1. Sounds like a SoundForge app for the Mac. Apple and Adobe suites have got nothing against the Sony suite. And it is cheaper too.

Posted at 10:53AM on Oct 26th 2006 by Russell Heimlich

2. A SINGLE track editor? what is this, 1995? Cool Edit 2000 was most definitely multi-track...

That said, you're right that this is certainly a good sign for Adobe on Apple.

Posted at 11:38AM on Oct 26th 2006 by Ryan

3. Your comments regarding Adobe bundle vs Apple bundle, and in particular Audition/Soundtrack, are WAY off base and I fear very ill-informed. As a long time user of both and a technology journalist who has used, reviewed and tested every system under the sun the simple fact is the Apple suite is not nearly as complete or well rounded as Adobe's, not by a long shot. What Apple have is better marketing and thats it. I have no love for Adobe and have very often been a harsh critic but credit where credit is due the latest Adobe production bundle is hands-down, no contest the most complete and most poweful production suite on the market. Nothing do with personal taste or preference or interface aesthetics but just feature for feature facts.

Lets start with Soundtrack... Soundtrack is a cruel joke. A very, very poor excuse for a multi-track audio program. Its been an industry laughing stock since it's launch and a lame Walter Murch paid-for adverorial didint help its uptake and reputation. It was an attempt to cover over the fact that audio tools in Final Cut Pro are absolutly abysmal to the point of being virtually non-existant. (there was no true audio mixer until version 4 and still no true sample-level accuracy in editing audio which is just absurd)

Audition (previously Cool Edit Pro) is a very powerful audio Multi-track and Stereo mastering tool in one; with full loop sequencing capabilities, MIDI, rewire suppourt, DXi and VST implimenttation not to mention surround sound mixing and encoding.

Soundtrack isnt even close to this - it has no re-wire capabilities, no dxi suppourt, no multi-channel sound, no punch-in/punch-out recording, no audio takes, no real-time effects automation, no effects input monitoring, no midi timecode synch, no spectral analysis, no restoration tools, no zero crossing tools, no MIDI slaving, and virtually no suppourt of audio formats outside of quicktime ... Should I go on..? I had high hopes for Soundtrack but it has been dismally dissapointing. A sad joke of an audio tool.

The Adobe Production bundle ($1600US) has, in one box, Premiere Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, Audition, and Encore. The Apple Box ($1400US) has FCP, Motion, DVD Studio Pro and Soundtrack. From the beggining the Adobe bundle (for just an extra couple hundred bucks) has a vector illustration tool (illustrator) and the ubiquitous Photoshop which the Apple bundle does not - no illustration tool, no imaging tool. Motion has some nice quirks but is a very very very long way form being in the same league as After Effects. DVD Studio Pro is very good but in real-terms it's no better than Encore whose integartion with all the other Adobe apps is superb and far better than DVDSP's lame arse pseudo integration with FCP.

And lets not forget our history, Final Cut Pro IS Premiere Pro. Final Cut was bought from Macromedia as Keygrip and re-badged. Keygrip was made by the lead design team from Adobe who made Premiere. FCP and Premiere subsequently are incredibly similar and share an almost identical code-base, workflow and interface. To say Premiere Pro is the 'weak link' is a statement of ignornance from someone who evidently has never used PP for more than 5 minutes. Premiere has better internal audio tools than FCP, (FCP still does not do any form of surround sound or functional multi-track recording) better compositing tools than FCP, better titling tools than FCP (as it is the text engine straight out of Photoshop), better real-time performance than FCP with multiple formats, is more file friendly than FCP which is incredibly restricted, has a better encoding engine that is internal to PP rather than operting as a system intensive sub-application in the form of Compressor that FCP has. PP also has total integration with other Adobe apps. For example you can create a Photoshop file from the timeline of Premiere and have both applictaions open with live updating from one to the other. Similarly you can drag an After Effects project file unrendered directly to the timeline of Prmeiere and edit and live-update from one to the other... This is a level of integration that Apple are not even close to.

The truth is that Apple's applications are not condusive to good integration. Virtually every application Apple have they bought from someone else; FCP from Macromedia, Motion comes from the aquistion of Shake, Logic was bought from E-magic, DVD Stduio pro was bought from Astarte, Live Type came from India Titler, hell even the Macintosh operating system was originally bought from Xerox...! What this means is that each app has a very different base architecture and it takes a lot of redevelopment over a long period of time to get them all unified to accomodate good integration. With the exception of Audition (which they bought from Syntrillium) all the Adobe apps are Adobe developed and many many many versions old which means there is a large shared code-base to make integration easy.

I have no love for either Adobe or Apple - both have no agenda other than profit and we, as users, should never forget that. But what I cant abide is mis-information driven by bizare brand loyalty to the point of blinkered ill-informed statements as above. I come to DVGuru daily because it is a great aggregator of news from across the web. I teach media production and it is the first site I show at the end of every class as great source of info for my students. But every now and then this site shows an thoroughly amateur side of petty brand loyalty that distintgrates into un-founded worthless opinion. Its a great dissapointment.... Your readers deserve better.

