit records in my studio!!!! I'll give Nuendo five stars..............

Answer 21

I am a dubbing / re-recording mixer with 10+ years experience. I think Nuendo is starting to give Pro Tools a run for its money. However having used both for long and short form on a daily basis, in my opinion....

Short form - Nuendo is ace, the folder tracks keep things nice and tidy (especially with the constant changes from advertising clients).

Long form - Pro tools is king, fades and automation are no nonsense (when I've had a long day, i just want to know hitting the space bar plays my huge mix, cause I want to go home)

Of course, future updates and versions could change all this, Nuendo 6 looks exciting, but I guess thats the beauty of competiiton... and about time.

Mr T

Answer 22

I've been working full time as a sound engineer for music and TV buisness since 2000. In the few last years, I was mainly using Protools 7/8HD and Nuendo 3/4.

When you are working as a professionnal, the system/software need to be a extension of your thoughts...it need to be fast, flexible and without limitations.

I my opinion Protools 9HD is the way to go...mainly because of is way to work with automations, it's ease with editing, it's hardware I/O (less user frendly but so flexible) and it's low latency. Also, when you have to do a very long session (over 1 hour), it is very easy to do a quick fix in Protools without having to redo the entire bounce.

I've tryed very hard to edit and to use automations in Nuendo (for plugins, pan, volume, etc.) without acheiving the 1/3 of what I am able to do in Protools. I got pretty fustrated by all those limitations so I am now only using Protools 9HD.

Conclusion: Neundo vs Protools LE= Nuendo Nuendo vs Protools HD= Protools

*Sorry for my bad english.

Answer 23

I use both Nuendo and Pro Tools on a daily basis. They are both great programs no doubt, but Nuendo is my favorite. It is the fastest for tracking, editing and mixing and has more features that speed up other processes. Protools can do anything Nuendo can do (except built in vari-audio which is like melodyne) but Nuendo requires fewer steps for most things.

Answer 24

How many professional studios use Nuendo? There's a reason why Pro Tools is the standard. In your situation, I personally wouldn't go with any native solution. You're asking for trouble.