Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Victor Tsaran]

Hi Slau.
Thanks a lot for such a comprehensive answer. This is pretty much what I 
was looking for.
Logic will remain for me a kind of an instrument to play with, but I am 
looking to get back into some editing and this is why I asked the question.

Thanks again.
Vic


On Tuesday, February 6, 2018 at 7:28:02 AM UTC-8, Slau Halatyn wrote:
>
> Hi JPR, just a specific comment to audio and MIDI, Pro Tools, by all 
> accounts, is superior for audio editing and that has nothing to do with 
> being a blind user or not but it just so happens that virtually everything 
> related to editing can be done via the qwerty keyboard and that's a major 
> advantage. Further, the new audio comping shortcuts in Pro Tools are off 
> the hook easy and fast. Also, what Flo Tools started to offer in the way of 
> on-the-fly editing of MIDI is now not only part of Pro Tools itself but 
> it's even better since it also involves keyboard shortcuts built in to Pro 
> Tools. What Flo Tools still offers is the automatic reporting of parameters 
> of selected MIDI notes on the fly which is enormously helpful and efficient 
> since all of this can take place right in the Mix or Edit windows. Editing 
> non-musical data like controller values and such still has to be done in 
> the MIDI Event list to a large degree and is not as quick as note editing 
> but that's essentially true for any dAW. That said, it's possible to edit 
> all kinds of data right in the edit window in specific views for the data 
> in question but it's surely more appropriate for cut, copy and paste-type 
> editing rather than granular editing.
> Best,
> Slau
>
> On Feb 6, 2018, at 3:04 AM, Jean-Philippe Rykiel  > wrote:
>
> Hi Vic,
>
> Interesting. I'd like to get the opinion from folks who are using audio 
> and MIDI together.
>
> Best,
>
> JPR
>
>
> http://www.jprykiel.comhttp://soundcloud.com/ryksounethttp://twitter.com/ryksounethttp://facebook.com/jeanphilipperykiel
>
> Le 06/02/2018 à 07:25, Victor Tsaran a écrit :
>
> Hello all! 
> Please please no flame wars!
> I would really like to hear from expert users who used both Logic and 
> Protools with VoiceOver on Mac OS. To be more precise, I mean the 
> Flotools/Protools combination vs Flogic/Logic one.
> After reading various release notes on Flotools.org, I came to conclusion 
> that protools combined with Flotools offers an unparalleled productivity 
> and efficiency with VoiceOver compared to that of Logic. Of course, you can 
> deal with the quirks of the latter, but judging from the feature set of 
> Flotools, querying, editing and manipulating the audio content in Protools 
> is much faster than in Logic Pro.
>
> Yes, I understand the difference between two DAWs. The purpose of this 
> message is to affirm my conclusions, especially from users who are experts 
> in using both.
>
> Would you agree with my observations above? Are there any remaining weak 
> points in Protools as far as accessibility is concerned?
> Thanks for any pointers, tutorials, podcasts, etc.
> Vic
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to ptaccess+u...@googlegroups.com .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to ptaccess+u...@googlegroups.com .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro 
Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Krister Ekstrom]

Yes indeed i have Komplete as well albeit only a Mk1.
/Krister


> 7 feb. 2018 kl. 18:07 skrev Ricky Prevatte :
> 
> Chi that is exactly what I am doing now using logic as a supplement. Most of 
> my work little of It there  is is done in  Protools. Christer you would not 
> have to have a control surface you would enjoy I believe working with 
> Protools doing your audio and you of course still have logic. Do you not use 
> complete as well?
> 
> Ricky Prevatte LMBT1154
> 
>> On Feb 7, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Chi Kim  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> Interesting thread!
>> First, let me clarify some of the things mentioned about me.
>> My main DAW is Logic as Slau mentioned. I'm forced to use Logic because 
>> my main collaborators use Logic. I also developed Flogic which is no 
>> where close to Flo Tools yet.
>> Having said that, I mainly teach Pro Tools at Berklee, and I have a 
>> certification for Pro Tools.
>> I'm mostly experienced in Logic, Pro Tools, and Sonar, but I briefly 
>> dabbled with Reaper and Samplitude as well.
>> Now, I'll just get to the point.
>> If you're purely talking about accessibility for DAWs in Mac, Pro Tools 
>> with Flo Tools is the winner without a doubt.
>> I can point out many reasons, but one thing I don't like about logic is 
>> that I have to waste time fussing with flaky user interface when using 
>> with VoiceOver.
>> Also, I think the interface for Pro Tools is much efficient for 
>> VoiceOver users in general. In Logic, ask someone to select 8 bars from 
>> bar 5 for track 1, 3, 5, and paste to track 6, 8, 10 using VoiceOver.
>> In short, if you have a choice, I would definitely recommend to use Pro 
>> Tools as main DAW, and supplement with Logic for some of its cool features.
>> Hope that helps.
>> 
>> Chi
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro 
Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Ricky Prevatte]

Chi that is exactly what I am doing now using logic as a supplement. Most of my 
work little of It there  is is done in  Protools. Christer you would not have 
to have a control surface you would enjoy I believe working with Protools doing 
your audio and you of course still have logic. Do you not use complete as well?

