New L.A. Post movement??

[Eric L]

I'm with the Doctor on this one. Stems=yuck. Virtual=yum. 150 plus tracks, conform in groups, no problems yet. I can give the client what they want without going backwards or making excuses. It may be easier to cut stems, but un-mixing stems makes it twice as hard. I'd rather do the conform off the stage and then have all my mix options available when the client is sitting with me.

[Kuba Pietrzak]

bigbadhenchman wrote:

Hmm. Is it really that much easier to reconform hundreds of separate tracks, dealing with the cross fades that may or may not be on the edit point?
Or is it easier to cut the stems.
If you have a bigbudget feature who will pay for all the extra time, then I'm sure you'll edit the individual tracks.
Cutting stems however, would be a faster way to go, don't you think?

__________________________________________________ _______


Yes and no...
I had a situation where director and producers decided to reedit the picture 2 days before the 1st official show, because they did some focus tests and you know what then...
If you have to cut stems because you deal with only "old" material you'll do it faster, because it's easier to cut stems, than a hundrets of trakcs, but if you have "new" material (some scenes, that were cut out during the picture editing process, but later I mean 2 days before the premiere put into the movie again) you are lost - we had to reprogramm all console and outbords automation which was a really hard thing (Dfc, m6000s and Lex960s in this case)
I know, that if everything was mixed inside ProTools the result of reconforming and mixing would be much, much better.

Back to the topic: ProTools and Nuendo
The compatibility is the issue. If most studios, dubbing stages, editing suites, etc, etc. ALSO used Nuendo the situation would be much different. For the price of 1/4 you have almost everything in Nuendo that ProTools has (TC time ruler, Omf support, surround etc, etc), so there would be many users, who choose Nuendo only because of economical reasons and nothing more. If you can do the job with the cheaper (but not so worse, some says that even better) tool, why not using it.
Look at the DUC members' profiles: most are from America, the number of Europeans is much smaller, only 2 guys from my home country. If you look at Nuendo forums, you'll see, that there is a little bit different. Cubase is popular in Europe, so Nuendo is. Motu's DP is almost unknown... really. I know lots of guys who choose Nuendo because it is CHEAPER than ProTools. I know post studios, which do everything from Omf to Adr, Vo, foley, sound design, music composition and mixing, so the compatibility is not the issue for them, and some use ProTools, some Nuendo, some Logic (as a post tool), some Soundscape (do you know what it is?) - and believe me they decided to use platform other than ProTools because of the price.
However, some days ago I had to find and open project from 1997 - everything was right, plug-ins loaded and I was impressed that it could be possibile, I am not so sure if it could be done with other app.
Best regards
Kuba

[The Chinese]

Hmm. Is it really that much easier to reconform hundreds of separate tracks, dealing with the cross fades that may or may not be on the edit point?
Or is it easier to cut the stems.

If you have a bigbudget feature who will pay for all the extra time, then I'm sure you'll edit the individual tracks.
Cutting stems however, would be a faster way to go, don't you think?

In My experience, this depends on who did the work.

An expert PT user will be able to pull this off fairly easily- the meticulousness of the Mix are what is key. Mixing with this possibility in mind also helps big-time.

for someone less experienced in the PT "world", so to speak. it's a lot more challenging simply because that operator mostlikely has done a lot of things in a "How do i get this to work" kind of mode.

that's not to say that one mixer is better than the other in terms of final product, but PT, like anything else, has a certain functionality that has to be respected in order for it to do things in the manner that we want.

-Todd A.

[funkcity]

I had to change the heading as it seemed to push everything into the Virtual Predub discussion!

With eyes wide open there are good and bad things about each platform.

Pyramix is very powerful....but not particularly user friendly in the US.
Fairlight had some vry fast cutting tools.
AudioVision....there are still folks on this forum lamenting it's passing.

Even if you do not like Nuendo, I think it will make some pretty big strides this year.
The tight integration with the Euphonix surface is just the first major enhancement.

