Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Audition 4.0 Announced

Apr 11, 2011 5:51 AM

Except the official name is Audition CS5.5.

 

...which gives you a good idea of the direction it's going.  Audiition CS5.5 is being marketed specifically as an audio post production for video tool--the announcement makes no mention at all of its abilities as a stand-along audio production or editing tool.

 

Read the details here:  http://www.adobe.com/products/audition.html

 

Beyond that, follow the link to the FAQ for some details of the rationale for the new product and a list of new features.

 

There's also a page to register for them to tell you when a download trial is available.  I guess that's all we can do:  download and try it to see if the "new direction" still gives us a worthwhile audio tool...or start the painful decision process about what to buy instead.

 

Bob

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 11, 2011 6:06 AM   in reply to Bob Howes

    it sounds like id have absolutely no use for about %95 of it. it almost sounds like a completely different product, like a hybrid of auditon and premiere or something. in fact i don't know why all the audio production can't be done in premiere anyway.

     

    will certainly trial it though. thanks for posting.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 11, 2011 10:53 AM   in reply to andyjee86

    @Bob

     

    Why would you need to buy anything else if AA3 does all you want? It's not going to stop working just because AA4 has arrived.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 11, 2011 12:47 PM   in reply to ryclark

    Hi,

     

    I currently have Soundbooth as part of Production Premium and I have no interest in it.  In terms of functionality, it doesn't compete with AA 3.01.  Having said that, I think it is too early to draw conclusions about the new Audition.

     

    Soundbooth seems like a stripped-down Audition, albeit with a more "contemporary" user interface. The sneak-peak that was posted last week revealed an Audition interface that is strikingly similar to Soundbooth.  It seems reasonable to assume that much of 3.0.1's feature set is still intact  The new time-stretch feature from Izotope might be interesting.  At the same time, it raises questions about Audition's future, in terms of innovation.  Regarding AA's future for audio and restoration work, I think that Adobe is stating that these features will still be provided.  The questions, here, are how well algorithms implemented.  Adobe, earlier this year, claimed that the new Audition will sound at least as good, if not better.  Hopefully, a trial version will show results that support that.

     

    Steve

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 11, 2011 9:51 PM   in reply to Bob Howes

    Some good points, Bob, and I feel similarly on much of it.  Andyjee, today's marketing pitch doesn't sound like great news for music production folks such as myself, but bear in mind that it's a marketing pitch.  Given the feature discussions sneaking about here and with the Mac beta, you're definitely going to have better than 5% usability.  It's just that Adobe is trying to attract a new audience to Audition, so it appears.  That doesn't mean bye-bye for the existing one.

     

    On the other hand, if you really think Premiere's audio handling is sufficient, stick with it.  Good for you.  However, I've done end-to-end audio in both Premiere and Audition, and there is no comparison.  For one, Premiere has no edit view.  As flexible as it is, the new Export to Audition feature is now in Premiere for very, very good reasons.

     

    So we're all looking forward to the release of a trial version!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 12:45 AM   in reply to MusicConductor

    Audition is not left behind. From the FAQ it seems pretty clear to me at least, that Soundbooth is gone however. Sob...

    There is a potential conflict between 'ease of use for the casual user' (the audience Soundbooth was targeted at) and 'fast workfolw for the professional user' - but it ain't necessarily so. Really looking forward to the trial.

    In the buzz, they're talking several times about music bed creation and such things. Let's hope they've solved the rigid metronome regime and stuff as well then.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 2:34 AM   in reply to Brian Stew

    Brian Stew wrote:

     

    Let's hope they've solved the rigid metronome regime and stuff as well then.

     

    Metronome? Yeah, they've fixed that completely. It's gone.

     

    In the buzz, they're talking several times about music bed creation and such things.

     

    Er, not creation as such - this is to do with Resource Central, which is an on-line source of previewable and downloadable music beds, loops and sound effects. There are presently a few music beds on it, and believe me, you wouldn't want to use them. They've bought a sound effect library from somewhere, but it's all American - which doesn't help the rest of the world very much. There is a huge snag for anybody using a DAW sensibly though - you need Audition connected to the internet to use this facility, and generally that's a very bad idea.

