Logic Pro X

[Jeff Wexler]

 

- from Macworld review

 

Those who’ve seen the Roman numeral X slapped onto Final Cut Pro may approach this release with some initial trepidation. Has Logic Pro been stripped of vital features to make it more accessible to GarageBand users? Is Apple abandoning professional audio engineers and musicians to cater to the prosumer user?

 

No and no. While Logic Pro has indeed adopted some of the look of Final Cut Pro X—with its dark visage and panes that can be invoked or dismissed as the mood strikes—Apple’s digital audio workstation (DAW) has lost none of its power and gained valuable features on just about every front.

 

 

Read the Article

[Jim Feeley]

Interesting. The Macworld review is totally focused on music creation and editing and in a skim, the only other audio app I saw mentioned was GarageBand. Nothing wrong with that since it appears that's whom Apple's targeting the app. From the press release:

 

====

 

Apple Unveils Logic Pro X

CUPERTINO, California—July 16, 2013—Apple® today unveiled Logic® Pro X, the most advanced version of Logic Pro to date, featuring a new interface designed for pros, powerful new creative tools for musicians, and an expanded collection of instruments and effects. Logic Pro X includes Drummer, a revolutionary new feature that provides a virtual session player that automatically plays along with your song in a wide variety of drumming styles and techniques, and Flex Pitch, which provides integrated pitch editing for audio recordings. Apple also introduced Logic Remote, an innovative new way to play and control Logic Pro X from your iPad®, giving musicians the flexibility to create and mix their music from anywhere in the room. 

====

 

Rest of the press release:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2013/07/16Apple-Unveils-Logic-Pro-X.html

 

Apple's LPX product page:

http://www.apple.com/logic-pro/

 

 

 

But has anyone seen a competent review that compares LPX to Pro Tools et al?

[Jeff Wexler]

I never thought Logic was an alternative for ProTools for post sound work, always considered Logic music production software.

[Jim Feeley]

I never thought Logic was an alternative for ProTools for post sound work, always considered Logic music production software.

 

That's its heritage back from the Emagic days. But I see (well, hear about) it being used for post. So I'd like to know more about that side of the app.

[Jeff Wexler]

Me too. I do know that people have used Logic in the past, even before it was with Apple, to do post sound work. I have no personal experience and I do agree it would be nice to read a review or someone's assessment of its viability for post work.

[Philip Perkins]

I wish the dark-BG thing for apps would go out of fashion.  A light BG is so much easier to read and more cheerful in general.

 

philp

[enginufuk]

I agree with you Philip! While my first impression is "how cool lookin!" after some time of use, dark back ground doesn't make it easy to read and work with. 

 

I personally find myself running Logic for a light, fast post work otherwise I start with PT if I know I'll be there for a while. Which is a weird instinct that I have to admit! cause Logic doesn't open Poly files and I have to go through Wave Agent, etc...  

 

Anyways, I believe once the files are imported both can handle a complicated post session. 

[Johnny Karlsson]

I own and use both Logic and Pro Tools. For music creation and composing, Logic is in many ways a lot better IMHO.

For mixing and editing audio - I'd say Pro Tools is the better choice (at least up until now).

 

This new version of Logic seems to have some real improvements in terms of audio editing, but we'll see --- I'm off to downloading Logic X right now. It's time to crank out some new tunes.

 

A lot of new cool features that I can't wait to use:

http://play.macprovideo.com/logic-pro-100-whats-new-in-logic-pro-x/1

[Jeff Wexler]

I agree with you Philip! While my first impression is "how cool lookin!" after some time of use, dark back ground doesn't make it easy to read and work with. 

 

It is a well demonstrated fact that dark backgrounds "look" cool but are miserable to work with. I have seen so many website designs that have the cool dark backgrounds but they are difficult to read, very fatiguing for the eye, etc. I looked at a lot of "cool" forum themes for JWSOUND but after doing a little research (and going with my own experience and instincts) I settled on a light colored theme for this site.

[Jim Feeley]

For picture editing, I much prefer a dark background. That way the interface doesn't compete with the content. (though these days, my time in front of a NLE is mostly screenings and stuff). Of course, audio and text are different beasts. And different strokes... So hopefully more developers will let users set the interface the way they each want.

 

Still looking for thoughtful reviews of LPX that discuss more than just music creation. So post links if you find 'em (and Johnny, let us know what you think when you fire it up yourself).

