Idea for Vegas FIVE

jmpatrick wrote on 10/13/2002, 8:46 AM
A lot of people seemed to be bugged/embarrassed/miffed that they use Vegas VIDEO to do there serious audio production. Would it be difficult for SF to make future versions user configurable? Upon first install, you would be presented with 3 options:

1. Audio features ONLY
2. Audio AND Video features with the ability to "hide" the Video feature set from the View Menu.
3. Traditional VV3 interface.

Just call it Vegas and be done with it...

jp

Comments

Chienworks wrote on 10/13/2002, 9:04 AM
Why hide the video features? If someone doesn't need a feature then they can ignore the button/menu option. Probably the most glaring video feature is the video preview window and this can already be turned on or off. There are dozens of features in Vegas that i've never used and may not ever use. It doesn't bother me in the slightest that they are listed in the menus. I skip over them and click on the function i do need.

I definately agree with your 4th suggestion though ;)
jmpatrick wrote on 10/13/2002, 12:01 PM
Don't get me wrong...I don't have a problem with using Vegas Video in front of my audio clients. When they see how quickly I can react to their ideas, they don't care WHAT it's called.

Judging by other posts, people seem to have issues.

jp
stakeoutstudios wrote on 10/13/2002, 4:16 PM
I don't have a problem with the program having all the video features - I ignore them, and they don't get in the way of my workflow.

I might even play with the video features one day :o)

The problem I have is the way the program is marketed: it is not considered a Pro Audio App in the UK at all.

Cubase, Logic, Sonar, Digital Performer.... super dooper music looper. not kidding.
Rednroll wrote on 10/14/2002, 9:20 AM
I'm with you guys on this one. As soon as someone unfamiliar with the product..which happens to be the majority of the people...hears the word "Video", the program seems to lose all credibility. I believe, it's because most video editing software have added audio editing abilities as an after thought and they're not very powerful. Just try telling someone you're doing all your audio editing with Adobe Premiere or an Avid. These programs can get your 2 track audio/video syncing done, but have nothing on a true multitrack editor. When you hear the name "Vegas", what's the first thing that pops in your head? Well if you're refering to software, I believe video poker and casino "games" would come to mind? Even Cakewalk renamed it's flagship software to make it seem like a more viable audio solution after Version 9. Even before then it was called "Cakewalk Pro Audio", but "Sonar" sounds soooo much like an audio program now doesn't it?

I've told everyone how I downloaded and installed Protools Free and redirected the desk top icon to point to Vegas, and then shut off the splash screen on start up haven't I? That always helps in elliminating the questions from ever happening, therefore the back peddling of trying to explain why you're using a software called "Vegas Video" for recording and editing audio. Sometimes a clients presumed assumptions will save you a thousand words of explaining, before you even get to impressing them of how well you can work with the software.
PipelineAudio wrote on 10/14/2002, 10:51 AM
"I downloaded and installed Protools Free and redirected the desk top icon to point to Vegas"

LOL, boy am I gonna get in trouble. I think Im gonna go stick a Fruity Loops icon on my friend's 001 *.exe for good measure
lunar07 wrote on 10/14/2002, 10:52 AM
Rednroll
I totally agree with you here. This was a marketing flop. Calling the software 'Vegas' to start with, then adding 'Video' to it. If it was not for the fact that we knew that this software came from the same company that made Sound Forge, we would not even have considered using Vegas.