     

    Music creation as such is significantly not a feature of the new release - multitrack audio processing is, in line with its place in CS.

     

    Don't shoot me - I'm only the messenger. It's just that I've been told that now it's okay to talk about it. Doesn't mean that I approve of all these things, though - don't run away with that idea!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 8:59 AM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    "Metronome? Yeah, they've fixed that completely. It's gone."

     

    Are you serious? They actually took out something as necessary as a basic metronome? I find that kind of hard to believe.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 12:20 PM   in reply to xrickrockx

    xrickrockx wrote:

     

    "Metronome? Yeah, they've fixed that completely. It's gone."

     

    Are you serious? They actually took out something as necessary as a basic metronome? I find that kind of hard to believe.

     

    Why would I not be serious about it? Audition isn't music production (in that sense) software, so it simply doesn't need it. So it's gone - at least for the time being. And it may never come back if the video-related sales outweigh all others...

     

    So I think that your sense of what to believe or not might be about to take a bit of a knock when the demo comes along.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 2:31 PM   in reply to Bob Howes

    Audition 4.0   YAWN!

    Does anyone at ADOBE listen to it's customers or are they like Microsoft?...they're smarter than their customers, so no need to pay any attention to what we peons want.

     

    It's the same with Photoshop and Premiere.  For audio production and editing Audition 1.5 (in my opinion) was the best...because it was closest to Cool Edit Pro which was created by people who understaood what we needed. Adobe wants to try to compete for the same market share as Pro-Tools and all the Pro-Tools clones. (Cool Edir Pro had the operative word...'EDIT"

     

    Alex.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 2:39 PM   in reply to Smart-Alex

    Smart-Alex wrote:

     

    Adobe wants to try to compete for the same market share as Pro-Tools and all the Pro-Tools clones.

     

    Does Pro-Tools do round-trip audio for video editing? That's the market that Adobe is currently aiming for, and arguably why they bought Syntrillium in the first place all those years ago. Those of us around then suspected that this was what they wanted to achieve ultimately, and to us the only wonder is that it's taken so long to achieve. Not saying that I approve of this, or anything - it's just the way it is. Personally I'd like to see a proper Audition 4 working the way that Audition CS5.5 currently does (rather more slick than AA3.0.1, as you'll soon find out hopefully) and with all of the audio functionality (except MIDI...) back.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 2:53 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    Hi SteveG,

     

    If Adobe's primary goals with CS 5.5 are rewriting AA so that it better integrates with Premiere and is a better alternative to Soundbooth, then is it valid to question AA's current and near-future value compared to software such as RX2 (for noise reduction) and Wavelab or similar (for other AA-type functionality)?  The point is, it could be argued in the absence of more complete information, that AA is treading water.

     

    What's your take?  Wouldn't it also be a good time for Durin to answer questions that people are raising about the new AA?

     

    Steve

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 5:16 PM   in reply to Steve C2

    Steve C2 wrote:

     

    If Adobe's primary goals with CS 5.5 are rewriting AA so that it better integrates with Premiere and is a better alternative to Soundbooth, then is it valid to question AA's current and near-future value compared to software such as RX2 (for noise reduction) and Wavelab or similar (for other AA-type functionality)?  The point is, it could be argued in the absence of more complete information, that AA is treading water.

     

    What's your take?  Wouldn't it also be a good time for Durin to answer questions that people are raising about the new AA?

     

    In reverse order, I think that Durin probably got let out to go to NAB, so won't say anything until he's back (although that's rather a guess). I can answer most technical questions that get asked about the new version, but I can't speak for Adobe - which is probably a good thing, because I don't altogether agree with some of their strategy. So you get my take on it instead of theirs... although this is by no means uninformed:

     

    Audition is displacing Soundbooth completely - it's now dead in the water (see announcement elsewhere). So, Audition needs to be integrated into CS, otherwise there's no point in Adobe having it. The fact that it's pretty much wasted on video editors is moot; Adobe know that if they're honest, and they also know that Audition has a pretty loyal user base going back to Syntrillium days. To an extent, they are playing on that loyalty when it comes to Audition development, I feel - the overall feel of the new version is that it's slicker (uses processor cores properly, for a start...) but the lack of some features compared to 3.0.1 is asking a bit much. But hey, they know that too. At least they should do - they've been told it enough times recently.