Ricky Prevatte LMBT1154

> On Feb 7, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Chi Kim  wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Interesting thread!
> First, let me clarify some of the things mentioned about me.
> My main DAW is Logic as Slau mentioned. I'm forced to use Logic because 
> my main collaborators use Logic. I also developed Flogic which is no 
> where close to Flo Tools yet.
> Having said that, I mainly teach Pro Tools at Berklee, and I have a 
> certification for Pro Tools.
> I'm mostly experienced in Logic, Pro Tools, and Sonar, but I briefly 
> dabbled with Reaper and Samplitude as well.
> Now, I'll just get to the point.
> If you're purely talking about accessibility for DAWs in Mac, Pro Tools 
> with Flo Tools is the winner without a doubt.
> I can point out many reasons, but one thing I don't like about logic is 
> that I have to waste time fussing with flaky user interface when using 
> with VoiceOver.
> Also, I think the interface for Pro Tools is much efficient for 
> VoiceOver users in general. In Logic, ask someone to select 8 bars from 
> bar 5 for track 1, 3, 5, and paste to track 6, 8, 10 using VoiceOver.
> In short, if you have a choice, I would definitely recommend to use Pro 
> Tools as main DAW, and supplement with Logic for some of its cool features.
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Chi
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro 
Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Chi Kim]

Hi All,

Interesting thread!
First, let me clarify some of the things mentioned about me.
My main DAW is Logic as Slau mentioned. I'm forced to use Logic because 
my main collaborators use Logic. I also developed Flogic which is no 
where close to Flo Tools yet.
Having said that, I mainly teach Pro Tools at Berklee, and I have a 
certification for Pro Tools.
I'm mostly experienced in Logic, Pro Tools, and Sonar, but I briefly 
dabbled with Reaper and Samplitude as well.
Now, I'll just get to the point.
If you're purely talking about accessibility for DAWs in Mac, Pro Tools 
with Flo Tools is the winner without a doubt.
I can point out many reasons, but one thing I don't like about logic is 
that I have to waste time fussing with flaky user interface when using 
with VoiceOver.
Also, I think the interface for Pro Tools is much efficient for 
VoiceOver users in general. In Logic, ask someone to select 8 bars from 
bar 5 for track 1, 3, 5, and paste to track 6, 8, 10 using VoiceOver.
In short, if you have a choice, I would definitely recommend to use Pro 
Tools as main DAW, and supplement with Logic for some of its cool features.
Hope that helps.

Chi

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro 
Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Slau Halatyn]

A surface was never mandatory except, perhaps, back in Pro Tools version 5.x 
when the faders were not visible in the Mix window. At that time, a surface was 
pretty much an absolute necessity. A surface is not required for the current 
state of things. That said, I can't imagine doing a proper mix without a 
surface and being able to control multiple tracks at a time with faders. For 
composing with virtual instruments, however, a lot of the "mixing" is done 
right within the composition stage so it's a decidedly different workflow.
Slau
 
> On Feb 6, 2018, at 2:40 PM, Krister Ekstrom  wrote:
> 
> Ok, have to find out about licensing options in Avid. 
> I have no studio as such, i’m an amateur making productions in my living room 
> so i have no clients as such, so time isn’t necessarily of the esance because 
> i would think that an Avid control surface is quite a costly business, so can 
> i manage without one or is it like it was back in the 11 days that a control 
> surface was in principle mandatory?
> /Krister
> 
> 
>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 20:16 skrev Slau Halatyn > >:
>> 
>> The many options in terms of annual upgrade and subscription plan depends on 
>> which version and which type of Pro Tools license one has to begin with. If 
>> starting from scratch, there's an initial charge of something like $300 or 
>> so and then it's $99 per year. If you let that expire, you'll have to pay 
>> the higher price again so keeping the subscription active is worth it in the 
>> end. There are a range of surfaces that'll work if they support HUI protocol 
>> but an Avid surface, especially one using EUCON is best and that's a 
>> protocol supported by Logic as well.
>> Slau
>> 
>>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 1:10 PM, Krister Ekstrom >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> So have i misunderstood things correctly, :-) Even if i am an earlier 
>>> protools user, the cost for v2018.1 is $399 for the first year?
>>> What surfaces are recommended nowadays, is it only the Avid line if you 
>>> want to have full benefit of it?
>>> /Krister
>>> 
>>> 
 6 feb. 2018 kl. 19:00 skrev Slau Halatyn >:
 
 Things have changed enormously since version 11 so, yes, you missed a lot. 
 The annual subscription for Pro Tools is $99 per year with an initial cost 
 of $300 for the first year with a support contract. Logic does have great 
 built-in sounds but it offers the same in terms of manuals and there's 
 equally a lack of tutorials from a blindness perspective. Control surfaces 
 are a huge help no matter what the dAW and Flo Tools has eased the burden 
 for that need although I still maintain the use of a surface is 
 indispensable if you're working for speed and with clients attending a 
 session.
> On Feb 6, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Krister Ekstrom  > wrote:
> 
> That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were 
> almost forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly 
> and not only that, if you were going to have a control surface where you 
> didn’t have to learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to 
> have a surface that was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden 
> that meant a five figure amount of money, something i most definitely 
> could not afford. I left Pro tools around version 11 so i have probably 
> missed things but i felt there was too much to sift through in terms of 
> manuals and howtos spread far and wide around the net.
> What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good 
> instruments and soft synths and i appreciate that.
> Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the 
> eko system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they 
> changed the lisencing system a while back.
> /Krister
> 
> 
>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn > >:
>> 
>> Hi Victor,
>> 
>> I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest 
>> answer to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been 
>> Logic. However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with 
>> the offerings on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite 
>> well versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on 
>> both platforms. while I consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, 
>> I'm really not at all acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and 
>> poking around in it, I have virtually no true hands-on experience using 
>> it in any meaningful way. That said, I've observed others and how they 
>> get 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Krister Ekstrom]

