[Tangier Clarke]

Glad to know. We’ve been using X2Pro to deliver AAFs to ProTools as well. It’s too bad that the interoperability between FCP X and Logic Pro X isn’t tighter via FCPXXML, but I am still interested in giving it a shot. As mentioned above, FCP X seems able to deliver good audio, but I was able to bog it down pretty easily so am trying to figure out at what point do people decide to not finish audio in FCP X and then from that point what their audio workflow is.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

I prefer a real locked picture as well. At what point do you decide to go to Logic instead of using FCPX? I am trying to discern is there a point where you ask yourself:

Are these too many tracks (roles) for FCP X to handle efficiently?

Are the tools in Logic (the same ones FCP X has access too any better in the quality of the processing. If not, then one could just stay in FCP X. If it’s a matter of more parameter control, then I’d understand going to Logic.

I had to do a mix over the weekend and FCP X really got bogged down. I assigned my roles, applied filters, expanded audio on all the clips so I could work with them, etc. I couldn’t help but wonder if this experience cause people to want to leave FCP X for audio work; being that Logic (and ProTools and the like) is just better suited for really handling all of the media. I am not totally sure about this, but I definitely felt like, I can’t get work done if everything is operating this slow.

I know ProTools is defacto, but I have heard so many great things about Logic’s built in tools and I wonder if, aside from the toolset(s) in ProTools is there any quality difference in how Logic Pro X handles the same operations – compressors, limiters, expanders, noise gates, plugins etc. If not, then it’s really just a matter of PT having more features tailored to post audio.

Additionally I have to make sense of a workflow – when to apply certain types of filters; on a clip basis or near final full-track basis.

I know this seems a bit much perhaps, but I am trying to make sense of the value using Logic could add to my post workflow and if, when, and how it’s worth it if FCP X can handle most of what I need done.

Thanks for everyone’s insight. No matter what it’s fun learning a new tool.

I just worked on a mix for a 3 cam shoot with 7 channels of audio (2 recorded mixes, 1 boom, 4 lavs) only needing to use the lavs, and it really just seemed slow with FCP X with the waveforms on, all four subject;s audio viewable in expanded view in the storyline on a relatively new mac pro.

Couldn’t help but think, “there’s gotta be a better way”.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

Side note – interesting anomaly:

If I create a new angle and copy audio already in an angle to a new angle, when I go back to the storyline and select the multicam clip the new angle is acknowledged.

If I add audio already in the library before making the new angle, the inspector doesn’t acknowledge the angle.

If I add the new angle, import audio into the library and add that audio to a new angle, the inspector will work and acknowledge the new angle.

Very strange.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

Other interesting perspectives:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmTsTx7Ux8g

Starting points – nothing is more than 2 min.
13:32, 23:30, 25:50, 33:05, 36:08, 37:20

Tangier

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Tangier Clarke]

I ran your test and the results were 9min 43 sec. straight from FCP X.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

More details about the project:

Duration: 8min 31sec
Format: 720p60
Project Codec: Apple ProRes 422
Media source: Content reading from and writing to external drive connected via FW800 through thunderbolt adapter.

One of my main work drives is a thunderbolt connected 8TB RAID10 Rocstor Arcticroc Hybrid 7T. So I imagine if my content source read/write from that volume, the numbers would change, however they should all change respectively to the drive speed and throughput of thunderbolt and the ultimate picture would look the same.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

Just realizing it only applies to certain computers and certain compression scenarios.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

That’s a nice trick. Wish there was more feedback on what’s happening when you’re sitting there wondering if it’ll reconnect. Still it’s an obscure workaround. Doesn’t address my issue exactly, but still very useful.

Thanks.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

That won’t work. One thing I cannot stand about the reimport feature is it does not seem to let you just point to a folder as a reel which is what we backup. It also requires that you’ve created the FCP X camera archive type first. So if it’s not a camera, camera-like volume, or FCP X archive it’s useless. I sure hope I can be proven wrong about this, but several of us have been frustrated by this feature for as long as it’s been there.

Thanks though.

Tangier

[Tangier Clarke]

Gave that a try by the way. No luck.

Tangier