Posted at 9:27PM on Oct 26th 2006 by Mike Jones

4. Hey!

Thanks for reading the site, and bringing such a wealth of knowledge to the conversation. Please comment more frequently! Our site needs more good communication, and community is one place we're definitely lacking.

I think you definitely bring up some great points. Lemme try to refute some of them.

#1-- I'm not a well respected journalist in the field of digital video. In fact, when it comes to digital video it's my career, but I spend a few hours a day on the site, not enough to make a living off of. I am, in fact, a twenty-something with a passion for all things digital video. I'll also be honest, I didn't read all of your reasoning... mainly because it doesn't matter to me.

This is an opinion piece, not well researched nor meant to be here as standing fact. Instead, it is meant to stimulate conversation. I don't claim DV Guru to be the mouthpiece for all of the DV community, but instead I claim it, as you've said, as a useful aggregator of all things digital video. We are interested in digital video, and movements in the industry.

I appreciate your opinion pieces, but as a video editor, I don't find myself heading in to Audition to make a complete audio bundle. I don't find Adobe Premiere Pro to be as great of an editor as Final Cut. When posing the question: "Would you rather have the Adobe's production bundle or Apple's FCP suite" I merely wanted to stimulate conversation, which I'm glad you've posted.

I feel like when I use Premiere Pro, biased from bad flashbacks of Premiere 5.5, it frustrates me. I don't do multi-channel surround sound, nor am I compositing in my NLE. From my perspective, would I rather have FCP or Premiere? FCP, obviously. If you feel like that's the "wrong answer," you're missing the point. It's personal preference.

I see you dislike Apple, although you say the contrary, but I'll be upfront: For editing and media creation, I've always preferred using my G5 to my Xeon machine. I renderfarm out After Effects projects to both, and I tend to do most of my compositing in an After Effects environment which is platform agnostic.

I appreciate your comments, and I understand your points, but your tone comes off a bit condescending, and feels like that of a collegiate professor, and no offense, I've finished school, don't try to lecture me. Instead, continue to comment on our posts. When you see errant flaws, feel free to email or comment! This site is somewhat of a collaborative beast that we'd like to see continue to grow. We've had record traffic this past month, and frankly we need more intelligent readers who know what they're doing.

If you'd like to contribute posts to our site, I'd be more than interested in talking further with you. This is a hobby that we've turned into an interesting site. It is a blog, and has all of the standard blog caveats, but we're trying our damnedest to get out great content. If you want to do better, by all means do it! I'd be more than happy to bring someone with your sort of CV on board to publish columns occasionally. Your background makes you a perfect candidate to write for us.

I know we may be too small-time for you, but honestly, if you think we're doing something useful, but a little bit off the mark, help us correct it. If you think the DV community at large would benefit from your expertise, I'd be more than happy to discuss you as a potential columnist.

I'd have to ask just one favor though: Cut our writers (and myself) some slack. We're doing this as a hobby, and hope it's worthwhile most of the time, even if you have to sort through a little bit of amateurish-ness (word choice intended... =) ) to get to the good meat.

Cheers!

--
Randall Bennett
Lead Blogger
DVGuru.com

Posted at 8:07PM on Oct 26th 2006 by Randall

5. Fair enough and well said. :)

I would add only this (at the risk of sounding condecending but not intending to) Dont bow to lowest common denominator. This site is superb. And I'm not sure if you realise it but the readership is very very wide. I've travelled all over the world and found people who, like me, rely on your site as a hub to find video news. I have colleagues who are 30 year veterans who come here to find news.

So, I would urge and encourge you to rise above the 'Blog Mentality', rise above the ill-informed opinion piece (unless its clearly defined as an opinion piece). It struck me that your news post sounded like, and should have been, one of the comments under the report on Adobe's new app. So that might be a way forward, present then news as facts and reporting and then provide the commentary.

Now that the site has grown let it also mature. Hobby it may be but that doesnt mean it cant and shouldnt be professional.

I say this only because I think the site is worth it, that it deserves better and that 90% of the time is better. That DVGuru has the potential to be a highly regarded, well-respected and popular site for all things media-related. I felt dissapointed this mornign that it seemed to slip back from my high expectations. Over the past 4 months the quality on DVGuru has grown enormously, i only wish it to continue.

Congrats to you all. I will continue to come here and comment when i can.
cheers

Mikej

Posted at 9:28PM on Oct 26th 2006 by Mike Jones

6. This is getting kinda intense guys. Anyway, I am sort of a newbie, I have only been editing professionally for around 2 years. I have been building PC's under the supervision of my father since my wee days so when first really getting on a MAC I was slightly put off. None of that has changed since then.

I have my PC at home with both Avid and the Adobe Production Studio and I have Final Cut Studio at work and i simply have to say that I would much rather work in Premiere than in Final Cut, although I spend around 80% of my editing time on the MAC.

I am not a history buff on the products or anything, but to me when I edit in Final Cut it just feels as though they simply pile more and more features and settings into an already crowded program.

