@alifftudm95 - Checked it out. And now what?

VEGAS team should consider making that features possible.

@alifftudm95 … I think that it is necessary to take into account the segment of the overall NLE market that Linus Tech is using for its comparison purposes. This is very evident at the summary of the video where they do a cost comparison based on a large video production company. To use the competing NLEs they conclude, they would have to employ more editors (not a bad thing), purchase more computers, rent more office space etc. That even applies to Avid, an NLE used on so many feature films and TV programs. And also Resolve which breaks up its functions to cater for collaborative teams each specialising in different parts of the editing process (e.g. media selection, color grading, audio and so on).

Linus Tech was simply exploring options for their segment of the NLE market: a large production company. The obvious extension of that is that if you are running a small scale production company or a 'one-man' production company, Linus Tech's cost analysis becomes somewhat irrelevant. Please consider the possibility that Vegas Pro caters for different segments of the NLE market rather than just focussing on the large production companies, though of course I am sure that VP would love to be in that sphere.

This is, of course, not to say that VP can't and shouldn't be improved. But just because another NLE does something doesn't mean of itself that VP should do it - and vice versa. The question becomes: Do you want that feature purely because the other NLE has it, or do you really need that feature?

He writes off VEGAS because it doesn't have "dynamic linking to a dedicated audio app", and because of "the limited functionality when it comes to working with multiple sequences in a single project".

I left him a comment: "Why do you need 'dynamic linking to a dedicated audio app' from VEGAS? It's strong with audio (it was a DAW to begin with) and can probably do all you need without leaving it."

Then he decides that VEGAS Effects is "nowhere near as capable" as After Effects.

Finally he decides to stick with Adobe because he doesn't want to pay the $42k extra salary to cover a 10% loss of productivity by switching away from his company's preferred NLE. I doubt 99% of his viewership really relate to that.

At least VEGAS was on his list of 3 alternatives to Adobe, and the other options didn't convince him to change either.

@alifftudm95 … I think that it is necessary to take into account the segment of the overall NLE market that Linus Tech is using for its comparison purposes. This is very evident at the summary of the video where they do a cost comparison based on a large video production company. To use the competing NLEs they conclude, they would have to employ more editors (not a bad thing), purchase more computers, rent more office space etc. That even applies to Avid, an NLE used on so many feature films and TV programs. And also Resolve which breaks up its functions to cater for collaborative teams each specialising in different parts of the editing process (e.g. media selection, color grading, audio and so on).

Linus Tech was simply exploring options for their segment of the NLE market: a large production company. The obvious extension of that is that if you are running a small scale production company or a 'one-man' production company, Linus Tech's cost analysis becomes somewhat irrelevant. Please consider the possibility that Vegas Pro caters for different segments of the NLE market rather than just focussing on the large production companies, though of course I am sure that VP would love to be in that sphere.

This is, of course, not to say that VP can't and shouldn't be improved. But just because another NLE does something doesn't mean of itself that VP should do it - and vice versa. The question becomes: Do you want that feature purely because the other NLE has it, or do you really need that feature?

I'm not a audio guy, but that dynamic link between VP & VE is a big must to make this software stands out. That is what adobe have and none other software have, & people love it. The nesting style of VEGAS pro also make it a bit unreliable since it create base off another VEG file. This main point have been discussed in the forum before.

Not everybody who purchases VP gets Vegas Effects. The link from basic VP to your selected audio editor (including the free Audacity) via the Tools menu is simple and quick.

Though I don't need to use it, the VP nested process is clearly clunky and limited in application when comparing that to Resolve.

That is just a big ad for Adobe. No other reason to make that video.

As with most internet pundits and fanboys, nothing is "clear."

It's grandstanding.

@Nickhope : can't agree more with your below

"Why do you need 'dynamic linking to a dedicated audio app' from VEGAS? It's strong with audio (it was a DAW to begin with) and can probably do all you need without leaving it."

I also find Vegas to already be pretty well behaved with media handling without so-called dynamic linking. It does this with file closing and dynamic update on opening. I do outside audio edits all the time while Vegas is running, either with another Vegas instance or another app like Sound Forge or Sonar. When I bring focus back to Vegas after an external audio edit, Vegas sees the change to any audio files in it's project media and automatically updates the project and wave-forms as necessary. This behavior is enabled by a general setting check-box to close media files when not the active application. Vegas does seem to keep its media open and locked while it does have focus, however. Which would put a crimp in simple multi-user shared storage schemes that are not replication based. Perhaps a change in this behavior is all that's needed to make Vegas more multi-user friendly... like an option to only hold media open when necessary, like when playing or rendering.