[bigbadhenchman]

Well, there's going to be a big Nuendo demo for those truly interested.
Check the Nuendo-post forum.

[cmaynes]

I so totally disagree with this... It is such a potential problem for clients. The main reason I say this is that when you print stems, they are no longer relying on plugins, automation etc. Imagine if you start a mix in one version of PT and the project goes into a deep - freeze. You do your periodic updates, and then the project comes back- First off, what happens if plugins that were originally used now are not available?, or are not presently compatible... This has happened to me certainly. And also, what if the automation is now not quite right- If you have 100 tracks playing back, and it is not sounding right, what then? you deconstruct the mix to try to find out where the problem is, but it will take as long as it would have to print stems... And also, the printed stems are an absolute representation of the work you did, that anyone can successfully playback- the number of DSP cards used or even the software version is totally removed from the picture.

I also hate the potential of one day it works, one day perhaps it doesn't...

And lastly-

sometimes you need way more tracks than virtual stems will allow- these tend to be the shows I get myself into- 192 tracks for effects can sometimes be woefully inadequate- however 192 tracks for a pre-dub is generous- I like that personally.

It really comes down to the sort project you have- sometimes going the virtual route is sensible, but sometimes it may not be- we should not be dogmatically inclined as to what is "absolutely" better.


just my opinion...

charles maynes

I'm with the Doctor on this one. Stems=yuck. Virtual=yum. 150 plus tracks, conform in groups, no problems yet. I can give the client what they want without going backwards or making excuses. It may be easier to cut stems, but un-mixing stems makes it twice as hard. I'd rather do the conform off the stage and then have all my mix options available when the client is sitting with me.

[Fernand Bos]

ProTools, Nuendo, I couldn't care less. I'm a supervising music editor in Los Angeles and these are just my tools. I am a long time ProTools user and owner of 3 HD systems. The last couple of years I've become increasingly frustrated with the way we work on the dubstage. I usualy have a playback rig with 32 outputs to the console and an edit rig to work offline. The frustrating part is to get the material from the edit rig to the playback rig. Yes they are connected and we use servers but I still need to stop the playback rig and import data, it's just not a good workflow. I have not done a final mix on an Icon but most of our temps are mixed in the box and although this has its benefits there is no such thing anymore as a quick edit. When Digi announced the Rocket networking feature several years ago I thought that this would be the introduction of ProTools networking. Unfortunately this dissapeared and I haven't found a solution for this in ProTools yet.

When Nuendo announced version 3.2 I decided to buy a copy and see if it would do some of the things I was looking for. The networking feature works great and to my surprise it also does some other things that I had on my wish list such as folder tracks and the ability to have all reels in a movie open at once. Waveform redraw is beatiful and I love a lot of the editing features. No support for split mono files is indeed a problem but in Steinberg's defense it is really Digi who should implement interleaved files.

I work with composers and therefor work with Digital Performer, Logic, and Ableton Live as well. I am replacing one of the TDM rigs with a 'works with everything but ProTools' rig which includes MADI for the dubstage and my choice of converters for the analog world. I also ordered a Euphonix MC controller. I considered a D-Command as well but as an editor I like the MC much better and it will work with all my applications instead of just one. I still like ProTools and will use it for a multitrack tracking date tomorrow. I just don't feel as passionate about my software as I feel about the music and just use the program that gives me the best tools to turn out a great score. If Apple announces Final Music Edit Pro than I'll probably buy that. One advantage my new rig has that all I have to do in that case is buy new software.

Disclaimer:
I have never worked with Ron Eng or John Ross
I don't play baseball therefor I'm not a major leaguer
I had lunch with Derek Vanderhorst and Scott Wood two weeks ago

Fernand Bos

www.lowdownmusic.com

[funkcity]

Whoa! Fernand Bos

<<<< Disclaimer:
I have never worked with Ron Eng or John Ross
I don't play baseball therefor I'm not a major leaguer
I had lunch with Derek Vanderhorst and Scott Wood two weeks ago >>>>

Ans.

