Creating the [audio] mix in FCP

[Mark Raudonis]

Joe,

We’ve just started to integrate STP into our workflow. Not so much as a final mixing tool, but as a “repair and restore” tool. In the classic “lock picture, then mix” mode, you had to wait until the mix to access the “powerful tools” that an audio suite had to offer. In the kinds of shows that we do (reality TV), audio is often the most challenging part of the process. Our bad audio is not because we have bad field mixers (we don’t) but because they have to work in less than optimal conditions (try recording usable dialogue in the middle of a dance floor). So… many of our scenes end up carrying “subtitles” to remain understandable. This meant that producers, networks, etc. had to respond to a scene with subtitles that eventually would go away (hopefully) after the final mix. Enter Sound Track Pro.

With STP’s ability to “round trip”, our picture editors can often “fix” a scene with just a couple of clicks (seriously!), and then that “cleaned” audio now lives with the scene. No need to worry about later changes or different versions. The “fix” is now part of the cut. This is WAY DIFFERENT than how we’ve been used to working. Add to this equation the “shared storage” workflow of X-SAN and now we’re thinking about a whole new approach to the off-line process.

We’re only scratching the surface of the potential of STP in our workflow. I look forward to experimenting and finding new ways for Sound Track Pro to help us get the job done better.

Mark

[Frank Nolan]

Dont get sucked in by the Headlines. If you read the entire article, what Murch was saying was that they brought the Stems created on the dub stage into FCP so when they did picture changes they could just edit them along with the picuture so they didn’t have to go back to the dub stage for a “conform” of the stems. That way they could show the new cut at the next meeting of studio execs, producers etc. without having to spend a few more days on the dub stage re-conforming the mix. So before these stems were created, all the dialogue editing, sound fx, backgrounds and foley would have been done in protools and taken to the dub stage. FCP is far from being anywhere close to Protools in terms of audio editing and mixing, however in a few more years STP could definitely become a contender.

[Joe Shapiro]

Hi Folks
I understand that FCP isn’t anywhere near ProTools for audio post right now. But, from my point of view, there are a few changes that could be made that would allow the editor’s sound design to be much better, and would allow the final mix, stil done in ProTools, to use all the editor’s work.

Imagine an FCP that could display the native plugin GUI and could use all the plugins that come with Soundtrack Pro. Or ProTools. Like Waves for example.

Imagine that FCP didn’t treat audio in a frame-based fashion in the viewer but rather a sample-based fashion. At that point, the viewer, when loaded with an audio clip, would be quite a bit like a Soundtrack Pro waveform view.

I suspect you’d still have to go out of FCP to destructively change the waveform, but for applying plugins and doing precise automation you’d have a much more powerful tool.

And, of course, you’d want FCP to properly export all the automation and plugins so that STP and, one REALLY HOPES, ProTools, could see all the work the editor had done.

—
Joe Shapiro
Freelance FCP Editor (narrative features and shorts)
Seattle WA
206-290-8482