     

    I should point out that losing Soundbooth has a big plus attached to it as far as Audition is concerned - it means that work on enhancements doesn't have to wait for a new release of Soundbooth before it can start. And that cuts out a lot of time-wasting. Oops! Did I imply that SB was a waste of time? Moi? Surely not...

     

    Thing is, the devs have done the round trip integration, and that bit works fine (apparently). And they don't need to put anything much else back for the vid-eds except some timecode-related stuff, etc. But they have to keep doing something towards Audition's future, and the only sensible thing they can do is to put the original features back, only perhaps improved, and possibly with a few additions - we'll have to wait and see.

     

    Some of the missing features are somewhat annoying. Since I'm now officially allowed to speak about it, I might as well tell you that as well as the metronome gone, so for the moment has clip grouping in MV (yes that is crazy, I know, but...), there's no scripting, half of the automation features (you can't drive it from faders at present) don't exist, and no form of external controller interface is present - not even the basic Red Rover will work with it. And no CD-writing. There are some nice new touches - the way EQ is displayed in the mixer, that audio tracks don't have to be just mono or stereo any more, that the plugins are modeless, there's no annoying MIDI, and a pretty useful favourites option that does more than the old one did - but that doesn't take away from the fact that a lot of actual functionality that audio-only users have taken for granted will be in any new version of Audition simply aren't there yet. This is, incidentally, just a list off the top of my head - there are almost certainly other items to go in both sections of it, but I think that the ones I've mentioned will be the ones people stumble over soonest.

     

    Do I like the new version, you may be wondering? Well yes I do - as a vehicle for future development, and something you can do basic work in. Most of the production I do I can actually achieve in it - but not quite all. And bits of it are different, like the favourites. These are supposed to be a sort-of replacement for scripting (you can integrate them into batch processing), but at the moment they are really hard to edit - simply because there isn't an editor for them, and they are .xml scripts. So if you want to change one, you either take your life in your hands with native .xml, or scrap it and start the learning process again. Personally I think that this is going to drive a few radio users up the wall, and have them hurtling back to 3.0.1 - we'll see.

     

    So in your terms no, I don't think it's treading water at all - it's just learning a few new strokes. Shame it can't currently do some of the old ones though, isn't it? But there's nothing any of us can really do about it. The devs know all this only too well, and reminding them constantly is almost certain to be counter-productive - they get orders from elsewhere and our constant clamouring constitutes noise. Durin might well strategically disagree with this and try to be very polite about comments being fed back, but even if he does, it's almost certainly true, regardless. And that of course reminds me - the one thing we should all do is to make a mental note that if we are company directors, we shouldn't ever let the Bean Counters take them over...

     

    Sorry for the length of this - but there's quite a lot to the answer to your question.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 5:32 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    I should also have pointed out that in terms of RX2 and programs like Wavelab that Audition is still way cheaper than either of them, and does more. Admittedly RX2 does stunningly good NR and cleanup jobs, but an editor it ain't. Which sort-of answers the other question you didn't ask - should you buy this new version?

     

    And the answer to that is that since Soundbooth has gone, and the devs want to keep their jobs specifically developing Audition, then unequivocally yes - because the way it works now is likely to be the way it works for some time and they will improve it. It's a bit different, but the fundamentals are the same. And it will grow. And if you like the basic package, and appreciate value for money, then this is what you go for - it's a no-brainer.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 6:19 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    Hi SteveG,

     

    Thank you for your thoughtful and detailed replay.

     

    I am guessing/hoping (no, I didn't sign an NDA so you can't kill me) that enhancements will start with CS 6.  From the little that I have seen of the entire CS 5.5 announcement, 5.5 looks like a refresh with a few new wrinkles.

     

    The reason why I brought up RX2 and products such as Wavelab...RX2 is said to be a significant improvement over RX to the degree where some people who were hesitant to use RX now use it as their NR of choice.  Yes - AA at $349 is less expensive than Wavelab at $500.  While one can test AA for free and one has to buy a dongle to test products like Wavelab, the issue is one of perception.  Does AA continue to improve when other products offer enhancements, or does its owner think that it is "good enough".