Ok, have to find out about licensing options in Avid. 
I have no studio as such, i’m an amateur making productions in my living room 
so i have no clients as such, so time isn’t necessarily of the esance because i 
would think that an Avid control surface is quite a costly business, so can i 
manage without one or is it like it was back in the 11 days that a control 
surface was in principle mandatory?
/Krister


> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 20:16 skrev Slau Halatyn :
> 
> The many options in terms of annual upgrade and subscription plan depends on 
> which version and which type of Pro Tools license one has to begin with. If 
> starting from scratch, there's an initial charge of something like $300 or so 
> and then it's $99 per year. If you let that expire, you'll have to pay the 
> higher price again so keeping the subscription active is worth it in the end. 
> There are a range of surfaces that'll work if they support HUI protocol but 
> an Avid surface, especially one using EUCON is best and that's a protocol 
> supported by Logic as well.
> Slau
> 
>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 1:10 PM, Krister Ekstrom > > wrote:
>> 
>> So have i misunderstood things correctly, :-) Even if i am an earlier 
>> protools user, the cost for v2018.1 is $399 for the first year?
>> What surfaces are recommended nowadays, is it only the Avid line if you want 
>> to have full benefit of it?
>> /Krister
>> 
>> 
>>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 19:00 skrev Slau Halatyn >> >:
>>> 
>>> Things have changed enormously since version 11 so, yes, you missed a lot. 
>>> The annual subscription for Pro Tools is $99 per year with an initial cost 
>>> of $300 for the first year with a support contract. Logic does have great 
>>> built-in sounds but it offers the same in terms of manuals and there's 
>>> equally a lack of tutorials from a blindness perspective. Control surfaces 
>>> are a huge help no matter what the dAW and Flo Tools has eased the burden 
>>> for that need although I still maintain the use of a surface is 
>>> indispensable if you're working for speed and with clients attending a 
>>> session.
 On Feb 6, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Krister Ekstrom > wrote:
 
 That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were 
 almost forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly and 
 not only that, if you were going to have a control surface where you 
 didn’t have to learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to 
 have a surface that was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden that 
 meant a five figure amount of money, something i most definitely could not 
 afford. I left Pro tools around version 11 so i have probably missed 
 things but i felt there was too much to sift through in terms of manuals 
 and howtos spread far and wide around the net.
 What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good 
 instruments and soft synths and i appreciate that.
 Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the eko 
 system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they 
 changed the lisencing system a while back.
 /Krister
 
 
> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn  >:
> 
> Hi Victor,
> 
> I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer 
> to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
> However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the 
> offerings on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well 
> versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both 
> platforms. while I consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm 
> really not at all acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking 
> around in it, I have virtually no true hands-on experience using it in 
> any meaningful way. That said, I've observed others and how they get 
> around the interface and I base my comments on this experience.
> 
> Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
> right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
> simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
> toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line 
> of clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and 
> groups list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is 
> essentially the entirety of the interface with only two levels of 
> "interaction as far as VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the 
> insert and sends sub groups in each channel strip, I 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Ricky Prevatte]

Well I will first clarify that I am not an expert on ProTools or logic. But 
when I start a project I intend to finish it I also intend to have a fairly 
simple work flow. The answer for me is Protools I have been a Windows user: 
those days are over. I am a logic user but I detest the drilling down and 
losing focus that goes on in logic. I am not doing the midi work that .
I  used to so for me Protools and a basic control surface is doing the job. I 
would not need The control surface if I did not have to see clients or have 
Fellow band members present.  as has  already been stated Flo Tools and the hot 
keys are doing a great job the addition of Flo Tools has allowed us to also 
access parameters with our control surface as well..

Ricky Prevatte LMBT1154

> On Feb 6, 2018, at 1:10 PM, Krister Ekstrom  wrote:
> 
> So have i misunderstood things correctly, :-) Even if i am an earlier 
> protools user, the cost for v2018.1 is $399 for the first year?
> What surfaces are recommended nowadays, is it only the Avid line if you want 
> to have full benefit of it?
> /Krister
> 
> 
>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 19:00 skrev Slau Halatyn :
>> 
>> Things have changed enormously since version 11 so, yes, you missed a lot. 
>> The annual subscription for Pro Tools is $99 per year with an initial cost 
>> of $300 for the first year with a support contract. Logic does have great 
>> built-in sounds but it offers the same in terms of manuals and there's 
>> equally a lack of tutorials from a blindness perspective. Control surfaces 
>> are a huge help no matter what the dAW and Flo Tools has eased the burden 
>> for that need although I still maintain the use of a surface is 
>> indispensable if you're working for speed and with clients attending a 
>> session.
>>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Krister Ekstrom  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were 
>>> almost forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly and 
>>> not only that, if you were going to have a control surface where you didn’t 
>>> have to learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to have a 
>>> surface that was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden that meant a 
>>> five figure amount of money, something i most definitely could not afford. 
>>> I left Pro tools around version 11 so i have probably missed things but i 
>>> felt there was too much to sift through in terms of manuals and howtos 
>>> spread far and wide around the net.
>>> What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good instruments 
>>> and soft synths and i appreciate that.
>>> Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the eko 
>>> system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they 
>>> changed the lisencing system a while back.
>>> /Krister
>>> 
>>> 
 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn :
 
 Hi Victor,
 
 I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer 
 to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
 However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the 
 offerings on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well 
 versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both 
 platforms. while I consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm 
 really not at all acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking 
 around in it, I have virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any 
 meaningful way. That said, I've observed others and how they get around 
 the interface and I base my comments on this experience.
 
 Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
 right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
 simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
 toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of 
 clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups 
 list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is 
 essentially the entirety of the interface with only two levels of 
 "interaction as far as VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the 
 insert and sends sub groups in each channel strip, I can't think of an 
 instance where one has to drill down more than one level to get to 
 anything in any window in Pro Tools. To me, it seems like Logic requires 
 more jumping around and drilling of interactions to accomplish similar 
 tasks.
 
 What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting 
 things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted 
 soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length 
 values are, etc. 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Slau Halatyn]

The many options in terms of annual upgrade and subscription plan depends on 
which version and which type of Pro Tools license one has to begin with. If 
starting from scratch, there's an initial charge of something like $300 or so 
and then it's $99 per year. If you let that expire, you'll have to pay the 
higher price again so keeping the subscription active is worth it in the end. 
There are a range of surfaces that'll work if they support HUI protocol but an 
Avid surface, especially one using EUCON is best and that's a protocol 
supported by Logic as well.
Slau

> On Feb 6, 2018, at 1:10 PM, Krister Ekstrom  wrote:
> 
> So have i misunderstood things correctly, :-) Even if i am an earlier 
> protools user, the cost for v2018.1 is $399 for the first year?
> What surfaces are recommended nowadays, is it only the Avid line if you want 
> to have full benefit of it?
> /Krister
> 
> 
>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 19:00 skrev Slau Halatyn > >:
>> 
>> Things have changed enormously since version 11 so, yes, you missed a lot. 
>> The annual subscription for Pro Tools is $99 per year with an initial cost 
>> of $300 for the first year with a support contract. Logic does have great 
>> built-in sounds but it offers the same in terms of manuals and there's 
>> equally a lack of tutorials from a blindness perspective. Control surfaces 
>> are a huge help no matter what the dAW and Flo Tools has eased the burden 
>> for that need although I still maintain the use of a surface is 
>> indispensable if you're working for speed and with clients attending a 
>> session.
>>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Krister Ekstrom >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were 
>>> almost forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly and 
>>> not only that, if you were going to have a control surface where you didn’t 
>>> have to learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to have a 
>>> surface that was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden that meant a 
>>> five figure amount of money, something i most definitely could not afford. 
>>> I left Pro tools around version 11 so i have probably missed things but i 
>>> felt there was too much to sift through in terms of manuals and howtos 
>>> spread far and wide around the net.
>>> What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good instruments 
>>> and soft synths and i appreciate that.
>>> Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the eko 
>>> system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they 
>>> changed the lisencing system a while back.
>>> /Krister
>>> 
>>> 
 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn >:
 
 Hi Victor,
 
 I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer 
 to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
 However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the 
 offerings on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well 
 versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both 
 platforms. while I consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm 
 really not at all acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking 
 around in it, I have virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any 
 meaningful way. That said, I've observed others and how they get around 
 the interface and I base my comments on this experience.
 
 Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
 right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
 simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
 toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of 
 clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups 
 list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is 
 essentially the entirety of the interface with only two levels of 
 "interaction as far as VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the 
 insert and sends sub groups in each channel strip, I can't think of an 
 instance where one has to drill down more than one level to get to 
 anything in any window in Pro Tools. To me, it seems like Logic requires 
 more jumping around and drilling of interactions to accomplish similar 
 tasks.
 
 What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting 
 things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted 
 soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length 
 values are, etc. Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were 
 used to getting in Sonar, 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Krister Ekstrom]

So have i misunderstood things correctly, :-) Even if i am an earlier protools 
user, the cost for v2018.1 is $399 for the first year?
What surfaces are recommended nowadays, is it only the Avid line if you want to 
have full benefit of it?
/Krister


> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 19:00 skrev Slau Halatyn :
> 
> Things have changed enormously since version 11 so, yes, you missed a lot. 
> The annual subscription for Pro Tools is $99 per year with an initial cost of 
> $300 for the first year with a support contract. Logic does have great 
> built-in sounds but it offers the same in terms of manuals and there's 
> equally a lack of tutorials from a blindness perspective. Control surfaces 
> are a huge help no matter what the dAW and Flo Tools has eased the burden for 
> that need although I still maintain the use of a surface is indispensable if 
> you're working for speed and with clients attending a session.
>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Krister Ekstrom > > wrote:
>> 
>> That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were 
>> almost forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly and 
>> not only that, if you were going to have a control surface where you didn’t 
>> have to learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to have a 
>> surface that was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden that meant a 
>> five figure amount of money, something i most definitely could not afford. I 
>> left Pro tools around version 11 so i have probably missed things but i felt 
>> there was too much to sift through in terms of manuals and howtos spread far 
>> and wide around the net.
>> What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good instruments 
>> and soft synths and i appreciate that.
>> Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the eko 
>> system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they changed 
>> the lisencing system a while back.
>> /Krister
>> 
>> 
>>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn >> >:
>>> 
>>> Hi Victor,
>>> 
>>> I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer 
>>> to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
>>> However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the 
>>> offerings on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well 
>>> versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both 
>>> platforms. while I consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm 
>>> really not at all acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking 
>>> around in it, I have virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any 
>>> meaningful way. That said, I've observed others and how they get around the 
>>> interface and I base my comments on this experience.
>>> 
>>> Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
>>> right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
>>> simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
>>> toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of 
>>> clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups 
>>> list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is essentially 
>>> the entirety of the interface with only two levels of "interaction as far 
>>> as VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the insert and sends sub 
>>> groups in each channel strip, I can't think of an instance where one has to 
>>> drill down more than one level to get to anything in any window in Pro 
>>> Tools. To me, it seems like Logic requires more jumping around and drilling 
>>> of interactions to accomplish similar tasks.
>>> 
>>> What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting 
>>> things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted 
>>> soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length 
>>> values are, etc. Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were 
>>> used to getting in Sonar, for example. Regarding Flo Tools, this is just 
>>> barely scratching the surface of what it can now do for Pro Tools. To me, 
>>> the current state of access in Pro Tools along with Flo Tools,  is 
>>> unparalleled. Of course, we all know that other DAWs are quite useable and 
>>> Logic offers a decent degree of access. However, it's not yet at the level 
>>> of Pro Tools with Flo Tools. Ah, one more qualification: in my opinion, the 
>>> greatest access to Pro Tools, even with Flo Tools, is gained by the use of 
>>> a control surface. This is not to say that one cannot access everything 
>>> without a surface but the degree to which and speed with which one can 
>>> access things is simply hands down faster with a surface and I would 
>>> venture to say that's true for a 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Slau Halatyn]

Things have changed enormously since version 11 so, yes, you missed a lot. The 
annual subscription for Pro Tools is $99 per year with an initial cost of $300 
for the first year with a support contract. Logic does have great built-in 
sounds but it offers the same in terms of manuals and there's equally a lack of 
tutorials from a blindness perspective. Control surfaces are a huge help no 
matter what the dAW and Flo Tools has eased the burden for that need although I 
still maintain the use of a surface is indispensable if you're working for 
speed and with clients attending a session.
> On Feb 6, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Krister Ekstrom  
> wrote:
> 
> That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were 
> almost forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly and 
> not only that, if you were going to have a control surface where you didn’t 
> have to learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to have a 
> surface that was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden that meant a 
> five figure amount of money, something i most definitely could not afford. I 
> left Pro tools around version 11 so i have probably missed things but i felt 
> there was too much to sift through in terms of manuals and howtos spread far 
> and wide around the net.
> What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good instruments 
> and soft synths and i appreciate that.
> Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the eko 
> system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they changed 
> the lisencing system a while back.
> /Krister
> 
> 
>> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn > >:
>> 
>> Hi Victor,
>> 
>> I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer to 
>> this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
>> However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the offerings 
>> on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well versed in Pro 
>> Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both platforms. while I 
>> consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm really not at all 
>> acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking around in it, I have 
>> virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any meaningful way. That 
>> said, I've observed others and how they get around the interface and I base 
>> my comments on this experience.
>> 
>> Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
>> right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
>> simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
>> toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of 
>> clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups 
>> list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is essentially 
>> the entirety of the interface with only two levels of "interaction as far as 
>> VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the insert and sends sub groups 
>> in each channel strip, I can't think of an instance where one has to drill 
>> down more than one level to get to anything in any window in Pro Tools. To 
>> me, it seems like Logic requires more jumping around and drilling of 
>> interactions to accomplish similar tasks.
>> 
>> What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting 
>> things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted 
>> soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length values 
>> are, etc. Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were used to 
>> getting in Sonar, for example. Regarding Flo Tools, this is just barely 
>> scratching the surface of what it can now do for Pro Tools. To me, the 
>> current state of access in Pro Tools along with Flo Tools,  is unparalleled. 
>> Of course, we all know that other DAWs are quite useable and Logic offers a 
>> decent degree of access. However, it's not yet at the level of Pro Tools 
>> with Flo Tools. Ah, one more qualification: in my opinion, the greatest 
>> access to Pro Tools, even with Flo Tools, is gained by the use of a control 
>> surface. This is not to say that one cannot access everything without a 
>> surface but the degree to which and speed with which one can access things 
>> is simply hands down faster with a surface and I would venture to say that's 
>> true for a blind user using any workstation out there. So, let's say that 
>> factor is a given but I think it's worth mentioning.
>> 
>> If anybody can help get Logic to a higher level of accessibility, it'll be 
>> Chi. The issues that Logic has are things like windows not being titled in 
>> ways that are conducive to scripting the UI. Image recognition helps but is 
>> still a bit quirky and not 100% reliable.
>> 
>> My sighted colleagues 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Krister Ekstrom]

That is exactly the reason why i leftt Pro tools, the fact that you were almost 
forced to have a control surface to do most of the work quickly and not only 
that, if you were going to have a control surface where you didn’t have to 
learn and assign all the parameters yourself, you *had* to have a surface that 
was fully integrated with Pro tools and in Sweden that meant a five figure 
amount of money, something i most definitely could not afford. I left Pro tools 
around version 11 so i have probably missed things but i felt there was too 
much to sift through in terms of manuals and howtos spread far and wide around 
the net.
What Logic has that Protools doesn’t have is a ton of very good instruments and 
soft synths and i appreciate that.
Heck i don’t even know if i as an old PT 11 user can even get into the eko 
system again without paying humongous amounts of money, because they changed 
the lisencing system a while back.
/Krister


