Comments

SonyEPM wrote on 1/16/2003, 11:32 AM
Vegas 4 beta is now live: http://www.sonicfoundry.com/
skysurfer wrote on 1/16/2003, 11:40 AM
Big shoutout to Sonic Foundry developers for this great piece of software, i wish you a bright future, this (Vegas4 and Acid4) is the way to go!
Rednroll wrote on 1/16/2003, 12:48 PM
So now that the word is on the streets I can blab now. The input monitoring with the ability to use DX fX's is an awesome feature!!! Bus automation is cool, and Yes Pipeline, the FX's are NOW pre-fader...or the the fader is Post FX if that helps you understand better. Oh yeah, there's ASIO. There also seems, to be an on the fly Punch-IN/Puch-Out ability. Although, I haven't got this to work quite the way I'm expecting it too yet. Maybe I have to do some reading on how to properly use the feature. I haven't gotten V4 to work on my system quite reliably yet with Windows XP using Dual Echo Gina20 cards yet. I'm thinking it might be a windows issue, it's having with my sound card drivers. I just finished downloading all the WindowsXP SP1 updates and hopefully this will fix my problems. I'm still trouble shooting, so if anyone else is using Echo cards with drivers v6.04 or v6.05 on Windows XP I'ld like to hear your reports.
billybk wrote on 1/16/2003, 1:21 PM
Wow, Vegas 4, this is really an unexpected, but very pleasant surprise. I like the idea of releasing a V4 beta also. I have not had a chance to download this yet, never mind checking out all the new and improved features, of which I am sure there are many. But, I will say this, regardless, I do plan on updating to V4, when it becomes available, even sight unseen. I still have a lot of confidence in the future viability of SOFO's audio/video software and I will continue to support a quality product, wherever it may lead.

Kudos to the whole SOFO software team!

Billy Buck
MacMoney wrote on 1/16/2003, 1:22 PM
Very nice work on Vegas 4 Sonic Foundry

George
Sari wrote on 1/16/2003, 1:33 PM
Hi Rendroll;

I am using 6.05 drivers with my Layla 20 running on Win XP SP1. No problem. Very solid although Echo calls them beta drivers for Layla 20.
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/16/2003, 1:41 PM
So, no VSTi or plugins then.....

geoff
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/16/2003, 1:55 PM
I could seriously see recording SANS console on this thing! Kickass!
allon wrote on 1/16/2003, 3:35 PM
thats it?!?!?
i guess i have to move to a diiferent product after all.
no midi?!no piano roll?!no acid track?!no vst/vsti?!no omf export?!
not even dxi support!
please!!!!!!!!!
can they just not figure these things out or what?
these are things people have been asking about for a long time.
are they trying to compete w/ the other companies at all?
to me its barely an update for the audio side.
i guess they chose to stay on the consumer side of things and not play w/ the "big boyz".
if im missing something here please let me know.
Rednroll wrote on 1/16/2003, 4:02 PM
"I am using 6.05 drivers with my Layla 20 running on Win XP SP1. No problem. Very solid although Echo calls them beta drivers for Layla 20."

Thanks for the info Sari, Peter Haller had reported similar results as you also. I had an early release of Windows XP, and have held off for awhile until Echo and MOTU got some drivers before i actually installed it, the v6.04 drivers had been working for me with VV3. Upon doing further investigation, with the Echo console I found it would crash anytime I clicked on the "Advanced" button located under the "General" tab, so it was definitely not likeing something on my system. I did a windows update and got all the SP1 stuff and reinstalled the v6.05 drivers. I will give a go at it again tonight and see if everything is working properly now.
Rednroll wrote on 1/16/2003, 4:19 PM
Allon said:
can they just not figure these things out or what?
these are things people have been asking about for a long time.

I agree with you on the OMF support. As far as the midi, and VSTi. I think this goes along with SF philosophy to keep a well focused app, where midi and VSTi are more of Pre-production tools and Vegas is more of a Post production tool, where you mix, edit and record as a true multitrack app. Just like Acid doesn't have editing and record power like Vegas. So to say, that SF hasn't figured this out yet, is not truly correct, because they do appear in ACID. Some people like to work in an UBER app, and others like to work in seperate apps where common features excel over the UBER apps. If you like the Uber app, with all the functions, then I would suggest Logic Audio, Cakewalk Sonar, ProTools, Samplitude or Cool Edit pro. The problem I find in working with any of those apps is that YES, I can do everything all within that app and I hardly ever use the weak midi features, but it's not as powerful and as easy to do as it is in Vegas and to sync Vegas up with another program, like ACID...or in my case for Midi, Studio Vision. In the later case, they do have "Midi Beat clock", "Smpte", and "MTC" sync options....so I would have to say, since they do have those features...then yes they have already figured that out.
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/16/2003, 5:31 PM
Hopefully that EDL convert pro thing will soon be done and we can import/export PT sessions anyhow
we oughtta go bug them for a while

email em http://www.cuibono-soft.com/Products/EDL_Convert_Pro/edl_convert_pro.html
waynegee wrote on 1/16/2003, 5:48 PM
yep, I think they've shown where their direction is...and it ain't the audio market. Add to the list:

NO metering
NO MIDI surface control
NO MIDI track/recording
NO mixing environment
NO OMF support
NO Rewire support
NO ASIO direct monitoring



They don't give a shizit about ya...Nuendo it is. Sell the f*@&king company to someone who cares already.
SHTUNOT wrote on 1/16/2003, 6:05 PM
Waynegee:"They don't give a shizit about ya...Nuendo it is."