     

    Hopefully, the undo facilities in the new AA are enhanced and persist between work sessions.  What would have been nice, and I suspect was not addressed, is what seem like curious inconsistencies where some AA plugins cannot be used in the rack (or whatever it's called).

     

    Steve

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 12, 2011 6:45 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    "Why would I not be serious about it? Audition isn't music production (in that sense) software, so it simply doesn't need it. So it's gone - at least for the time being. And it may never come back if the video-related sales outweigh all others...

     

    So I think that your sense of what to believe or not might be about to take a bit of a knock when the demo comes along."

     

     

    Heh...no, it'll be a bit of a knock when my purchased copy of Audition CS5.5 gets in.

     

    I actually consulted an Adobe sales rep earlier today regarding the metronome and even he couldn't confirm if it's there or not, but at least he did mention Audition CS5.5 should start shipping as early as May 2nd, so that was nice to know.

     

    I understand that Adobe's vision for Audition is now audio-for-video post production and that metronomes are primarily for musicians, but how does Audition now handle BPM and time signature management? As mentioned on the Feature Page, music is still a factor regarding loops and music beds, which are almost universally categorized by genre, length, beats per minute and time signature. The latter three are also important factors when working on music videos in Premiere and After Effects, which is, of course, an amalgamation of both video and music post production.

     

    If there is no longer a metronome, are there still at least some minimal controls for keeping track of BPM and time signature within Adobe?

     

    Thank you for your input.

     

     

     

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 13, 2011 2:05 AM   in reply to Steve C2

    Just for the benefit of anybody else reading this, I should also point out that as usual, this new version co-exists perfectly happily with other versions you may have - you don't have to lose any of them. And in fact, for a lot of people this is very likely to be the way they run it. For the time being, you use its strengths and revert to previous versions to cover issues not covered by the current feature set.

     

    As for waiting for CS6 before any Audition improvements materialise - well, I hope they can manage a bit better than that. Some of the deficiencies really need addressing quite rapidly, IMHO.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 13, 2011 9:13 AM   in reply to Bob Howes

    Hi everyone,

     

    I am indeed down at NAB this week showing off Audition CS5.5 and the rest of the Production Premium applications to great response.  I'll have more time later this week to answer questions and talk more about what's happening with Audition and how we're moving forward.  Some good news that might not have made it into the mostly Suite-related press releases and marketing messages is the speed and performance improvements the new application offers on even older hardware.  Additionally, Adobe has committed to more frequent updates on a 12-18 month release schedule which means we won't have to wait 3 years for the next release of Audition.

     

    Durin

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 13, 2011 9:33 AM   in reply to _durin_

    Sounds good. Thanks for checking in, Durin.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 13, 2011 5:52 PM   in reply to xrickrockx

    FYI, from this thread I have taken quotes by Bob Howes and SteveG and used them in this Audiomasters thread:

     

    http://www.audiomastersforum.net/amforum/index.php/topic,8257.15.html

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2011 12:49 AM   in reply to _durin_
    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}Adobe has committed to more frequent updates on a 12-18 month release schedule which means we won't have to wait 3 years for the next release of Audition.

    Bingo Durin!  That realization of Adobe, on whatever level of admission it resides, has long been due.  It was nice of you to offer that acknowlegement.  As for the other points SteveG answered quite eloquently, it appears (to me) that AA continues down a ubiquitous path.  What I mean by that is AA was incorporated into the previous CS suite, then tossed aside for the sake of time spent on Soundbooth (the easy way for video folks to do audio), Soundbooth apparently was a bad decision (imagine that), so now Adobe looks back to AA to save the audio side of video production, again.  Now AA (better said, the genuine AA user base) takes the hit, again, while Adobe, again, continues to ignore AA's real potential and purpose, forcing it back into the video realm (which could be fine if it wasn't bastardized), but hey, we have a "better" plan this time.  The plan continues to be a dismal disappointment for those who've looked to AA for what it is rather than a commodity to destroy (regardless of the owner's "right" to do so).  The longest shot traditional AA users have is to wait that 12-18 months from its release, just to see if Adobe might return to replacing some, if any, of what was removed.  That means 12-18 to maybe get back something, but not move forward with new audio-related design incorporations in 12-18 months.  That would be the following 12-18 month release schedule...maybe (or CS...7?).   My mistake, it isn't even AA anymore.  We'll likely be reminded later on, when all this discourse is history, that AA was changed to the CS model, and why would anyone think it was going back?  "Those of you pining for the old AA days can still use 3.01 (on the limited basis of older OS's and hardware, nod nod, wink wink)".