> 6 feb. 2018 kl. 16:20 skrev Slau Halatyn :
> 
> Hi Victor,
> 
> I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer to 
> this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
> However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the offerings 
> on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well versed in Pro 
> Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both platforms. while I 
> consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm really not at all 
> acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking around in it, I have 
> virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any meaningful way. That 
> said, I've observed others and how they get around the interface and I base 
> my comments on this experience.
> 
> Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
> right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
> simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
> toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of 
> clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups 
> list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is essentially 
> the entirety of the interface with only two levels of "interaction as far as 
> VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the insert and sends sub groups 
> in each channel strip, I can't think of an instance where one has to drill 
> down more than one level to get to anything in any window in Pro Tools. To 
> me, it seems like Logic requires more jumping around and drilling of 
> interactions to accomplish similar tasks.
> 
> What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting 
> things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted 
> soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length values 
> are, etc. Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were used to 
> getting in Sonar, for example. Regarding Flo Tools, this is just barely 
> scratching the surface of what it can now do for Pro Tools. To me, the 
> current state of access in Pro Tools along with Flo Tools,  is unparalleled. 
> Of course, we all know that other DAWs are quite useable and Logic offers a 
> decent degree of access. However, it's not yet at the level of Pro Tools with 
> Flo Tools. Ah, one more qualification: in my opinion, the greatest access to 
> Pro Tools, even with Flo Tools, is gained by the use of a control surface. 
> This is not to say that one cannot access everything without a surface but 
> the degree to which and speed with which one can access things is simply 
> hands down faster with a surface and I would venture to say that's true for a 
> blind user using any workstation out there. So, let's say that factor is a 
> given but I think it's worth mentioning.
> 
> If anybody can help get Logic to a higher level of accessibility, it'll be 
> Chi. The issues that Logic has are things like windows not being titled in 
> ways that are conducive to scripting the UI. Image recognition helps but is 
> still a bit quirky and not 100% reliable.
> 
> My sighted colleagues who use both Logic and Pro Tools virtually all agree 
> that they like Logic for composition and its sounds and Pro Tools for its 
> editing and mixing environment. With the advent of Komplete Kontrol and the 
> MIDI editing enhancements built into Pro Tools, to me, I don't feel any lack 
> of MIDI or virtual instrument capabilities. It's clear that some other DAWs 
> have more advanced or flexible MIDI implementation but that's the kind of 
> thing that people who are MIDI and VI-based composers care most about. I use 
> plenty of MIDI and virtual instruments and the degree to which I can edit 
> MIDI now, even on the fly, is way more than I even need. That said, a person 
> trying to compose and mix EDM, and I mean a blind user here, would have a 
> challenge on their hands when it comes to 

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Slau Halatyn]

The question was not regarding Windows. Victor was asking specifically about 
Logic versus Pro Tools. I simply mentioned Chi's Windows experience because 
he's probably used more DAWs than any single blind user out there.
> On Feb 6, 2018, at 10:39 AM, Phil Muir <i...@accessibilitytraining.co.uk> 
> wrote:
> 
> Slau wrote: I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the 
> fullest answer to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has 
> been Logic. However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with 
> the offerings on that side of the fence. More important, he's quite well 
> versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both 
> platforms.
>  
> Phil replied: possibly although don’t think Chi has dug into Samplitude on 
> Windows and not sure how much of a Reaper user he is either.  There in lies 
> the problem for any of us who work in multiple DAW’s.
>  
> From: ptaccess@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
> Of Slau Halatyn
> Sent: 06 February 2018 15:20
> To: PTAccess List
> Subject: Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity
>  
> Hi Victor,
>  
> I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer to 
> this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. 
> However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the offerings 
> on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well versed in Pro 
> Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both platforms. while I 
> consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm really not at all 
> acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking around in it, I have 
> virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any meaningful way. That 
> said, I've observed others and how they get around the interface and I base 
> my comments on this experience.
>  
> Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible 
> right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are 
> simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the 
> toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of 
> clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups 
> list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is essentially 
> the entirety of the interface with only two levels of "interaction as far as 
> VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the insert and sends sub groups 
> in each channel strip, I can't think of an instance where one has to drill 
> down more than one level to get to anything in any window in Pro Tools. To 
> me, it seems like Logic requires more jumping around and drilling of 
> interactions to accomplish similar tasks.
>  
> What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting 
> things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted 
> soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length values 
> are, etc. Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were used to 
> getting in Sonar, for example. Regarding Flo Tools, this is just barely 
> scratching the surface of what it can now do for Pro Tools. To me, the 
> current state of access in Pro Tools along with Flo Tools,  is unparalleled. 
> Of course, we all know that other DAWs are quite useable and Logic offers a 
> decent degree of access. However, it's not yet at the level of Pro Tools with 
> Flo Tools. Ah, one more qualification: in my opinion, the greatest access to 
> Pro Tools, even with Flo Tools, is gained by the use of a control surface. 
> This is not to say that one cannot access everything without a surface but 
> the degree to which and speed with which one can access things is simply 
> hands down faster with a surface and I would venture to say that's true for a 
> blind user using any workstation out there. So, let's say that factor is a 
> given but I think it's worth mentioning.
>  
> If anybody can help get Logic to a higher level of accessibility, it'll be 
> Chi. The issues that Logic has are things like windows not being titled in 
> ways that are conducive to scripting the UI. Image recognition helps but is 
> still a bit quirky and not 100% reliable.
>  
> My sighted colleagues who use both Logic and Pro Tools virtually all agree 
> that they like Logic for composition and its sounds and Pro Tools for its 
> editing and mixing environment. With the advent of Komplete Kontrol and the 
> MIDI editing enhancements built into Pro Tools, to me, I don't feel any lack 
> of MIDI or virtual instrument capabilities. It's clear that some other DAWs 
> have more advanced or flexible MIDI implementation but that's the k

RE: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Phil Muir]

Slau wrote: I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the
fullest answer to this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has
been Logic. However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with
the offerings on that side of the fence. More important, he's quite well
versed in Pro Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both
platforms.

