Right you are, so it goes back to what kind of work. Professional, or expensive hobby that you asked earlier sir. - T.O.M
On Apr 26, 2012, at 6:57 PM, "Brian Casey" <[email protected]> wrote: > Cool. I'll take all that on board. > > I suppose its still worth mentioning reaccess development has seemed to hault > without any notice, but it of course is workable for the moment according to > the educated few!! > > Just to balance this thread as much as possible! > > Brian. > > From: The Oreo Monster > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 11:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? > > Actually thas where i disagree lol. Reaper is alot easier to get into and has > alot less over head than sonar. You install it, launch it once, quit it then > install the reaaccess plugin, then you can launc it and use it. Sonar you > have to install, then install the scripts then follow the guide to set up the > lay out for the scripts to work,the and you can not have sonar and jaws > going through the same sound card at all. Reaper also works equally with > NVDA, Jaws,System Access, and Window Eyes.. THis is of course with the > reaaccess plug in. My only real gripe with Reaper was how they implemented > editing with the reaaccess plug in. It made me want to pull my hair out > during long editing sessions lol > - T.O.M > > On Apr 26, 2012, at 6:46 PM, "Brian Casey" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Haha, I thought it better to leave reaper out of it...it doesn't seem like >> an option as a main daw for someone starting out quite yet, but again, >> that's an opinion. >> >> From: The Oreo Monster >> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 11:44 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? >> >> Ditto to everything brian said. It really comes down to your needs and which >> platform (windows/mac) you want to go with. Personally i prefered the JSonar >> scripts as it relied on the fimiliar sonar interface i was already used to >> from using sonar with a screen magnifier before my sight got to the point >> where i had to switch to using jaws. Caketalking does bput its own interface >> layer over sonar and has its own complete set of shortcuts, where as JSonar >> relies on the default sonar interface and most of sonar's already extensive >> library of shortcuts, adding JSonar shortcuts where needed. On the flip side >> the mac comes with Voice over and you only have to buy Pro Tools and an >> interface.And to complicate things, there is also the option of reaper on >> the PC as well. >> - T.O.M >> >> On Apr 26, 2012, at 5:06 PM, "Brian Casey" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I don't think so really. >>> >>> It boils down to free versus paid, no tutorials vs extensive tutorials and >>> possibly less stable/less regularly updated/subject to lack of time for the >>> developer vs commercial insentive to release, talking of course about J >>> sonar and CakeTalking respectively. Though the development cycle for >>> CakeTalking scripts is quite slow, and from what I gather J Sonar is quite >>> stable. >>> >>> There also seems to be more people using custom HSC sets etc to g ain >>> access to plugins with J Sonar, where as I'm not sure myself as a >>> cakeTalking user about latching on HSC sets to the scripts...I'd still like >>> to hear from someone in the know about HSC sets and Caketalking. >>> >>> Hope that helps, >>> >>> Brian. >>> >>> From: Jim Noseworthy >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 10:00 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? >>> >>> Hello: >>> >>> Is there a general consensus about which scripts work best for full access >>> to Sonar 8.5? >>> >>> Thanks all over the place. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Brian Casey >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 5:18 PM >>> Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? >>> >>> Hi Chris, >>> >>> I'm not trying to say your wrong, but I think we need to be careful in >>> saying which is more accessible, and its very dependent on someones >>> needs/wants. >>> >>> If someone wants to do a lot of midi stuff and audio in equal amounts or >>> whatever, Sonar on a feature for feature basis would probably be >>> technically more accessible depending on the scripts being used. >>> Add to that the possibility of creating hot spot sets for jaws and it >>> presents very different accessability to ProTools. >>> >>> So I'm not saying your wrong but its not a simple black or white issue. >>> >>> Perhaps you didn't take to the way things were done in sonar, as you seem >>> to be taking to ProTools like a duck to water, but many make a living and >>> achieve success with sonar, so you know, lets try to give as full a picture >>> as possible to anyone trying to make a decision on what is a relatively big >>> investment/commitment. >>> >>> I'm glad you feel the way you do about PT though, I wasn't as posative, but >>> I didn't have a chance to throw myself into it fully and reading about your >>> quick learning on it and excitement about the platform gives me hope that >>> I'll at least learn PT as another skill in my bag of tricks some time in >>> the near future. >>> >>> >>> Brian. >>> >>> From: Christopher-Mark Gilland >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:03 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? >>> >>> In a lot of ways, I personally find it to be as accessible, if not more. >>> >>> Chris. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Pino Guarraci >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 11:41 AM >>> Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? >>> >>> Hello Chris, >>> >>> I agree with you but do you think that Protools is even accessible as >>> Sonar? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Pino >>> www.studiocrescendo.be >>> www.proguide.eu >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Christopher-Mark Gilland >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 2:18 PM >>> Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? >>> >>> For one thing, do realize that on the Windows side of things, ProTools is >>> going to be almost useless. >>> >>> If you get a mac, it works almost flawlessly. I would recommend PT by far >>> and away over Sonar! The effects are way better, the sound is way better, >>> and honestly, over all things I find at least, are just way easier to do in >>> PT in a whole. Plus, Sonar is not industry standard, where as ProTools is. >>> >>> Any good major recording studio is going to have most likely one, if not >>> more, ProTools systems that they can use. >>> >>> So ultimately, I'd suggest PT, but that is me. >>> >>> Chris. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: stuart young >>> To: '[email protected]' >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:51 AM >>> Subject: Pro tools or Sonar? >>> >>> Hi all. >>> I am going to be setting up a small recording studio with in the next 6 >>> months or so and I am currently doing some research in to which digital >>> audio work station to use. I have decided to use either Pro tools, or >>> Sonar, but I thought that I would first ask on this list if anyone has had >>> experience in using either product, and what were there thoughts on using >>> each one. >>> Many thanks for your help on this, regards. >>> Stuart Young >>> Learning Support Unit >>> The West of England School and College >>> Countess Wear >>> Exeter >>> Devon >>> EX2 6HA >>> Tel: 01392 454223 >>> Website: http://www.westengland.ac.uk/ >>> Email: [email protected] >>> Charity Number: 1058937 >>> >>> The information in this email and any files transmitted with it may be of a >>> confidential nature and are intended solely for the addressees. If you are >>> not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by >>> replying to the email and then delete it without making copies or using it >>> in any way. The West of England School and College has taken reasonable >>> precautions to ensure that this message has been checked for viruses before >>> transmission. However, you are strongly advised to carry out your own virus >>> scan before any opening any attachments. The West of England School and >>> College accept no responsibility for loss or damage caused by software >>> viruses. >>> >>> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >>> signature database 7089 (20120426) __________ >>> >>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. >>> >>> http://www.eset.com >> >
