-
Murch and NLEs from IBC
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Since you guys keep talking about Audition, how does its audio repair tools compare to something like iZotope’s RX 5Audio Editor?”
Audition has many of the same tools, but they’re not quite as good. I have only played with RX5 but I am familiar with Sony Soundforge, which is similar to RX5 (it actually has some of the iZotope filters packaged with it)and the Izotope noise reduction filter in Soundforge gets better results and is easier to use than the same filters in Audition. also RX5 Pro has some filters that you won’t find anywhere else – reverb/echo eliminator, ambiance filter (create room tone) to name two. On the other hand I’m thrilled to be able to use the spectral analysis tool in Audition because of it’s very tight integration into Ppro. It might not be quite as good as the RX version, but it’s plenty good enough for most of my needs.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
I can’t compare them precisely, as I’ve never used them side by side, but I can tell you from my limited testing that the toolset is amazingly powerful, yet amazingly simple to use. Which, according to Al Mooney, is s major goal for the Adobe development team, because tools that go unused waste everyone’s time and money.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los AngelesDavid is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
The discussion of sound brings up some interesting points. First off, although Walter Murch has experimented with NLEs, he has stayed pretty loyal to Pro Tools. I’m not quite sure why no experimentation there. Either there’s no solid competitor to PT in the Hollywood film community or it’s still the best tool. Post production sound is much more of a team sport than picture editing so it helps to be on the same page.
In addition, Avid has expanded the mixing desk offerings, so many shows and films are mixed on computer-assisted Avid consoles that include integrated PT workstations. These often include integrated Avid video hardware to play picture files out to monitors or projection, without the QuickTime movie kludge. So the mixing desk is really just a glorified control surface, although that’s quite an oversimplification.
For someone who is just as involved with sound as with picture, having a consistent timeline layout between both tools makes tracks a familiar paradigm and makes the crossover between applications more fluid. If you check out Walter’s credits on his most recent films, he’s the picture editor and the re-recording mixer, but he isn’t necessarily the only sound person in-between picture and mix. Plus in the film mixing world, large films are mixed with a 2 or 3-person team at the console. Add a few more for dialogue, ADR, Foley, SFX and music editing before it gets to the mix.
If you look at the timeline of most top feature film editors who get involved with sound as part of their edit, there’s a hierarchical structure to where dialogue, SFX and music is placed – often with blank tracks as a type of “guard band” in between sections. Right away, you can tell which element is on a given track just by looking at the placement on the tracks.
It’s here that FCPX actually offers some advantages, but it takes a bit of work. First of all, location sound. Broadcast WAV files usually carry several isolated channels embedded in each file. If you have 8 channels in one file, that consumes 8 tracks in a track-based system. If you overlap clips, you now take up 16. With X, these are neatly tucked into the primary clip until you need to expand and work on them.
The workaround that a lot of Avid editors use is that you can sync clips using only one of the tracks of the BWAV file. This works because Ch.1 of the BWAV is typically the location mixer’s composite mix of all iso mics. If you need to access an iso channel, match-frame to the BWAV and cut in only that one channel. The point here is that the film editor knows PT will be used for sound post. In PT, you can use the Ch.1 that’s in the timeline and link back to the original file, thus bringing in all the other channels. This is a workaround to reduce the number of tracks that you tie up in the edit.
With X, it’s a lot easier to edit with all channels available on the timeline in a fashion that’s far less cumbersome than trying to do the same in a track-based system. And you can deliver all channels as part of the timeline when you turn it over to audio post.
The big issue is visual organization on the timeline. While you can use Roles to isolate just dialogue or SFX, etc. it’s an extra step that isn’t needed in a track-based system. This is where an FCPX editor might add connected gap clips in order to create the vertical, visual separation between sound elements. Here, some type of “zone” system sure would be handy. Unfortunately the process using gap clips can require you to pull connected clips above or below such gap clips to keep dialogue, FX and music separated.
Clearly FCPX can be used for good sound and has some advantages for the picture editor working heavily in sound. However, there is a mental adjustment that has to take place if you routinely go between both worlds.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Clearly FCPX can be used for good sound and has some advantages for the picture editor working heavily in sound.”
Oliver, do you happen to know precisely what sub-pixel audio editing capabilities are supported in X?
***Oops, I mean to “sub-frame” not “sub-pixel” above…
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los AngelesDavid is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “what sub-pixel audio editing capabilities are supported in X?”
Down to 1/80th of a frame.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “Down to 1/80th of a frame.”
Actually, I just looked it up on the Apple site where they claim 1/100th of a frame…
See my next new post in a new thread where I discuss this…
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los AngelesDavid is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “Actually, I just looked it up on the Apple site where they claim 1/100th of a frame…”
The odd thing that some folks have experienced is that it if you make the primary storyline an audio clip it can cause problems with accurate frame boundaries. Connected clips don’t actually match up against each other, but instead leave gaps. However, these gaps don’t seem to be visible during actual video playback.
– oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “The odd thing that some folks have experienced is that it if you make the primary storyline an audio clip it can cause problems with accurate frame boundaries. Connected clips don’t actually match up against each other, but instead leave gaps. However, these gaps don’t seem to be visible during actual video playback.”
I just quoted you in the new thread I created about the BIG difference in sub-frame audio editing bewteen FCP X and Audition.
For the record, audition can edit down to the sample rate of 1/48000th of a frame vs FCP X which edits to just 1/100th of a frame. This may not sound all that important to many here who probably typically edit at the frame level and find that satisfactory for many of their projects. But, for those more audio-centric pros like you, like me, like Michael Gissing, and for Walter Murch, it represents a huge benefit.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los AngelesDavid is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “For the record, audition can edit down to the sample rate of 1/48000th of a frame”
Sure. We’ll also just ignore that comparing an NLE with a DAW is nonsense to begin with. Or that there’s always Logic that will go down to the sample as well. But I wouldn’t want to rain on your crusade, so never mind… 😀
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “[David Roth Weiss] “For the record, audition can edit down to the sample rate of 1/48000th of a frame”
Sure. We’ll also just ignore that comparing an NLE with a DAW is nonsense to begin with. Or that there’s always Logic that will go down to the sample as well. But I wouldn’t want to rain on your crusade, so never mind… 😀
– RK”
As David Lawrence already pointed out, Premiere Pro will also edit down to the sample level.
Shawn
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up