Finally he decides to stick with Adobe because he doesn't want to pay the $42k extra salary to cover a 10% loss of productivity by switching away from his company's preferred NLE. I doubt 99% of his viewership really relate to that.

At least VEGAS was on his list of 3 alternatives to Adobe, and the other options didn't convince him to change either.

LTT's cost analysis is just a "make believe" number. The only way to get a true understanding of time efficiency would be to produce a bunch of projects over a long enough period of time for their editors to become proficient. So the Adobe conclusion was predictable (and quite possibly completely wrong.)

IMO, it is a very good sign that Vegas got a mention - that's quite rare - and maybe shows a growing awareness and respect for the software.

There have also been several positive articles in ProVideo Coalition & Redshark News.

As with most internet pundits and fanboys, nothing is "clear."

It's grandstanding.

You're calling one of the highest quality vegaspro tutorial and video editors on youtube an adobe fanboy. He was talking about it being clear that the lack of dynamic linking is an issue, and a feature worth considering. He details the problem here starting at 9.00

@wilvan

@Nickhope : can't agree more with your below

"Why do you need 'dynamic linking to a dedicated audio app' from VEGAS? It's strong with audio (it was a DAW to begin with) and can probably do all you need without leaving it."

Why you disagree with @NickHope should maybe give you a little more reason.
That would interest me too.

He's agreeing with NikeHope. It's just a strange English turn of phrase (not strange in english). But he supports the view

He's agreeing with NikeHope. It's just a strange English turn of phrase (not strange in english). But he supports the view

@Former user

Thanks for the English tutoring ! 😁

I've watched Linus' channel for a few years; he's a hardware guy, NOT an editor, and it really shows in this weak presentation. This must have been a video they could produce at home, keeping "social distancing." IOW, "Let's just crank out something, anything -- till we can get back to our more normal mode of production."

It's pretty obvious they just wrote of Vegas without any sort of serious "deep dive." Ridiculous - if they'd even pretend to make that claim. AS some have mentioned, VEGAS IS and always was, an audio program, a DAW, as it were, at is core, it's foundation....video came later.....and though perhaps not on the cutting edge, as far as DAWs go, but fairly sophisticated. NO, there is no MIDI, not as such, but ProTools did not do much with MIDI for a long time. Round tripping to external, dedicated Audio editor of choice is very smooth, AFAIAC. I doubt that they even tried that.

Anyway, back to the point: Linus' editors, out of their own mouths, said the only used audio for basic level adjustment and rudimentary mixing. To say they "passed" on Vegas because of audio is just a bad joke.

I'm as big a critic of some of Vegas' persistant shortcomings as anyone, but Vegas is MUCH easier to work with than Premier, AND it's got decent audio (Premier sucks) AND it will composite pretty well. Linus was spewing pure BS.

I watched the video when it originally "aired". There was no real mention of time spent with Vegas to learn how it works and how to use it, while they have been using Adobe for years.

That makes a huge difference in giving an evaluation, how long have you used the product, and used it exclusively to learn it.

But even mentioning Vegas is a plus for me.

Gary said there going to be competition between Adobe and Vegas post. nab

He writes off VEGAS because it doesn't have "dynamic linking to a dedicated audio app", and because of "the limited functionality when it comes to working with multiple sequences in a single project".

I left him a comment: "Why do you need 'dynamic linking to a dedicated audio app' from VEGAS? It's strong with audio (it was a DAW to begin with) and can probably do all you need without leaving it."

Then he decides that VEGAS Effects is "nowhere near as capable" as After Effects.

Finally he decides to stick with Adobe because he doesn't want to pay the $42k extra salary to cover a 10% loss of productivity by switching away from his company's preferred NLE. I doubt 99% of his viewership really relate to that.

At least VEGAS was on his list of 3 alternatives to Adobe, and the other options didn't convince him to change either.

Can VP do 7.1 or 3d audio like DaVinci resolve all the audio tools have not been uploaded or no new tools been add especially the old audio plugins thay look very old compare to DaVinci resolve or Adobe take a look ↓

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/uk/products/davinciresolve/fairlight

Can VP do 7.1 or 3d audio like DaVinci resolve all the audio tools have not been uploaded or no new tools been add especially the old audio plugins thay look very old compare to DaVinci resolve or Adobe take a look

Yes, but you have said this so, so many times on the forum recently, including as a comment during a recent Vegas Pro tutorial (it appeared during the tutorial under something similar to your user name). We get it! And I am sure that you have made your point well and truly with the Vegas Pro dev team.

Indeed. Cross posting should be avoided (Community rule #3).