Ha, I was just wondering if all this hadware, converters and controllers, were interesting. So, disappointing, you say, at least for the controllers.
1 Like
You know that on the Samplitude forum, Magix answered the Atmos question by asking to be patient, but that itās coming. Iāve been on Samplitude for two years (and Sequoia a little) and Iāve liked it a lot. Just the behavior of the clips is difficult: everything you move cuts off whatās on the right. I never got used to it. But in terms of functions and possibilities, itās great. I also think the sound is superior, but thatās a whole debateā¦ !
1 Like
I donāt get it. Over? Sequoia has everything you need. Youāre talking about faster assembly, arenāt you?
1 Like
Most BMD hardware (and I own a decent amount of it) is meh. Not just the consoles. I think the cameras may be the exception. But converters, I/O cards, switchers, routers - all are cheaply made and provide all the base functionality you need, but lacking the finesse that goes the extra mile or makes you smile when you use it. But their intent has always been budget friendly and play the very large bottom half of the market, where you can make it up in numbers what you canāt catch with sophistication. (You can read the history of BMD and its founder, it will explain the rationale.)
We have 3 Resolve licenses. Several years ago it was our main color platform, but these days we use it occasionally for edit and color when speed is of the essence, but the rest of the time itās mostly as a utility for transcoding, etc.
It depends where in the market you are. There are some 3M Resolve users word wide. If you work in film, every director and camera operator will have their own copy and tell you what color should look like. It makes it hard to stand out as an artist and demand good rates when everyone thinks they can just dial a few knobs themselves and donāt understand the difference. Some high end colorists stay with Baselight instead, others use boutique software like Mistika, etc. which I did for a while too. These day I do color in Flame, another high-end niche tool.
But if you are just an early career mainstream artist churning out content and you look for a low friction tool that keeps your cost down, Resolve is the perfect match for you. Same if you are a small studio and have an army of editors working for you. For the same reasons Fairlight will too for many. So its adoption has no doubt been growing. But for the most part those are not folks hanging out here, but running YT channels, etc. Thereās a lot of them. So if āblowing out of the waterā refers to head count, sure, Fairlight will win the race. But I donāt think that will be the measure.
Early versions of Fairlight, just after it became a page in Resolve, didnāt even support side chaining. And itās I/O routing was a mess. A good chunk has been fixed in the years since I understand. The main appeal is the shared timeline, that is a tremendous asset if you are on the clock and donāt need much in terms bells and whistles.
2 Likes
Thank you for all this information. This ecosystem is not for me (and my plans for immersive audio books, don concentration audio). All the same, itās something to keep an eye on.
1 Like
Yesā¦This was just before Covid Third wave hit in 2022. I had 2 days to deliver and had to clean the poem which had several issues from ambient noise to clicks, pops and plosives, RX at rescue.
create the sound design, mix and master and and upload. Didnāt even have an hour extra.
So from my experience nothing compares to it when it comes to speed.
just uploaded it so it can be watched here
1 Like
Hereās a clip gain! SB please take a look!
That said, Rajiv, do you correct plosives manually? Iām all over this problem. De-essers, most of the time, tackle sibilances, and few tackle plosives. Iāve seen Smartās, but I donāt like the adjustments.
1 Like
Thatās not (pan?) automation? Automation normally extends between clips with clip gain only existing on clips.
1 Like
Youāre right. I reacted too quickly (sensitive issue here!). That said, does clip gain exist on Resolve?
Update: Iāve just checked and yes, thereās a gain clip thatās independent of the volume automation and adjustable. Whatās more, itās positive and negative. Exactly what you need.
1 Like
Personally, I work almost exclusively with Nuendeo. In other studios we also use Pro Tools, Sequoia and Studio One on one computer. Personally, I used to like to switch DAWs from time to time because I found it challenging. And because Iām a curious person who likes to try something new or different. But Iām getting older. 
Itās also a question of cost. Thatās why Sequia will probably leave our portfolio soon. Personally, I would get rid of Pro Tools. But I canāt justify it because we need it for training. (It is still expected that knowledge of PT is taught.)
Yes, they have been promising that for a while. And I think MAGIX will come up with Atmos. If only because Dolby seems to be āgiving it awayā at the moment, so that Atmos is implemented in every DAW. (Which is very clever, of course, because it will become the de facto standard). But itās too late for me. I really like Sequoia. I really miss the four-point cut, for example. But Sequoia now costs 900 EUR per year (including premium support and priority updates). When you consider that hardly any of us still use Sequoia, thatās a lot of money.
I can no longer justify it to our accountant. 
2 Likes
I keep updating Pro tools here, which I really like. Nuendo, I donāt know. There must be some adjustments required. As for Sequoia, youāre right, itās terribly expensive and weāre a bit alone in the world (except in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, for classical music among other things - thatās what Iāve seen). But all I have in my studio is the Samplitude license. If Atmos arrives in Samplitude (it might be reserved for Sequoia), Iāll have to evaluate all the same. Samplitude has traits of genius. Around me, on the other hand, itās Pyramix all over the place. No easy task!
1 Like
After our studio closed down in covid its -be simple, invest less, use what you have and innovate. . . And we have done tons and tons of work and fast.
2 Likes
RX De-plosive within Nuendo or Fairlight work most of the times, for bad ones it manually done using spectral repair/ replace . Some times I end up using the erase and clone tool in specralayers pro within Nuendo and at time I have also used the clone tool.
1 Like
We use to call it A-B roll or source -destination edit, of course ripple (non linear) edit has replaced it. .
1 Like
PS Not only does Reaper have the best ripple editing, but someone wrote a great 4 point editing system for it. Pretty amazing. Iāve already moved on to Reaper for all my podcast editing work.
1 Like
Okay, Iāll watch Spectralayer. Thank you for your time.
1 Like
I swear Reaper is the Linux of DAWs: No matter what the conversation is about, no matter where it is being had, theyāll pop up to say how superior their chosen software is and how you should all use it.
3 Likes
Itās true that itās strong. I also really like the design of the tracks themselves. But design isnāt a problem with Reaper. For me, itās mainly the lack of French documentation.
That said, Sunshy, what about Reaper and Dolby Atmos?
1 Like
Many use Reaper for ambisonic and game audio. It does not support Atmos natively like Nuendo does however. But now there is Fielder Audio.
1 Like
Please do not put words in my mouth. Neither did I say that Reaper is superior nor did I say that you should use it. I was only offering alternatives. That said, as Cuebendo does not offer ripple edit at all, I would have to say that Reaperās ripple edit is far superiorā¦but only because it exists
2 Likes