 

Phil replied: possibly although don't think Chi has dug into Samplitude on
Windows and not sure how much of a Reaper user he is either.  There in lies
the problem for any of us who work in multiple DAW's.

 

  _  

From: ptaccess@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Slau Halatyn
Sent: 06 February 2018 15:20
To: PTAccess List
Subject: Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

 

Hi Victor,

 

I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer to
this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic.
However, Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the offerings
on that side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well versed in Pro
Tools. I'd say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both platforms. while I
consider myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm really not at all
acquainted with Logic. Despite owning it and poking around in it, I have
virtually no true hands-on experience using it in any meaningful way. That
said, I've observed others and how they get around the interface and I base
my comments on this experience.

 

Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible
right out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are
simple and offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the
toolbar in the Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of
clusters. The Mix and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups
list and the Edit window can also display a clips list. That is essentially
the entirety of the interface with only two levels of "interaction as far as
VoiceOver is concerned. In fact, apart from the insert and sends sub groups
in each channel strip, I can't think of an instance where one has to drill
down more than one level to get to anything in any window in Pro Tools. To
me, it seems like Logic requires more jumping around and drilling of
interactions to accomplish similar tasks.

 

What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting
things like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted
soloed or record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length values
are, etc. Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were used to
getting in Sonar, for example. Regarding Flo Tools, this is just barely
scratching the surface of what it can now do for Pro Tools. To me, the
current state of access in Pro Tools along with Flo Tools,  is unparalleled.
Of course, we all know that other DAWs are quite useable and Logic offers a
decent degree of access. However, it's not yet at the level of Pro Tools
with Flo Tools. Ah, one more qualification: in my opinion, the greatest
access to Pro Tools, even with Flo Tools, is gained by the use of a control
surface. This is not to say that one cannot access everything without a
surface but the degree to which and speed with which one can access things
is simply hands down faster with a surface and I would venture to say that's
true for a blind user using any workstation out there. So, let's say that
factor is a given but I think it's worth mentioning.

 

If anybody can help get Logic to a higher level of accessibility, it'll be
Chi. The issues that Logic has are things like windows not being titled in
ways that are conducive to scripting the UI. Image recognition helps but is
still a bit quirky and not 100% reliable.

 

My sighted colleagues who use both Logic and Pro Tools virtually all agree
that they like Logic for composition and its sounds and Pro Tools for its
editing and mixing environment. With the advent of Komplete Kontrol and the
MIDI editing enhancements built into Pro Tools, to me, I don't feel any lack
of MIDI or virtual instrument capabilities. It's clear that some other DAWs
have more advanced or flexible MIDI implementation but that's the kind of
thing that people who are MIDI and VI-based composers care most about. I use
plenty of MIDI and virtual instruments and the degree to which I can edit
MIDI now, even on the fly, is way more than I even need. That said, a person
trying to compose and mix EDM, and I mean a blind user here, would have a
challenge on their hands when it comes to certain aspects of that type of
production. That has more to do with the interfaces of the virtual
instruments, however, and that's the area where every DAW poses a challenge
for blind users.

 

I've been openly accused of being both a Mac and Pro Tools snob. This mostly
comes from people who are equally snobbish about Windows and other DAWs
while procla

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Slau Halatyn]

Hi Victor,

I believe that the only person truly qualified to give the fullest answer to 
this question is Chi Kim. Chi's primary DAW for years has been Logic. However, 
Chi has also been a Windows user and is familiar with the offerings on that 
side of the fence. More  important, he's quite well versed in Pro Tools. I'd 
say he's perhaps equally knowledgeable on both platforms. while I consider 
myself an experienced Pro Tools user, I'm really not at all acquainted with 
Logic. Despite owning it and poking around in it, I have virtually no true 
hands-on experience using it in any meaningful way. That said, I've observed 
others and how they get around the interface and I base my comments on this 
experience.

Recent versions of Pro Tools, especially the latest, are very accessible right 
out of the box. The two main windows, the Mix and Edit windows, are simple and 
offer channel-strip type groupings of controls aside from the toolbar in the 
Edit window, which is just laid out in a horizontal line of clusters. The Mix 
and Edit windows share a table of track list and groups list and the Edit 
window can also display a clips list. That is essentially the entirety of the 
interface with only two levels of "interaction as far as VoiceOver is 
concerned. In fact, apart from the insert and sends sub groups in each channel 
strip, I can't think of an instance where one has to drill down more than one 
level to get to anything in any window in Pro Tools. To me, it seems like Logic 
requires more jumping around and drilling of interactions to accomplish similar 
tasks.