[Miguel Carretero]

The reason for using Logic for post in the past is related with the algorythms used for sound processing. As the Pro Tools became an standard, they just didn´t spent enough amount of money programming deeper and good algorythms, because the equipments were sold anyway. So, Pro Tools always offered nice and reliable operation and interface, but an extremely poor sound processing and results. In order not to extend the conversation, this has changed since the Pro Tools became native, and start using others manufacters algorythms. Another important fact for sure was the flexibility chosing converters and wordclocks with Logic; you could plug Apogges or other manufacters easy, while in Pro Tools enviroment that was not always posible.

[Constantin]

The reason for using Logic for post in the past is related with the algorythms used for sound processing. As the Pro Tools became an standard, they just didn´t spent enough amount of money programming deeper and good algorythms, because the equipments were sold anyway. So, Pro Tools always offered nice and reliable operation and interface, but an extremely poor sound processing and results. In order not to extend the conversation, this has changed since the Pro Tools became native, and start using others manufacters algorythms. Another important fact for sure was the flexibility chosing converters and wordclocks with Logic; you could plug Apogges or other manufacters easy, while in Pro Tools enviroment that was not always posible.

If that were true, then why did Pro Tools become the industry standard? For the interface alone?

[Philip Perkins]

If that were true, then why did Pro Tools become the industry standard? For the interface alone?

That's a long story, but some factors of it are (were) the guaranteed track count on TDM systems no matter what the edit density and plug usage was, scalability (esp into multiple CPUs on dubstages), sync and picture interfacing, destructive record (w/ punch in) and......marketing.  PT 10/11 is a very nice app., but the truth is that many aspects of what users of other apps have enjoyed for years in basic editing and file management functions have just come to PT.

 

philp

[Miguel Carretero]

Sorry Constantin; I understand you think something becomes an standard just for it´s quality??

 

You said "If that were true??" Please go and check it out instead of dispute something you just don´t know.

 

"For the interface"? Definitely your not in the post market

[Constantin]

That's a long story, but some factors of it are (were) the guaranteed track count on TDM systems no matter what the edit density and plug usage was, scalability (esp into multiple CPUs on dubstages), sync and picture interfacing, destructive record (w/ punch in) and......marketing. PT 10/11 is a very nice app., but the truth is that many aspects of what users of other apps have enjoyed for years in basic editing and file management functions have just come to PT.

philp

Would you agree then to Miguel's statement above about the bad sound quality?

[Jay Rose]

 

and......marketing

 

That's always been Digi's strength. You have to admire it.

 

They were very clever about building an environment with very low entry cost. Mboxes and PTLE were cheap enough for almost anybody, and then there was also PT Free. And of course now there's M-powered, etc. You could call yourself a "PT Facility" with minimum investment.

 

They were very early about building partner relationships with plugin manufacturers, supporting them with space at tradeshows and ad money as well as giving them a license environment where they could charge a little more.

 

Back when I was teaching at Berklee,  that's what they taught. I asked why, and was told the school gets the stuff at an incredible discount.

 

In the mid 00s, my son was assistant CE of a large news radio complex and had to maintain 8 PT edit rooms. He saw how much faster and easier it was to work on the [insert name] DAW I use, and how much better the maint and upkeep was. When he asked the ops department why they used PT, he was told "because everybody gets trained on it... so we can hire operators cheaply and they're ready to work".

 

(If that was the story in a backwater like Boston, imagine how it ran in LA...)

 

---

 

These days there's very little usability/quality difference between PT and other topnotch DAWs. They leapfrog new features - sometimes PT's in the lead, sometimes Steiny or someone else - and they're all pretty much compatible. But Digi/Avid still blows the others away in terms of positioning themselves for our market.

[Jim Feeley]

Jay, I don't recall the whole PT history very well. But didn't PT have a pretty good grip on the industry before they offered low-cost PTLE & Free versions? Wasn't their earlier and rather unsuccessful low-cost version Session? Sure, Digi distributed OSC's DECK for a while, but in the marketing, that was pitched as a low-end option. PTLE came out around 1999, iirc. But I could have this all wrong.

 

 

Anyway, about LPX, this looks to be a useful non-fanboi-ish take on LPX and FCPX. Mentions some interesting & cool stuff and what appears to be some shortcomings in FCPX-LPX roundtrips. 

