On Faders and Mixing (NLEs are DAWs)

[Marcus Moore]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “NLEs are DAWs – though their functions may be limited, it’s hard to come up with a definition of DAW that an NLE doesn’t fit. The fact that most editors will not extensively use the DAW functionality doesn’t change that.”

I’m not sure I agree here. A DAW is exclusively audio focused- so the toolset can be optimized specifically to be the best audio tool possible.

An NLE by its very nature is at cross purposes. What works best for lean, fast, and efficient picture editorial is certain to compromise what may be best for audio. Conversely, a NLE which is a great DAW is probably making all sorts of compromises to picture cutting, especially as the audio stack becomes more complex.

This is why I think it’s a foregone conclusion that top tier audio finishing (in the same way as graphics) will always be done in specialized apps.

Of course, the balance that has to be struck in any NLE is what level of features is “enough”, and what level of compromise do you make between being a great picture and sound editor within that NLE.

There’s no right answer here. Everyone has their own level of functionality and compromise that they find sufficient to meet their needs for NLE audio. And this depends entirely on individual workflows in question- How much responsibility the editor has for audio in the production? What level of complexity is required?

It’s always an interesting topic. As it relates to FCPX- it’s obviously the least DAW’ish NLE out there, with it’s forsaking of conventional track structure. Apple is clearly putting the emphases on picture first- and i’m curious as anyone to see how more complicated audio functionality is figured into that structure.

[Dennis Radeke]

I would say that an NLE is a DAW in its function: that is it can do many of the functions of a digital audio workstation. The counterpoint is that an NLE is not a DAW in its focus. An NLE’s focus is video whereas a DAW is audio.

Dennis – Adobe guy

[David Mathis]

Bazinga! It will be more interesting to see how things get when Resolve 11 is released. Looks like a pimped out FCP X system (in a very good way) with tracks. On the video side, tracks can get in the way sometimes, not to mention patching this to that. On the other hand, really prefer tracks for audio. Part of it is personal preference, the other is I am the occasional control freak and do not like things getting too automated.

David

FCP X Motion and Resolve Guy!

Sorry, just could not resist saying that. 🙂

[Steve Connor]

I honestly think people may be holding out a bit too much hope for the next version of Resolve.

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly

[Charlie Austin]

[Steve Connor] “I honestly think people may be holding out a bit too much hope for the next version of Resolve.”

Ya think? 🙂 I’m also unsure what it is everyone is hoping for. If you want an NLE with tracks there are currently a couple available that I’m aware of. I could be wrong…

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Steve Connor]

One of the biggest things we take for granted with modern NLE’s is real time playback, most of them are very good at it, even on low spec systems. Resolve needs Power to get RT and unless they’ve re-coded it to make it less resource intensive then it isn’t going to compete (not that it’s BM’s intention to – at the moment!)

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly

[Walter Soyka]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “audio always offers orchestration since it’s used more in parallel than picture is (which tends to be serial in arrangement).”

[Franz Bieberkopf] “NLEs are DAWs – though their functions may be limited, it’s hard to come up with a definition of DAW that an NLE doesn’t fit “

I think that difference is in the philosophy of the toolset, as you noted above. Aren’t NLEs optimized for serial operation and capable of parallel operation, whereas DAWs are optimized for parallel operation and capable of serial operation?

I’m hoping Lance chimes in with some Vegas knowledge, Vegas being an outlier in our conversation in that it’s an NLE based on a DAW.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events

[Jim Giberti]

I’ve grown up as a music producer and a film/video producer.
I’ve spent countless hours sitting at different evolutions of mixing consoles and yeah, as a musician I can definitely see the analogy of the console as an instrument.
In fact just the other day my partner and I were talking about complex mixes, before automation, where we would rehearse our fader moves on 32 track mixes, repeated over and over – taking the instrument/band analogy even further.

That said, I just finished a mix in FCPX that didn’t allow for me to get the audio into Logic or DP where I mix now.
But, having my main processors from Logic available in FCPX and after getting very comfortable with CCing levels of audio, using the range tool to even initial levels, and then using the CCs as “fader groups”, I was able to get a very good mix done.

Coincidental to this thread, I made a comment to said partner how I’ve really evolved away from the mixer/instrument paradigm as the sole means of creating good audio.

Now, I’m not talking music, where I would/could never create elaborate mixes without everything laid out in real time before me. But that’s a demonstrably different experience than creating, say, a 3, 6 or maybe 8 track audio mix for a TV spot.

[James Culbertson]

I’ve always felt that video editing was like playing a musical instrument, and when I edit I am equally aware of the effects and rhythms of the audio I am working with as I am the visual component. I’ve always cleaned up ragged audio (as for instance in dialogue cutting) in order to properly work with the visual edit. But I’ve noticed that many other editors I have worked with leave this sort of clean up for audio-post. Drives me nuts and I don’t understand how anyone can really properly edit when the audio isn’t at least somewhat cleanly edited as well.

[Lance Bachelder]

Thanks Walter – you’re right Vegas started as a DAW and Pro Tools competitor – Sonic Foundry added video capabilities in version 2 which is when I started using it. Vegas was the first NLE to have real-time dissolves and fades on picture (DV days). I think the only reason Vegas doesn’t get its due is because its Windows only. I was already a FCP 1 user when I discovered Vegas and me and my Mac only buddies were floored by it at the time but they refused to use it because they thought Bill Gates was satan – truly. But the proginal programmers were all Windows gurus which is why Vegas was 10 years ahead on Pro Tools on many features.

I don’t do much picture editing in Vegas anymore but I still mix everything I can with it. I still find it way faster than any other DAW and doing 5.1 mixes is a breeze. In the past I’ve cut and mixed many shows on it and being able to sound design, mix, cut picture and color time were huge. Unfortunately they’ve fallen way behind on real-time picture and none of the fx and plug-ins for picture have ever been improved, in fact, when they switched to OpenFX they redesigned many plug-ins and made them worse – strange…

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1