-
advanced audio
There is a great post on advanced audio on the Techniques forum.
I won’t repost it because it’s already over there.I like watching Wohl, he’s good and knows how to work the program.
I agree with him when he says that Apple wanted to “hide” a lot of the controls away and power in X
For those who would never know of, or work with the ringshifter they wouldn’t have to look at it.
But maybe they did too good of a job hiding.
I think they “assumed” that pros would find these controls and unlock the door to some of it’s power.
I think that was a bad assumption.
-
42 Replies
-
[tony west] “I agree with him when he says that Apple wanted to “hide” a lot of the controls away and power in X
For those who would never know of, or work with the ringshifter they wouldn’t have to look at it.
But maybe they did too good of a job hiding.
I think they “assumed” that pros would find these controls and unlock the door to some of it’s power.
I think that was a bad assumption.
“Tony, thanks for the heads up. I watched the video. None of that stuff was hidden from me, but I liked watching the demo. I’ll just say what I said over on the other forum: It was an interesting look, and quite fair. The depth of filters is great, but the handling of multiple tracks is still so awkward. I liked seeing rolls in action, though. I also liked the way he summed the presentation up:
Its not identical to working in a proper audio system but it does provide a little of the control were used to.
I’d say that’s a pretty fair analysis.
-
Tony West “For those who would never know of, or work with the ringshifter they wouldn’t have to look at it.
But maybe they did too good of a job hiding.”
I don’t know what a ‘ringshifter’ is, but it sounds interesting- and if it’s going to help improve the quality of my audio I’d rather it not be hidden from me…
______________________________________________
“THAT’S our fail-safe point. Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine… But after this windmill it’s the future or bust.” -
[Greg Andonian] “I don’t know what a ‘ringshifter’ is, but it sounds interesting- and if it’s going to help improve the quality of my audio I’d rather it not be hidden from me…
“I’m really not sure how often anyone would want to use a ringshifter filter in video. Maybe to help make alien or robot voices or sweeten some other sci-fi sfx. Though, I personally, would choose other filters. Certainly not to “improve the quality”. Its part phaser and does something with the pitch. It offers a tinny, sort of decaying sound that has kind of a disco feeling for me. Its really aimed at sweetening instruments. But, hey–its a hoot that you can access it straight from the timeline instead of having to go to Soundtrack Pro. Now, if only there were a mixer, too.
-
[Tony West] “For those who would never know of, or work with the ringshifter they wouldn’t have to look at it.But maybe they did too good of a job hiding.”
I don’t know what a ‘ringshifter’ is, but it sounds interesting- and if it’s going to help improve the quality of my audio I’d rather it not be hidden from me…”I guess that is what Apple has called their ring modulator. It always helps to use pre existing definitions and naming conventions but, hey Apple doesn’t have a big history there. Trust me it is an effect that deserves to be buried. It is a filter used in electronic music but has almost no application in video sound tracks, so it is just part of a package deal with Logic plugins.
I know this was just a quick demo but none of that is what I would classify as advanced. Two things stand out. One is the screen clutter and the other is the constant mousing. The ergonomics are poor.
Nice to see Roles in action. It does seem like a workable grouping concept. Years ago with DAWs like dSP, I had the ability to define fixed groupings like this and quickly decided it was much better to do temporary groupings as a way of shifting and manipulating. Temporary grouping was track based however but seemed more powerful and useful, particularly when wanting to shift blocks around of “unroled” material, like lets grab this scene and all audio but only the narration from halfway through the scene. Ironically this is what you can do by lassoing clips in FCP before a copy or move or delete etc. I still think this is more powerful and that Roles is better suited to bus routing type activity. If someone can see if that old style lassoing concept still works within X that would be nice info.
Finally a little point on the display of frequency under the parametric EQ. You want it to stay when you stop, not disappear after a few seconds, so you can see the area you are going to set filter frequency and Q. A nice idea and easy to improve I suspect.
-
Chris Harlan Maybe to help make alien or robot voices or sweeten some other sci-fi sfx.
With that in mind, I’m surprised Apple didn’t put it out in the open front-and-center. It sounds like it would be a great companion to the “Alien Lab” preset in the color corrector. 😉
______________________________________________
“THAT’S our fail-safe point. Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine… But after this windmill it’s the future or bust.” -
Michael is a great presenter and it is a nice overview.
Always missing for me though is the biggest advance: Sample level audio editing all the time.
Being restricted to 1 frame at a time was always a big problem, specially once you done some editing in an DAW and saw how much more control you have there. Being able to this now inside the NLE is god send. All the plugins are nice but I leave that to the sound guys as most of them I do not understand anyway 🙂
-
[Carsten Orlt] “Sample level audio editing all the time.”
Totally agree.
-
[Chris Harlan] “[Carsten Orlt] “Sample level audio editing all the time.”
Totally agree.”
Page 552 of FCPX User Guide
subframe A subframe has 1/80 the duration of a video frame and is thus a more precise unit of reference when editing audio at the sample level. -
[Craig Seeman] “[Chris Harlan] “[Carsten Orlt] “Sample level audio editing all the time.”
Totally agree.”
Page 552 of FCPX User Guide
subframe A subframe has 1/80 the duration of a video frame and is thus a more precise unit of reference when editing audio at the sample level.
“No, its totally cool. I cut Carsten short when I quoted him. I’m agreeing with him that I think the sub-frame audio editing is bitchin’.
-
[Carsten Orlt] “Being restricted to 1 frame at a time was always a big problem, specially once you done some editing in an DAW and saw how much more control you have there.”
You’ve never been restricted to one frame if you know what you’re doing. Here’s an example of a sub-frame audio edit:
I’ve been using this technique for years. It’s especially handy for dialogue cutting.
Don’t get me wrong, FCPX does have more precise control, but it’s simply incorrect to say that you’re restricted to one frame. Sub-frame audio control has always been possible in Final Cut Pro via volume keyframes and it works well.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up