Anaconda, to me it makes sense that you recorded to analog tape first then moved it digital. We all know there's a richness to 2" tape that hasn't been duplicated in digital. But if I had a choice of moving it to a 2424 or Protools, I'd choose Protools without question. Why? mostly so I could do clean edits but also because of the mixing power.

Pichaga - I'm sorry you got bad customer service in 1995 from Digidesign over an Audiomedia III card. The year is now 2004 last time I checked. I think after nine years you owe it to yourself to re-evaluate Protools TDM. Two studios I work with have recorded countless bands on Protools Mix+ and still do today. Protools HD offers a lot more processing power but many do not switch because they would have to replace their plugins which is also costly. Your comments about CPUs being powerful enough today isn't far off with the coming of 64bit software to take advantage of 64bit processors. However I still disagree. The two Protools cards I have in my HD system are gigantic PCI cards and chock full of dsp chips. I think of them as containers for the number of instances of DSP (plugins) I can use at one time. Really, check out Protools HD sometime and you'll see what I mean.

To all -- look this thread is getting kinda tired. If you all wanna think I'm from outer space for thinking Protools is a better product than the rest - so be it. I find all your observations informative and fun and will take them under advisement. And by the way, yes, there are tons of features I'd like to see added to Protools. For example, software instruments and samplers are awesome when they work right but great sounds can be very processor and memory intensive. The highly anticipated Mach Five fell short for most people. They'll get it, it's just not quite there yet. I'd like to see the power of Gigastudio incorporated into Protools. That'd be something. Cheers.

Oh and Anaconda. I'll try to keep that wood in my pants if it's ok with you