 

 

 

Logic Pro X and Final Cut Pro X: How they work together

http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2013/07/16/logic-pro-x-and-fcpx/

[Constantin]

Sorry Constantin; I understand...

No, you don't.

[Philip Perkins]

Would you agree then to Miguel's statement above about the bad sound quality?

It used to not sound very good, before PT9 or so, I think.  (Never used PT 8, used PT 7, 5/4/3 a lot.)   It sounds fine to me now (regardless of interface).

 

philp

[Constantin]

Thanks, Philip, that's interesting

[Miguel Carretero]

Pro- Tools was the standard many years before the low cost series came up. And of course now you can tell it´s sounding fine, since they gone Native

 

Constatin; keep on trying

[Constantin]

Pro- Tools was the standard many years before the low cost series came up. And of course now you can tell it´s sounding fine, since they gone Native

Constatin; keep on trying

Miguel, I'm not quite sure what you're on about. It seems like you're taking something personal here. I was merely asking some questions, don't know why this rattles you so much

[Petros Kolyvas]

I'm a longtime Logic-for-post user. I'm a longer-time Logic user; since the days it was Emagic Logic Audio Platinum on windows no less.

 

I started using Logic when I was recording a lot of music and working on a lot of soft-synth-based compositions. My favourite DAW (at least for strict-audio-only projects) was Samplitude/Sequoia. But when push came to shove and I had to choose one to purchase, I chose Logic because it met all of my needs in a single package. It didn't do audio quite as well, but it got my projects delivered.

 

Logic also worked quite well for doing mixing and re-recording on Final Cut projects, even more so when I would be working on the music for said projects. 13 years later, I still use Logic almost every day for something or other. For composing and music production, I really can't see moving anywhere else for a long while. I'm too invested in the workflow, and it's one I enjoy.

 

To me,  Logic Pro X looks like they streamlined Logic for the newcomer, and I don't think that's a bad thing. Over the years with all the features added on to Logic, the interface became very, well, "cluttered." The number of times people would ask how to insert a plugin or soft-synth alluded to some UI issues that needed fixing too - basic things shouldn't be counter-intuitive. I am a big "RTM" fan - but at the same time, there's some fun in just diving in. 

 

From watching a few tutorials and "new features" videos, it looks like everything longtime users were used to having is still there, but a lot of work was done to streamline the most common needs when you just want to bang out an idea - the very reason I enjoy using Logic so much.

 

For want of exploring and playing around, I give Ardour a shot now and then, and remain a staunch (financial and otherwise) supporter - but it's not quite there yet, what with MIDI just making an appearance only recently. For audio-only work though, it is surprisingly robust and feature-complete.

 

I did purchase a PT seat when it went "native." I decided it was time to learn it, at least on a basic level, and see what strengths and weaknesses it had over what I was used to.

 

A nasty PT limitation saw me stop using it for over a year (related to larger SAS RAID systems that Avid has somehow engineered the software specifically not to support). But every now and then a project would come up where PT was a better choice. PT's method of track grouping and the Shuffle mode are audio-editing tools (Dialog, VO, layered-SFX) that I can no longer live without and allow me to move through some projects at an incredible pace.

 

So now I use both depending on the context of the project.

 

The price of Logic dropped from the $1k+ a seat at version 7 ($499 upgrade I believe) - I still have my XS key - to now an across-the-board $199, which was the previous version's (9) upgrade pricing. Upgrade pricing for all - pretty smart.

 

With PT (non HD) being $299 per-upgrade per cycle ($100 more if you skip one), and Logic only $199 to stay current for some time to come (based on how much they've worked on FCP X as a single release) - both are pretty affordable now if you're making a living using them.

 

There are so many great pieces of software out there now, I think we're going to see the slow erosion of the "industry standard" software, into hopefully some actual "industry standards" for project interchange. At least, that's my pipe dream. 

 

[Henchman]

But I see (well, hear about) it being used for post. .

Yeah. I've heard people have seen mermaids as well.

[Henchman]

So, Pro Tools always offered nice and reliable operation and interface, but an extremely poor sound processing and results. In order not to extend the conversation, this has changed since the Pro Tools became native, and start using others manufacters algorythms. Another important fact for sure was the flexibility chosing converters and wordclocks with Logic; you could plug Apogges or other manufacters easy, while in Pro Tools enviroment that was not always posible.

Nonsense.

This changed long before Po-Tools went native.

Everything else written after that is nonsense as well.