I have to agree, I was disappointed with the review. Even the compliments were back-handed in nature. The author just couldn't get past the fact that Vegas didn't look like all the other NLEs. Pity.

Haze

Ah, are they too blind to see? - Haze! ;-)

You are doomed to walk the Planet, John-the-Baptist-like, attempting to convert those "Lost Souls" that are blinded by the lure of a massive user platform . . Our time will come . . Keep the faith . . I know, I know it hurts when reviewers don't get or who aren't "ON-message" . . . .

I'm trying my best in London UK .. others here will vouch for my passion for Vegas5 . . .

Grazie

Can ANY NLE be reviewed in 700 words. OK maybe there's the odd one that could be summed up in one word but apart from that I think they're just after cheap copy.
I think overall we're all to blame, we want everything served up in predigested lumps that can be digested while we're doing something else.


Bob.

. .and after we have digested it, "while we're doing something else" . .sorry couldn't resist!

Grazie

"Can ANY NLE be reviewed in 700 words..."


sure , with 2 words : " total crap'

Overall the review was consistent with Peter Wells review of Sonic Foundry Vegas 4.0 +DVD

John

Computer Video is a pretty basic mag, the reviews are always big on glossy pictures but very low on real technical content. Best left to the OAP wedding videographers that make up the readership and hang out at computrervideo.net. Have a glance at the september issue, the DVD +R DL drive review is a complete joke.

To some extent my question is more about Sony than its reviewers. Does Sony have a guide for reviewers? Do they highlight any features for them? Granted this reviewer may not have gone through Sony.

But it's very odd to me that a Vegas review doesn't mention scripting. There are over a hundred free scripts for Vegas. Does Sony send a zip file to reviewers and mention "you may want to try this, this, or this?"

What would you highlight if you had a brief space to talk about Vegas.

I think I would mention:

High Quality Output
Fast Workflow
Scripting
Multiple Instances
Audio
Excellent Previews (and other preview tools like RAM renders)
Stability

Sweeping generalisations about Computer Video readers, I am a subscriber, are not at all helpful in discussing the general thrust of the review which I felt gave a positive outcome for Vegas.

Instead of just rubbishing the review perhaps it may prove beneficial for Sony to read a critque of the program from another editors view point.

Just my opinion.
Dave

I think most reviewers miss what is to me, one of Vegas' greatest features - it requires very little ovehead. Some programs take forever to import a video clip. Vegas can do the job almost instantly.

I found the comments about how competitors are all pushing similar design/workflow models interesting. The author started out sounding as if he was lauding Vegas' unique approach.

In the end, his comment about it not being a killer ap colored his entire review in the negative.

Interesting reading, though.

Caruso

The review brought up valid points about DVDA authoring weaknesses, hope Sony continues to improve upon it as the reviewer highlighted. Agree with you all re the focus of the article could've/should've highlighted also, the unique new features in Vegas 5 vs audio focus.

Ken

Why you would want to subscribe to a magazine when you can get real user reports from forums is a mystery to me. The editor of CV is an ignorant, rude, obnoxious, self righteous prat. There is never any real technical content to the publication just lovely pictures of dialogue boxes and opinions gleamed from a few hours of amateur fiddling. They sang the praises of pinnacle studio 8 for months even though it didn't really work and everyone else knew it. A few clips of bridesmaids and the same old appalling punk bands hardly make the best test material. They continually claim "you read it here first" and seem to think they actually have influence. They have a tiny circulation and about the highest cost per page in the sector. Mistakes are frequent and so called reviews so light weight they positively float of the page. It's a turgid little publication out of date and out of place in today’s fast moving and exciting digital world.

Superfulcrum:

Don't sit on the fence, tell us what you really think! :)

Andy

Hi,

I personally find this thread very interesting, as I am currently writing reviews of Vegas for two different US magazines. I would like to point out that:

a) the space limitation is always a drag when given a product to review such as Vegas (as compared to, say, a capture card or audio compressor) with such a wealth of features. Also note, the review at the link provided indicates that that is an exerpt and not the whole review. It looks to me like they gave us the intro and the conclusion only.

b) Handing a review of a feature-rich product such as Vegas to someone who hasn't had much experience with it and expecting them to spend the time to really learn it and not just write from the manual and/or entry-level experience is naive on the editor's part and usually results in the sort of review that skims the surface. Meanwhile, the writer probably feels he must take some kind of tone or jabs to be taken seriously. The combination is ugly.

I am a professional audio engineer and video editor first and not a writer first. If I take on a review of something like Vegas, or a pro video camera, it is going to be something that I am willing to invest the time in and use in as many professional capacities as possible. I am hoping my reviews will receive a more positive review from you lot! (I'll post links when they come out).

I follow this forum closely, though don't post a lot, in part because most of my questions are usually answered by searching the answers already provided. This is easily one of the most helpful and active forums of any product out there.