You will be missed!

>>>Line from the video store scene in the movie clerks ;)

Ed.
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/16/2003, 6:05 PM
It would be neat to know what the real philosophy was behind this stuff. It seems pretty clear that they would REALLY like us to mix, " inside the box" for one thing. And not to use any hardware if at all possible. This is a neat and lofty goal, but then if it is the way they're thinking, then why no midi control surface? And why no VST ?

If its not then why no auto input? Bizzarre to be sure, but this version of Vegas is sooooo many leaps forward, that most of the stuff can be overlooked for quite a while. Buss tracks alone will make a LOT of stuff faster and better, and FX automation seems pretty neat too!
Jacose wrote on 1/16/2003, 8:53 PM
Im lovin IT!!!! lol

I REALLY Hope the first release will be out b4 the beta expires tho
Arnar wrote on 1/17/2003, 7:52 AM
I dont know...It doesnt take much to make this a better app then it was,like adding bus tracks which are nice but really a very basic for an app like this.

But it´s still utterly semi-pro in every respect except juggling your audio bits around the screen and the real time crossfades.

I love Vegas for the few things they get right but i have been waiting for a serious upgrade not just adding the stuff we take for granted.
Weevil wrote on 1/17/2003, 10:38 AM
Obviously the video side of the program shifts a hell of a lot more units that the audio side.

Unfortunately I think Vegas has gotten to the point where it can no longer successfully maintain its split identities. I can’t help but feel that the audio side of the application is being badly compromised by the presence of the video side.

How can a DAW (let alone one this far into its development cycle) not have tempo controls on its main window? I’m not spitting the dummy here; I genuinely can’t imagine how I would explain away an omission like that to someone new to the program.

Apparently no significant new features can be added to the DAW end because of the danger of it becoming an 'uber' app. Yet the whole time we are forced to share the bed with this huge, bloated, “full-featured nonlinear video editor” leviathan. I can’t reconcile those two propositions under the one roof.

...Sure, you don’t have to use the video stuff (I never, ever have). But you wouldn’t have to use the MIDI or any of the other stuff either. Why is this rule so absolutely rigid in one direction but nonexistent in the other?

If Vegas only had the same limited set of video features as ACID, I’m sure we would be enjoying the huge number of audio features we are currently denied access to. But unless we get a separate audio version I can’t imagine the DAW side will ever be let out of its time capsule.

...Sorry for sounding so down. I really do love the program, I appreciate that many people at SF have thought and worked very hard on this. But the bigger picture genuinely does leave me feeling very confused and let down.

Cheers.
decrink wrote on 1/17/2003, 10:55 AM
My list was long as to what I was hoping for in VV4. What I really like is that some major improvements were made to a couple of my wishlist items. It became more true that with this release, VV is the premiere audio/video app. Not just audio. Not just video. It really is the combination of those that makes it wonderful. When I just do audio, there are still things I'm missing. I render out MIDI and Vst in Acid now to import to VV and I'll continue to do that. But where this really shines is when I have many tracks of audio and also many of video. Its a great way to work.

Would there be lots of other additions to the audio side I'd want? Of course. Does this continue to make me more productive in the area of audio video that I'm working in? Absolutely.

In the past year I've finished several complete audio CD's and several complete videos, all in Sonic Foundry apps. If I were strictly on the audio side, I'd probably look at other apps more seriously. If I were just video, I'd do the same. But to work in both, this is a fine product. This latest update seems icing on the cake and I'm looking forward to experimenting with 5.1 for the DVD's. I'm glad there is FX automation, color correction, better rippling, bins, and more.

Overall, a nice effort from a company that continues to try to link the audio and video applications.
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/17/2003, 11:32 AM
I gotta agree with you and arnar, weevil. There still obviously hasnt been that much attention given to those who make records for a living, but its a huge step forward. No brainers like input monitoring, phase switches, pre-fader buss fx, direct outs, VST FX ( maybe) and midi control surfaces should have probably been in Version 1.5 or 2 , certainly by vegas 3, IF audio for AUDIO's sake were a major concern. By this time we oughtta be looking at the final little bits, the REALLY hard ones to tackle, like delay compensated hardware I/O for the day when we can actually plug in our real world gear and STILL mix "in the box "

I do gotta weigh this, tho, with the stuff i never really expected. Buss tracks are COOL! Vegas' editing is the glue that binds, and I am spoiled forever. The auto crossfades alone are a tremendous timesaver over any other app. The envelopes are also very well done and no problem ever getting back to zero, unlike most apps.