     

    This is just my opinion and speculation, not meant to be analyzed and picked apart.  It's just all quite sad, because empirically speaking (the history is all there), I believe this is a very lucid and reasonable expectation.  It's even sadder that I hope CS5.5 fails miserably, but hey, it's hard to be expected to support something you don't believe in so there it is.

     

    Anyway, thanks for the updated information.  It's nice now as we can better determine for ourselves who will stay and who will not.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2011 3:31 AM   in reply to buzshaws

    buzshaws wrote:

     

    We'll likely be reminded later on, when all this discourse is history, that AA was changed to the CS model, and why would anyone think it was going back?

     

    Because it did once before, is the simple answer to that! But the reason that I don't think it will this time is based on a slightly more informed version of history, I'm afraid:

     

    ...it appears (to me) that AA continues down a ubiquitous path.  What I mean by that is AA was incorporated into the previous CS suite, then tossed aside for the sake of time spent on Soundbooth (the easy way for video folks to do audio), Soundbooth apparently was a bad decision (imagine that), so now Adobe looks back to AA to save the audio side of video production, again.

     

    The problems with this all stem from what happened with AA2.0. This was a timed release, not a developed one. CS at the time had a very unfair advantage, and I'm pretty sure that there were internal calls of 'foul play' - and there was a subsequent Suite withdrawl. But the quid quo pro for this decision was that the developers had to create Soundbooth. And when I said this was a 'waste of time' I was referring to now, not then - I should have made that clearer; sorry. Because back then it served a dual purpose, I think, and wasn't a waste of time at all. It was a suitable sop for Adobe corporate, and also served as a dual-platform testing tool for the devs, giving them the experience to redevelop Audition along similar lines. It's a waste of time developing it any more now  though, simply because its purpose is achieved.

     

    As for the other points SteveG answered quite eloquently...

     

    Hehe! Thank you. This was a bit easier for me than usual - I've had quite a long time to get used to all of it, after all...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2011 2:56 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    I started a new thread at http://forums.adobe.com/message/3614935

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2011 3:49 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    I wrote:

     

    The problems with this all stem from what happened with AA2.0. This was a timed release, not a developed one. CS at the time had a very unfair advantage, and I'm pretty sure that there were internal calls of 'foul play' - and there was a subsequent Suite withdrawl.

     

    As Durin has reminded me elsewhere, the suite that Audition 2 was in was the Adobe Production Studio bundle, which was what the CS effectively was before it was called the CS, if you see what I mean... but what's in a name? The principle is unaltered.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2011 10:02 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)
    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

     

    Because it did once before, is the simple answer to that!


    Maybe in this special case, we could hope lightening strikes twice :-)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,602 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2011 2:23 AM   in reply to buzshaws

    buzshaws wrote:


    Maybe in this special case, we could hope lightening strikes twice :-)

     

    Well I would have agreed wholeheartedly with that sentiment in the past - but if Adobe and the developers have got it right, it might now be considered to be counter-productive. We'll just have to wait and see how it pans out. What I hope is that there are enough painful memories of last time around to make sure that the AA2.0 debacle doesn't reccur. It certainly seems to me that quite a bit of effort has gone into getting the process right this time, so at present I'm feeling quite positive about it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 3:04 AM   in reply to Bob Howes

    MInd if I join the discussion?

     

    I run an audio production company in the UK (www.mediamill.co.uk) and have used Audition is all its iterations since 1998, with CEP 1.0. I've gone from using it to mix radio news packages for the BBC to producing audio for video games.  Most of the people in my industry use other products but I  have stick with AA because I know it and love it.  It's always had its flaws (3.0 is hideously buggy and crash prone) but I still think it's a great bit of software.