I have worked with Ron Eng. Great editor...forward-thinking good guy (and closet musician)!
I almost worked with John Ross (But I'm quite familiar with his fabulous "home" dubbing theatre)
I hurt my shoulder playing baseball and it kept me out of the Vietnam war!
Derek Vanderhorst...ala "Reefer Madness" ??
Fact.... I ALSO had lunch with Scott Wood at NAB. So there!


And...
Open systems that allow YOU the flexibility are certainly appealing to those who control the format or are allowed to call the shots. Many (most of the time) times that is not the case.

Charles Maynes.... The voice of sanity and former Digidesign employee!
I remember when in the record biz (when there WAS a record biz) folks would mix and automate ALL DAY just to have there automation crash at the end of the day before they "printed" the mix!
Of course the WHOLE day was a no charge!

The film guys always said, Even though were automating we need to print the predubs, stems and masters AS WE'RE DOING THEM....This is a built-in backup!
They even had Harrison (now known as the Harrison mode) have the record-on keys trigger the automation WRITE when any track went into record.

When you lost a drive...and you did... the console auto was the backup...If you lost the mix...you had the actual recording.

Peace

[The Chinese]

ProTools, Nuendo, I couldn't care less. I'm a supervising music editor in Los Angeles and these are just my tools. I am a long time ProTools user and owner of 3 HD systems. The last couple of years I've become increasingly frustrated with the way we work on the dubstage. I usualy have a playback rig with 32 outputs to the console and an edit rig to work offline. The frustrating part is to get the material from the edit rig to the playback rig. Yes they are connected and we use servers but I still need to stop the playback rig and import data, it's just not a good workflow. I have not done a final mix on an Icon but most of our temps are mixed in the box and although this has its benefits there is no such thing anymore as a quick edit. When Digi announced the Rocket networking feature several years ago I thought that this would be the introduction of ProTools networking. Unfortunately this dissapeared and I haven't found a solution for this in ProTools yet.

When Nuendo announced version 3.2 I decided to buy a copy and see if it would do some of the things I was looking for. The networking feature works great and to my surprise it also does some other things that I had on my wish list such as folder tracks and the ability to have all reels in a movie open at once. Waveform redraw is beatiful and I love a lot of the editing features. No support for split mono files is indeed a problem but in Steinberg's defense it is really Digi who should implement interleaved files.

I work with composers and therefor work with Digital Performer, Logic, and Ableton Live as well. I am replacing one of the TDM rigs with a 'works with everything but ProTools' rig which includes MADI for the dubstage and my choice of converters for the analog world. I also ordered a Euphonix MC controller. I considered a D-Command as well but as an editor I like the MC much better and it will work with all my applications instead of just one. I still like ProTools and will use it for a multitrack tracking date tomorrow. I just don't feel as passionate about my software as I feel about the music and just use the program that gives me the best tools to turn out a great score. If Apple announces Final Music Edit Pro than I'll probably buy that. One advantage my new rig has that all I have to do in that case is buy new software.

Disclaimer:
I have never worked with Ron Eng or John Ross
I don't play baseball therefor I'm not a major leaguer
I had lunch with Derek Vanderhorst and Scott Wood two weeks ago

Fernand Bos

www.lowdownmusic.com

Your network solution is this:

http://www.studionetworksolutions.co.../globalsan/x4/

-Todd A.

[bigbadhenchman]

Your network solution is this:

http://www.studionetworksolutions.co.../globalsan/x4/

-Todd A.

The network isn't the issue.
Being able to work on the exact same session that is being mixed, and NOT having to stop to import changes is the issue.

That's what you can do with Nuendo.
You can be on another continent. Do changes and edits, and have those changes and fixes updated in the master session, without having to have the mix stop, while this is done.