-
Audio editing in FCPX
-
[Atilio Menéndez] “Expanding audio or expanding audio components is different in this sense and I still think it’s a better practice if you want to keep stuff in sync, but anyone is free to edit how he/she wants. “
We agree actually. the way I would do this would be to expand the audio components, range the cough out
attach room tone as cc with and adjust using the fade handles. That was my original suggestion.He didn’t like that so I offered up another option.
As far as I know, you can not cut into the audio channels in the expand mode (which is what he wanted to do)
But when you break apart clip items you can cut into it. that’s the only reason I suggested that. It wouldn’t be how I would do it. I just offered him that as another option.
If you were worried about that coming out of sync just turn it into a compound clip after your cut in.
Again, not how I would handle it.
-
Exactly!
-
[tony west] “Again, not how I would handle it.”
Well then, it’s obvious. It must be a design flaw!! 😀
I’m kidding, of course.
-
I’m using PPro CC and FCPX about 50/50 at the moment. When I’m using CC sync markers are essential and very useful.
When I’m using FCPX I don’t miss them, for the reasons others have explained.
Having said that, I’m sure it would be useful to have them!
Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly -
[Atilio Menéndez] “But what about what’s probably THE other most common operation when audio editing: changing the volume of part of an audio clip using keyframes?”
Atilio,
You should really try using automated keyframing.
1. Hit play.
2. Listen and adjust fader.[Atilio Menéndez] “So in legacy this most common operation involves more than TWICE as many clicks/steps!”
… only if you’re trying to operate it like X.
[Atilio Menéndez] “This all becomes VERY tedious once you have experienced a better way.”
Indeed.
Franz.
-
[Atilio Menéndez] “So in legacy this most common operation involves more than TWICE as many clicks/steps! Plus in legacy you are forced to press the spacebar repeatedly. This all becomes VERY tedious once you have experienced a better way.”
Legacy is deader than a Dodo, I’m not comparing Legacy to FCPX, I’m just looking at some of the design decisions that went into X. All NLEs have strengths and weaknesses, it’s helpful to understand the basic design priorities that goes into creating them. As for adjusting volume I currently use PPro and I can mix on the fly with it’s internal mixer – no keyframing at all if I want.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
But automated keyframing is not the same. You have to coordinate the adjustment in realtime and in the case of very brief sounds that is very difficult or simply impossible. And then you almost always have to adjust the keyframes anyways, which in legacy is not exactly a pleasure.
That being said, automated keyframing is great and a FREAKIN MIXER are sorely needed in X land, no discussion there!
-
True, but comparing X to Legacy shows precisely what the developer team has been trying to improve and thus indicates their priorities quite well. Clearly, considerable effort has gone into making audio editing more efficient, even if the whole thing is still half baked. One can therefore at least expect them to continue going in that direction.
-
[Herb Sevush] “… no keyframing at all if I want.”
Herb,
Strictly speaking this is called “ultra-keyframing” (others refer to it as “hover-keyframing”) and just feels as if no keyframing takes place.
Franz.
-
[Herb Sevush] “it’s helpful to understand the basic design priorities that goes into creating them.”
All due respect, since the demo is free, maybe you should try to learn how to use X as it was designed. This discussion would make much more sense to you. 🙂
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up