     

    But... and this is a big but... I truly cannot believe how much has been left out of the new version.  Who in their right mind thinks Group Clips isn't essential??

     

    It's an utterly vital part of the multitrack. If I'm mixing to video / cgi and the visuals change, I may need to move a large number of clips / samples at one time. That's jjust one example: there are so many situations where it's used on a day to day basis. Why not put it in the new version? I cannot believe someone thought this was a good idea.

     

    Then the CD production part. I've used that to produce CD masters for  non-game-related work projects. It was brilliant - to be able to go from a 70 minute multitrack to a polished CD master, with proper tracks and timings. And what do Adobe say? They suggest I use Nero instead!!

     

    Okay, the new 5.1 mixing is finally as good as it should be. The previous versions were pretty terrible. But now they go and take out Mackie Control Protocol. Doh! So you move one step forward and get proper 5.1 mixing but then lose the ability to mixing using hardware!!  So we're all supposed to do 5.1 mixing with a mouse?

     

    Seriously, I have always evangelised about Audition and have even demo'd my work with it for Adobe in the past, including at NAB and IBC. But seriously, why leave out such vital features as Grouping? That smacks of a decision taken by people who've never actually used any mixing software.

     

    That's my contribution to the debate.

     

    Jerry Ibbotson

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 8:05 AM   in reply to jerry.ibbotson

    Hi Jerry

     

    I suspect that it was not a case of no-one thinking clip grouping was important but rather was do you want to give up in order to have it.  As SteveG or maybe it was Ron (why he was on the forum and not writing the SAW Studio export function I don't know - LOL) said looming deadlines versus stability etc and something has to slip.

     

    I agree with you I use clip grouping and until a 'patch' is released it will be inconvenient.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 8:57 AM   in reply to Suite Spot

    I commented upon the lack of clip grouping in the thread at http://forums.adobe.com/message/3621847 but I assure you no one on the development team thought it would be a good idea to "take away" that feature.  Clip grouping relies upon a significant amount of existing functionality under the hood, and requires a significant amount of special functionality to address behaviors when dragging, overlapping, crossfading, clip fading, etc.. and was not something that could be adequately completed within our development timeframe.  I think there is going to be a segment of our users form whom CS 6 will be the first "complete" release of Audition for their workflow, and I hope they think of CS 5.5 as a great preview of what's to come.  On the other hand, CS 5.5 is a VERY usable application and I think a lot of users old and new will find it meets their needs, incomplete as it might be right now.

     

    In any case, I don't want anyone to think we're taking this lightly.  Feedback is very important to our prioritization process and how features are implemented.  If you'd like to suggest improvements to clip grouping, or any feature, that may have bothered you in 3.0, please do so here or e-mail us privately at audbugs@adobe.com

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 9:34 AM   in reply to jerry.ibbotson

    I have to agree with Jerry Ibbotson. In fact, I have tried all the Audition releases and have always gone back to 1.5.  The group clips is essential to my work. This leads me to another question. Why does Audition exist? Who is their target? What field?

     

    This applies to everyone from Adobe to Microsoft...do they seriously have a handle on what their customers really want or are they genius geeks locked in a underground bunker with a goal to come up with the coolest hippest "next great app". Do they ever get out in the real world and work with the people who USE their software daily...or are they just too cool and clever for that. (too hip for the room) I certainly get that feeling.  For example, 100 Micosoft developers should be forced to go live and work with small business people for a month and understand what problem we face daily with their OS. Same for Adobe. My wife is a Graphic Designer and daily she yells "what were they thinking?" when we has to deal with Photoshop or Illustrator. (by the way she loves Corel must more)

     

    For me, given the choice, I'd rather go back to Cool Edit Pro than deal with Audition 4.0

     

    There has been a lok of techno-babble on here. At the end of the day, all that matters is what works. Maybe we need to come up with software expressly designed for the audio production field that isn't trying to be an also-ran music production system.