Cheers,

Steve

Feel free to read my reivew of Vegas 4, if interested:
http://www.smurphco.com/articles-tvtech-veg4.html

"This is easily one of the most helpful and active forums of any product out there."
Amen! Darryl

Just so people know, Superfulcrum is - I think - one of the huge number of aliases behind which Nigel Cooper hides on various forums.

Ignoring the fact that what he has said about me here is libellous, people might care to follow this thread on the DVdoctor forum to understand what kind of very sad, sick individual this poor man is.

www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=013725

Bob Crabtree
(launch-to-birth editor, Computer Video magazine)

Oh, and the review of Vegas+DVD that you can read on CV's web site is a brief summary of the review that appeared in the magazine.

This ran for nine pages and was over 5,500 words long.

The author was Peter Wells - generally acknowledge in the English-speaking world as one of the finest reviewers of video editing software and hardware - and I ran the programs while editing Peter's review, as I have tried to do with every review of editing/DVD authoring software that has been published in CV.

Bob C

If they were smart they would take the time to watch Gary's or Spot's tutorial DVD's and take notes, but then they would be blown away and would be in a catatonic state for a week.

JJK

Something seemed wrong here english mags usally have pretty long reviews on software.

Thanks for the update Bob. C we will check it out.

Regards,

Chris H

First, I felt the review was pretty positive. It was touted as different, some of the key differentiators were highlighted, but it seemed like the reviewer may not have had the amunition to address the great "video" interface properly. He did nail the DVD app for several missing critical features, but we all know that Sony has been VERY good at catching up and throwing in a few tricks to boot.

Regardless of the reviewer's comments, I often don't believe that reviews like these are the reviewers fault, since everyone knows reviewers seldom have the time to discover and try out all the features. Instead, it is usually marketing's fault. Sony marketing would (or better) know that these reviews are happening (usually according to an editorial schedule or a product pitch). As such, they should send a reviewer's guide that shows the reviewer the quickest way through the product to show off its key advantages (they set the criterial for the review, help select the items they think will best reflect the new release, etc.). In addition, they should always overcome the objections that they know occur most of the time (and the unique interface is almost always one of them). They may wish to create a reviewer's "quick start" interface tutorial that can show off the advantages of the Vegas approach. They may also wish to count keystrokes and time (or have a side-by-side comparison with a key competitor), an include 3rd person testimonials to show and validate usability advantages.

I have not seen the Sony reviewer's guide--although it would not be hard to get one if I were a competitor (I only assume they have one--if they don't their PR folks (or agency) needs to put one together or be replaced), but I have read every review I have seen and they consistently loose points over many of the exact same issues (interface (only because it is not familiar to the reviewer)), render speed, etc.). This is often a positioning problem--not a reviewer's problem.

The only review I've seen that seemed to position their products properly was eMedia (where the reviewer seemed to understand the strategy and upgrade linkage between Movie Studio and Vegas).

I also don't blame this exclusively on the PR folks, but the product managers who own the product. It is their job to ensure a world-class reviewer's guide is created (it is part of the product). Back when Microsoft actually had competitors (i.e. WordPerfect, Lotus), they would often tie in the reviews, even if they were missing comparable features--not because they had a better or equal product, but because they had incredible reviewer's guides that helped set the criteria (checklist) for the review.

Sony should review this area and address it. Corel (in it's glory days) won over 150 editor's choice awards and much of it was based on their terrific video, demo script and reviewer's guide. Goldmine won 8 consecutive PC Magazine editor's choice--much was based on the strength of their reviewer's guide.

If they need additional help, I recommend www.petersgrouppr.com. They can also review part of my PR section at http://www.chanimal.com/html/target_audience.html

Ted

Whats so hard about putting a couple clips on the timeline, add a sound track or two, and join them with no problem with auto-transitions? Where is the steep learning curve that these reviewers speak about?

It was a couple years ago that I first attempted to learn video editing and I gave Premiere, Avid, and couple other editing packages a try only to give up in despair. It was those programs that almost killed my desire to learn how to edit video and then I found Vegas. It took several minutes, a few peeks in the manual and then I was editing video within a half-hour! Again, where is the so called learning curve that is inherent in this NLE program? If you ask me, Vegas is such a great piece of software that it kills them (the reviewers) to write anything positive about it. They have to resort to slanderous lies like "steep learning curve" to deter potential users away to the so-called competition.

I'll make a point of putting the full review on line for everyone to read and judge for themselves.

This may not be for a week or three, but since my comment on Dec 27 was about four months after the previous posting in this thread, I hope people won't mind the wait.

Oh, and I'm emailing Peter Wells, the author of the review, to see what he makes of some of the nonsense comments made here, mostly by people who have not even read the full article (or have an agenda that may be hidden from others here).

Bob C