-
X2Pro now available on the Mac App Store
-
Ah, that error message sounds like Logic cannot handle embedded audio in AAF at all. Strange limitation. We plan to do referenced audio in AAF in a later release, and trimming audio. Embedded was the path of least resistance for a first release.
Many thanks guys.Chris Steele
Product Manager
Marquis Broadcast -
So can you get OMF out of Protools? I’ve never used it, but I’m thinking about learning it
Steve Connor
“FCPX Professional”
Adrenalin Television -
[Steve Connor] “So can you get OMF out of Protools? I’ve never used it, but I’m thinking about learning it”
Yes, indeed, OMF export from ProTools works very well and is hugely useful especially if you’re working on AVID and want to be able to access an audio session with all its data.
PT is very far from perfect (well, what else do you expect from AVID?) but there is simply no question that it is the industry standard, like it or not.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Thanks Simon, I might invest in a copy and some training.
Steve Connor
“FCPX Professional”
Adrenalin Television -
[Steve Connor] “I might invest in a copy and some training.”
Good luck with it, but be warned – you’ll need seriously deep pockets.
PT is anything but cheap – OK, let’s be honest it’s massively over-priced in typical AVID fashion. You’ll be amazed how much extra you need to spend to enable features that you’d have thought would come with the basic package.
In fact, I don’t want to put you off but unless you are a trained audio engineer and have a sustained stream of revenue from mixing audio, I’d question whether it was a purchase worth making.
I’d say the better scenario is to be in a position – which xtoPro finally enables – to be able to hand off your audio via AAF/OMF to an audio professional who will in the vast majority of cases be using PT rather than anything else.
If you’re essentially a video editor who wants to dabble in audio then wait and see if Logic X delivers everything he audio community is hoping for it – there is a reasonable chance that it will interface better with FCPX than anything else.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “PT is anything but cheap – OK, let’s be honest it’s massively over-priced in typical AVID fashion. You’ll be amazed how much extra you need to spend to enable features that you’d have thought would come with the basic package”
I’m not sure I agree. Since PT9, ProTools has been available as a full version in a software-only, open configuration. You can run with most Core Audio i/o devices. I have run it fine with an older Mbox2 Mini and in fact there’s a current bundle of Mbox Pro + PT9 for $999. Nothing else needed if your main objective is to mix stereo programs sent from an NLE.
[Simon Ubsdell] “If you’re essentially a video editor who wants to dabble in audio then wait and see if Logic X delivers everything he audio community is hoping for it – there is a reasonable chance that it will interface better with FCPX than anything else.”
I would agree. I personally prefer STP for what I do over PT and also like Adobe Audition. I’m looking forward to Audition’s next version.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
https://www.studiodaily.com/2012/03/useful-tools-for-editors-x2pro-audio-convert/
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Nothing else needed if your main objective is to mix stereo programs sent from an NLE.”
Yes, I should have qualified by saying that PT is now massively cheaper than it has been in the past and PT9 was itself quite a big step forward.
I’m not sure that you can say that even now it compares price-wise with quality competitors like Logic and Digital Performer (and many others).
The point I was making is that if you’re used to almost any other software DAW you’ll be astonished at what you don’t get at the basic price.
If you want to mix in anything other than stereo – and let’s face it almost everything now allows you to do 5.1, even dare I say it FCPX itself! – you’ll have to pay an extortionate premium to get the (outrageously misnamed) Complete Production Toolkit which will set you back more than $1500 and give you very little meaningful functionality beyond switching on the 5.1 capability. This is quite simply outrageous in today’s market place.
(It’s also worth noting, I think I’m right in saying, that until PT9 you couldn’t even import OMF/AAF without buying the CPT.)
Also comparing PT with the competition you’ll be shocked at how few plug-ins come as standard – only just enough to do the basic job and no more – whereas Logic and the rest (including the late lamented and essentially free STP!!!) have an extensive and high quality plug-in set built in. To begin to make PT compete in terms of features you’d need to spend literally thousands of dollars extra on third party plugs.
The general feeling among PT users is that it’s a long way from being value for money, especially in terms of things like upgrades. The furore over the pricing of PT10 was truly something to behold!
It’s worth mentioning that just like the rest of the AVID range, PT is marketed via a typically labyrinthine set of pricing and packaging structures which, whether designedly or not, seem like the perfect trap for the unwary.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Thanks for the thoughts on this, I think it might fill a gap in FCPX capability so on complex projects I can get some finer control on the audio before it gets sent to audio finishing. I’ll still wait for a while though to see in Logic X turns up or at least an update so Logic could work with FCPX XML.
Steve Connor
“FCPX Professional”
Adrenalin Television -
[Simon Ubsdell] “Yes, I should have qualified by saying that PT is now massively cheaper than it has been in the past and PT9 was itself quite a big step forward. I’m not sure that you can say that even now it compares price-wise with quality competitors like Logic and Digital Performer (and many others). The point I was making is that if you’re used to almost any other software DAW you’ll be astonished at what you don’t get at the basic price.”
Yes. I would agree with all of this. I’m personally not a huge fan of PT, using STP and Audition myself. My son – a guitarist/composer/mixer – swears by Vegas, which started life as a DAW. If you don’t need the music side of what PT offers, Vegas blows the doors off of PT in turns of real-time track-count. Nevertheless, PT is the industry standard and nearly ever mixer I work with, who specializes in sound for picture, is very tied to PT. Providing a PT session file is often a deliverable requirement on some jobs. The only non-PT mixer I work with uses Logic and prefers it. I’ve sometimes had trouble with him reading OMFs out of FCP7. Never had an issue with the PT guys. Other Logic users tend to be musicians rather than just audio post folks. So using Logic certainly is NOT the norm. As far as cost, you are right. OTOH, once you get under $1K, does it really matter? One project will pay off the difference if not the entire application!
[Simon Ubsdell] “If you want to mix in anything other than stereo – and let’s face it almost everything now allows you to do 5.1, even dare I say it FCPX itself! – you’ll have to pay an extortionate premium to get the (outrageously misnamed) Complete Production Toolkit which will set you back more than $1500 and give you very little meaningful functionality beyond switching on the 5.1 capability. “
Certainly true. Yet, nothing I normally produce myself goes beyond stereo. Projects that require surround get done in a studio where the engineer knows what they are doing and the monitoring is set up properly. At least TC and OMF/AAF is now included. That used to cost $500 extra.
[Simon Ubsdell] “To begin to make PT compete in terms of features you’d need to spend literally thousands of dollars extra on third party plugs.”
Hmm… Seems like it comes with enough for most audio post folks, but I get what you are saying. I certainly know plenty of PT mixers who have a wealth of third-party plug-ins.
[Simon Ubsdell] “PT is marketed via a typically labyrinthine set of pricing and packaging structures which, whether designedly or not, seem like the perfect trap for the unwary.”
That’s certainly not the intention, but you do have a lot of upgrade variables. Personally I find the website very difficult to navigate. When you look at PT specifically, it’s probably better to go through a reseller like Sweetwater or B&H.
One other comment before was about the real-time bounce. The reason that exists, is because PT hardware allows you to loop through external hardware processing. So if you want to use that favorite, vintage compressor that’s sitting in the rack when you print the mix inside PT, then real-time is the only way to do that. Probably needs an optional setting.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up