     

    Alex

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 10:19 AM   in reply to Smart-Alex

    "For me, given the choice, I'd rather go back to Cool Edit Pro than deal with Audition 4.0"

     

    That's the beauty of choice  - its yours to do what you will - if it doesn't work for you then you would be crazy to move from CEP

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 11:48 AM   in reply to Suite Spot

    You see this response is part of the problem. I don't believe that most people on this forum have any idea of what it is that we in the radio and commercial production business do. Neither does Adobe. Someone even suggested why couldn't we just use Premiere. That is ludicrous! It would be like using a 18-wheeler to carry your groceries home.

     

    This points out why the time has come for a product that addresses our needs. I think the apropriate line is from the old movie Cool Hand Luke.

    "What we've got here is failure to communicate".

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 12:32 PM   in reply to Smart-Alex

    I'm holding my fire until I can actually try the product, but I think one of the problems will be that people in different parts of the world with different broadcast systems and aims will see things differently. The beauty of CEP/Audition was the flexibility and ease of use for non-technical people.

     

    Most of the "missing parts" seem like components I use, but then I still use Windows XP on a machine with 3.01 and 1.5 for serious work, but I do a huge amount of testing with Windows 7 to find its strengths and weaknesses so that I can assist with broadcaster friends as they are forced to "upgrade".

     

    If AA4.0 is work in progress and proves to be a solid, utterly reliable basis for future development back to beyond where we were, and its future is assured by being part of the Creative Suite, that will be good enough for me. I might not pay for the upgrade at this stage, though.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 12:52 PM   in reply to Wild_Duck

    Thank you Wild Duck for the logical response. Lets see how 4.0 shakes out.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 1:53 PM   in reply to Bob Howes

    Thanks for the answers and sorry if I appeared to be ranting!  I do come at this from the position of being a long term user (13 years) and strong supporter of AA.  I am also kicking myself - I was on the Beta program but was so wrapped up in crucial work projects (using AA 3.01) that I failed to notice the lack of a few key features in CS5.5. Doh....

     

    That said, I'm not sure if it would have made a difference though, even if I had.

     

    I do understand about development times - I help make games like Motorstorm which had a 2 - 3 year dev. time and I totally understand the concept that not everythinhg can get in. But some very key features do seem to have been missed out and at the end of the day, the users of a piece of software, be it game or DAW, don't actually care about the developers' woes. What they care about is their own experience of it.

     

    I sound like a right pain in the *&% but I'm not really.

     

    Honest.

     

    Jerry

     

    www.mediamill.co.uk

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 2:41 PM   in reply to Smart-Alex

    Hey Guys,

     

    Thanks for the feedback so far (and we encourage you to keep it coming as you start playing with the trial when available)!

     

    I also strongly encourage everyone to fill out at the survey below to help us properly prioritize our feature work for the next version.

    We have a strong plan in place going forward and we know the features that need to be re-implemented cross-platform, but we want your feedback as to what features are most important to you. This will help us to make sure the most important features get done first, and the things that end up missing the cut will then be the features you prioritized lower (or didn't mention at all).

     

    http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/auditionfeedback

     

    The Audition team is always listening and we look forward to hearing from you!

     

    --Ron

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 20, 2011 8:02 AM   in reply to Bob Howes

    Me again!

     

    I've been using the latest beta build (the final release version) to do some actual work and I have to say that it is very good. Putting the 'missing' features aside, the playback quality is audibly better than 3.0, the whole thing runs very, very quickly, it looks stunning, the Batch Process and Favourites (yes, there is a 'u' in there) are so simple... that's just the beginning.

     

    Okay, so I miss being able to preview a file before I Import it but I did a voice recording session yesterday and when doing a little post-production (levels and a bit of FFT to ward off any mic rumble) it was so, so quick. Not just in terms of processing, but in the way it works. I created some Favourites - Normalising etc - and found using these to batch my files was simplicity itself.

     

    Later in the day a friend was showing me round ProTools 9 and I kept thinking, "Yup, Audition does that too" - things like context sensitive mouse pointers.

     

    So, I can say nice things!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 20, 2011 11:51 AM   in reply to xrickrockx

    This BPM matter is critical for us who do more complex imaging, my whole service is based around tight BPM matched production where all elements are locked into the BPM on the multi-track. This would be a major problem for me and might mean trying to get to grips with Pro-tools elastic again...

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points