Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
The audio sync? That’s probably not happening there, but at the multiplexer.
-
It’s cool, man. Thanks for saying something. But, you know, you’re here in this roach motel, too.
-
Yup.
-
That’s hilarious!
-
Ah. Now that’s personal.
-
[David Lawrence] “[Jeremy Garchow] “And none of them will want to work in FCP7’s horrendous audio capabilities either.”
Minor annoyances aside, I think you’d be surprised how productive FCP7 is for audio. I can do 80-90% of a complex mix right in the timeline. OMF out if I’m working with my sound guys or round trip thru Soundtrack Pro if it’s just me. Or if time’s tight, I’ll often just stay right in FCP. Could it be better? Sure. Horrendous? I don’t think so.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Since FCP7 doesn’t have busses I still don’t see how X is that much different, from a truly practical perspective, when it comes to audio.”
Well for one thing, you don’t have to deal with only one “track” that’s locked in ripple mode. That and the connected clip concept get the biggest laughs.”
I’ve been mixing and finishing Network Broadcast material FOR YEARS on FCP. Is it the only way I do it? No. Do I sweeten in Logic or SoundTrack Pro? Often. But I HAVE mixed countless national and international spots for film, broadcast, and cable television with FCS. I have never had a piece rejected for either unsatisfactory mix or technical standards issues. I find its interactivity with control surfaces to be adequately responsive, and its relationship with Sound Track Pro to be very usable. To call it “horrendous” seems more than a tad ridiculous. To say that FCP X has better mixing capabilities is absurdly ridiculous.
-
[David Lawrence] “[Clint Wardlow] ” do a lot of projections and non-linear narrative (along with more traditional stuff). However, I currently use tracks extensively to layer audio & video and my biggest fear is that the magnetic timeline will limit my ability to control these elements to the degree I want. ”
I do this kind of work too. My gut is that if this is what you need, you’ll find the magnetic timeline unusable. It really favors simple, linear assembly and doesn’t offer the flexibility you get with tracks for the kind of layered, non-linear projects you describe. If you need multi-track audio mixing, you’ll hit a wall immediately. There’s a reason that you don’t see any audio mix screen shots in any of Apple’s FCPX marketing material.”
I second this. I do a lot of audio layering on any particular spot. I also work with a lot of rhythmic and textural events that I build in Omnisphere–pads, glides, and things there are no names for–and I blend sfx with musical elements. I rely very heavily on the ability to place elements in time. For me, timing is an extremely important element. Frankly, I don’t think I knew HOW important it was until I started examining FCP X.
And I like to work free-form. Sometimes, I might even want to start with music cues or sound effects. Let’s say I’m doing a promo for a mystery/noir/cop flick, and I’ve been haunted by a sound I came up with in Omnisphere. I might want to place three instances of that haunting sound in exact places in the timeline, and then build everything from there. Not an everyday event, buts it has happened and has been fruitful. That’s what I loved about FCP. Very freeform. It was a table that you placed things on, however you wanted to place them. Eventually, everything fills up, and the only important relationships between clips is that A) one thing follows another, and that one thing in some way obscures another.
You should try FCP X to get a feel, but my guess from you description is that it will not be to your taste.
-
[Steve Connor] “As for jumping on to people for pointing out flaws, exactly the opposite is also true, people who are trying to post about their positive experiences are being jumped on, just look at the post below.”
I should say my experience is somewhat opposite of your opposite.
-
[Steve Connor] “Not me personally, but perhaps some people would like to use this thread to reiterate their dislike of FCPX, rather than jumping on to others peoples positive threads about their experience with the software.
Just a thought:)
“Its not really venting, Steve, as much as talking honestly about something. Is it “venting” in your mind, by the way, when someone forcefully jumps on someone for pointing out flaws? If so, I guess you start a thread called “Happy Things about FCP X.”
-
I don’t know where you located, Mark, but as someone who was part of the push over the last decade to convince Los Angeles producers that FCS was a viable professional tool, I can tell you with confidence that FCP X has done serious damage to that movement. And you know what, I think that is a GOOD thing. After years of being and FCP evangelist, I’m extremely happy that word is out about FCP X’s shortcomings. By the way, the “bad workman” mantra is getting a little tired. Could I make something good with FCP X? Certainly. Thank goodness I don’t have to.