The way the programs each start up and handle files Adobe has surpassed Final Cut. On my PC it asks me which project I would like to open, then what type of project it is (DV, HD, etc.) when Final Cut just opens the last project, or a new project automatically. And if I want to keep the project self-contained I have to change four settings before opening that project as opposed to Adobe doing it for me and also including the project manager that at the very least will RENAME MY CLIPS!

To me Final Cut is editing in frustration, Premiere is editing in organization. It is an endless debate, but I for one hope that Premiere one day returns to the MAC. Until then I will secretly be boot-camping into Windows to get some real work done..

Posted at 2:15PM on Oct 27th 2006 by James Godwin

7. I am right there with James...I use use both Final Cut and the Adobe Production Studio, and hands down, without question, I work faster and smoother with Adobe. Apple has created some great apps, but they can't beat Adobe right now.

My Final Cut die-hard friends are slowly realizing that the Premiere the used in the past is nothing like the Premiere Pro of today.

Posted at 2:25AM on Oct 28th 2006 by Eric

8. Please dont get me wrong, my comments about Audition and Soundtrack, FCP and PP, were never intended at all to be more of the absurb PCvMac idiocy. Opertaing system is irrelevant. Microsoft own controlling share in Apple anyway, is it any wonder the two operating systems are near identical in all but cosmetics. Its the application that counts - thats the interface you deal with everyday. So my concern and discussion prompting was in regard to a mis-information regarding the Adobe Production bundle in the original post and the obvious strengths of the integartion that only Adobe are currently in a position to achieve because of the age and maturity of their applictaions with a unified code-base.

In truth my own tool set of choice is currently centred on the infinately flexible Sony suite - Vegas, Acid, SoundForge - but here there is, alas, painfully little integration between apps just as there is precious little (but getting better) integration in the Apple bundle. I would hope all software developers are keeping a close eye on Adobe's approach because its the right way forward; seemless integration.

As said before, whilst I'm a long-time user of Adobe tools (and Apple for that matter) I'm no fan of Adobe Corporation, they are guilty of some horrendous crimes in regard to their legal department actions and absurd copyright enforcement processes along with vicious take-over attacks on smaller companies. This is in line with a feeling of utter contempt for Steve Jobs as the worlds greatest snake oil salesman and propagator of mis-information as a daily occupation.

Our job as creative users and, by proxy with forums like this, industry commentators, is to always ensure we are questioning the corporate developers not blindly buying into their marketing strategy. Maybe we should start to compile a list here of all the things we hate about all the different editing systems. This is actually far more useful and constructive than sychophantic product endorsement. By consistently demanding better of the tools and of the industry, rather than lapdogedly being ever so thankful for what we're given, we evoke real power of change and influence (dont think for a second that software developers dont spend half their working day peering over forums like to gauge their products market psoition.) Let us all be criticial instead of part of the marketign vehicle.

I'll start...

Final Cut Pro has the worst audio tools of any NLE on the market and the most inflexible format and resolution performance engine around. Its a joke.

Premiere Pro has stability issues and a clunky '3-mouse clicks where one will do' workflow.

Vegas has a totally crap text titling tool and the Source window/Trimmer is clunky and unintuitive.

Avid is a dinosaur functioning in an old-wrold mentaility that is just not keeping pace with a contemporary all-digital, all-flexible workflow.

SoundTrack is the most under-developed, limited, rudimentary poor excuse of a multi-tracker on the market.

Audition is powerful but runs dangerously close to Bloatware packed with irrelevant stuff and convoluted steps to achieve simple things.

Actaully, the only truly great bit of software on the market that I find it hard to find fault with... Celtx. the greatest pre-production tool ever created. And its Open Source..!!!

Mikej

Posted at 9:14PM on Oct 27th 2006 by mike jones

9. Returning to the original discussion, I'm an independent film director, and I prefer the Shake/FCP/Cinema Tools route. Unlike MikeJ, I find the integration between these three applications to be absolutely unparalleled by anything in the Adobe bundle, at least in terms of real-world workflow. Granted, Shake isn't part of Final Cut Studio, but it costs half that of After Effects for 10x the power. My EDL is preserved flawlessly as we move from rough cut to color correction to effects editing to compositing to picture lock to inline cut. Toss in built-in integration with Xgrid, and you have one hell of an editing solution.

By the way, FCP and Premiere Pro are not DAWs, even though some people can't seem to get it through their heads that audio editing should be handled in, off all things, an audio editor. The tools in both of these programs are less than adequate for truly quality sound work. And Audition is at best a mediocre audio editor...not that Soundtrack is any better. If you are really concerned about audio production, spend a little money on a real DAW.

Posted at 2:25AM on Nov 4th 2006 by Steven Luce

10. Perfect. So after years of using the Adobe suite--from Premiere 5 to Premiere Pro 1.5--I switch over the Mac platform and Final Cut Studio and now I'm hearing Adobe is better!

I have the worst timing with this stuff.

I will say that OS X wipes the floor with XP (we'll see about Vista).

Posted at 2:53PM on Nov 6th 2006 by Ryan