Audiowise, Vegas still has a long way to go to catch up to Nuendo version 1, and not a hope in hell of being near Nuendo V2, but the truth is, even with those features, I just cant work in that app in any decent speed.
Former user wrote on 1/17/2003, 1:21 PM
Pipeline,

I have mixed feelings on 4.0 beta. I was hoping for much more in the way of audio and alas - this version at first glance is very very close to 3.0...almost a point release on the surface but I am sure I will discover more as I work with it.

I did want to ask you about your editing techniques in Vegas. I have read a number of your posts from a long way back and you do give a huge slap on the Vegas back for pure editing. So I was wondering if you could share a bit about what you do with Vegas editing wise....I do primarily radio production and I have tried to use it for for track by track editing but it still doesn't come close to Forge or Nuendo for specific audio processing (Muting, silence, no pencil tool...stuff like that). So maybe my thoughts on "editing" are completely different than yours. I just wanna get a feel for what you do in Vegas, vs how I am attempting to edit...which I cannot seem to do cleanly in Vegas....Maybe it's operating and zooming over multiple tracks that annoys me but I find it difficult. Some insight or example from your world would be interesting.

Cheers,

Cuzin B
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/17/2003, 2:13 PM
CuzinB, for me the editing Im talking about is mostly the word processor style stuff: cut, copy and paste. For instance, nowadays I get a LOT of bands that cant play for $$$$ but read that there are magic tools that fix all their crap. Try as I might I cant get them to play in time and cant get the singer to play in tune. If I am so lucky as to have them play a single part right ONCE, I can cut copy and paste a workable take from there. The real killer here from vegas is the autocrossfades. Other apps do them, but its not so " auto". In vegas I need only move the parts across each other and its done! Also the ease of the cut and paste stuff on vegas is unmatched, the closest thing for me is " smart tool " in pro tools, but its not even close.

For a while while i was having all the troubles with my RME cards, I was learning Cubendo in earnest, and having friends who were skilled cubendo operators showing me stuff. The number of keystrokes and time it takes there to do a simple split, copy, move and crossfade compared to vegas was just ridiculous. Also when you move a track in that app it doesnt stay as transparent graphically so its hard to tell exactly how you are lining stuff up.

In vegas just a simple hitting " S " on the keyboard splits a track while in nuendo I have to select or keystroke to the split tool, then change back to the move tool, then change to the crossfade tool. In Vegas its just one tool, so for me for my style of working, this editing is unreal. I am so stuck on it that I have to fight every once in a while for my partner NOT to spend the money on PT, since I wont use that app anyway. I know Im stupid, but SF really has me spoiled on the interface. When I show vegas to "name" engineers who are computer haters, even THEY like it, and love to play around with it. But once they find out there is no auto input, the program, and I by extension, am subject to quite a ribbing.

The kind of editing you are describing, at the sample level, like pencil tools and such, youre right, sound forge can do em much better, but then it sucks cuz now you are editing out of context. I wish there were a solution to this, but for my style of working, it would be a cold day in hell before all i had to fix were a few samples :) For me I usually will be cutting and replacing a whole CHUNK of stuff.

For me, using a wheel mouse to zoom in and out I can quickly and easily get to just the right spot. I turn on " always show marker lines" in the preferences and Ill drop a marker, zoom in on something else, drop a marker, double click the timeline and have my whole junk selected. One cool speed trick is clicking on the area under the last track where there is just dark gray, hitting S and splitting every single track at once. Having the cut and paste stuff follow regular windows conventions for me, has made it so fast and easy, hitting shift to selct multiple stuff, hitting control to select multiple non contiguous stuff, for me its a nice easy fun ride. The restof the app, thats another story.
Former user wrote on 1/17/2003, 2:28 PM
Pipeline,

Thanks for the descriptions. It's nice to see how others are using the tools and get a few tips along the way.

Cheers,

Cuzin B
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/17/2003, 3:14 PM
SF - you've done half the job (for us audio types) by getting rid of the superfluous and confusing part of the app name ;-) Now all that's left to prune is the 'video' content of the app itself, so that the audio development can be concentrated on ! Clearly, from the Forum traffic, the video side is the money-earner so far.

So idealogically something must have registered with the decsion-makers for the 'name concession'. I guess a problem is the installed (ie. paid for) base. Would is be sufficient to run as a separate product 'branch' to it's Video cousin ? Would/will the audio usage take off now that potential customers aren't put off by the name ?

I believe that with appropriate marketing, and more closely focussed development and marketing, Vegas could take on the big name DAW applications.

geoff