What Flo Tools has done is dramatically increase efficiency by reporting things 
like how many tracks are showing, how many are hidden, what's muted soloed or 
record-enabled, etc. what the current start, end and length values are, etc. 
Largely, the kind of information that Windows users were used to getting in 
Sonar, for example. Regarding Flo Tools, this is just barely scratching the 
surface of what it can now do for Pro Tools. To me, the current state of access 
in Pro Tools along with Flo Tools,  is unparalleled. Of course, we all know 
that other DAWs are quite useable and Logic offers a decent degree of access. 
However, it's not yet at the level of Pro Tools with Flo Tools. Ah, one more 
qualification: in my opinion, the greatest access to Pro Tools, even with Flo 
Tools, is gained by the use of a control surface. This is not to say that one 
cannot access everything without a surface but the degree to which and speed 
with which one can access things is simply hands down faster with a surface and 
I would venture to say that's true for a blind user using any workstation out 
there. So, let's say that factor is a given but I think it's worth mentioning.

If anybody can help get Logic to a higher level of accessibility, it'll be Chi. 
The issues that Logic has are things like windows not being titled in ways that 
are conducive to scripting the UI. Image recognition helps but is still a bit 
quirky and not 100% reliable.

My sighted colleagues who use both Logic and Pro Tools virtually all agree that 
they like Logic for composition and its sounds and Pro Tools for its editing 
and mixing environment. With the advent of Komplete Kontrol and the MIDI 
editing enhancements built into Pro Tools, to me, I don't feel any lack of MIDI 
or virtual instrument capabilities. It's clear that some other DAWs have more 
advanced or flexible MIDI implementation but that's the kind of thing that 
people who are MIDI and VI-based composers care most about. I use plenty of 
MIDI and virtual instruments and the degree to which I can edit MIDI now, even 
on the fly, is way more than I even need. That said, a person trying to compose 
and mix EDM, and I mean a blind user here, would have a challenge on their 
hands when it comes to certain aspects of that type of production. That has 
more to do with the interfaces of the virtual instruments, however, and that's 
the area where every DAW poses a challenge for blind users.

I've been openly accused of being both a Mac and Pro Tools snob. This mostly 
comes from people who are equally snobbish about Windows and other DAWs while 
proclaiming that it's horses for courses and, at the end of the day, it's just 
WAV files. I say it's about the quality of getting from point A to point B. To 
me, the quality of the experience has always been better on a Mac and, 
therefore, Pro Tools. Even though Logic eventually started becoming accessible, 
Pro Tools is still the gold standard on the Mac side of things. Given that my 
sighted colleagues are overwhelmingly Mac and Pro Tools based, I'm comfortable 
in this camp and find it getting better all the time. All that said, some 
people just simply feel better sticking to other environments and what they're 
used to and you can't blame a person for that.

One last thing I'll say about a weakness versus strength, there is no current 
tutorial focused on the use of Pro 

RE: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Phil Muir]

No doubt about it.  With regard to accessibility on the Mac in DAW software
even without Flo Tools which takes it to another level, Pro Tools wins hands
down.  Also they have done a ton of cool stuff in Pro Tools 2018 with regard
to MIDI which is very cool indeed!!

 

  _  

From: ptaccess@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Victor Tsaran
Sent: 06 February 2018 06:25
To: Pro Tools Accessibility
Subject: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

 

Hello all!

Please please no flame wars!

I would really like to hear from expert users who used both Logic and
Protools with VoiceOver on Mac OS. To be more precise, I mean the
Flotools/Protools combination vs Flogic/Logic one.

After reading various release notes on Flotools.org, I came to conclusion
that protools combined with Flotools offers an unparalleled productivity and
efficiency with VoiceOver compared to that of Logic. Of course, you can deal
with the quirks of the latter, but judging from the feature set of Flotools,
querying, editing and manipulating the audio content in Protools is much
faster than in Logic Pro.

 

Yes, I understand the difference between two DAWs. The purpose of this
message is to affirm my conclusions, especially from users who are experts
in using both.

 

Would you agree with my observations above? Are there any remaining weak
points in Protools as far as accessibility is concerned?

Thanks for any pointers, tutorials, podcasts, etc.

Vic

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro 
Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Protools vs Logic Pro, accessibility and productivity

[Jean-Philippe Rykiel]

Hi Vic,

Interesting. I'd like to get the opinion from folks who are using audio 
and MIDI together.


Best,

JPR


http://www.jprykiel.com
http://soundcloud.com/ryksounet
http://twitter.com/ryksounet
http://facebook.com/jeanphilipperykiel

Le 06/02/2018 à 07:25, Victor Tsaran a écrit :

Hello all!
Please please no flame wars!
I would really like to hear from expert users who used both Logic and 
Protools with VoiceOver on Mac OS. To be more precise, I mean the 
Flotools/Protools combination vs Flogic/Logic one.
After reading various release notes on Flotools.org, I came to 
conclusion that protools combined with Flotools offers an unparalleled 
productivity and efficiency with VoiceOver compared to that of Logic. 
Of course, you can deal with the quirks of the latter, but judging 
from the feature set of Flotools, querying, editing and manipulating 
the audio content in Protools is much faster than in Logic Pro.


Yes, I understand the difference between two DAWs. The purpose of this 
message is to affirm my conclusions, especially from users who are 
experts in using both.


Would you agree with my observations above? Are there any remaining 
weak points in Protools as far as accessibility is concerned?

Thanks for any pointers, tutorials, podcasts, etc.
Vic

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools 
Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.