VV3 should be renamed

BarryB wrote on 8/28/2002, 1:02 PM

Well at least a couple of you (Hee Hhee and SR_C) understand what I was trying to say. All I was trying to do was illustrate that the name does not market itself to the audio production market. Okay, so some of you don't care what they call it because you already have it and you like it and those of us who are worried about the name are being trivial and should get over it, right? Please tell me, if you were looking for a video editing program, would you even consider looking at a product called, I dunno...Awesome Audio 3--even if it was fully loaded with all all of the video editing tools that are packed into VV3? I imagine you'd pass on it because the word Video is missing. Why would you buy something called "Awesome Audio 3" when you want to edit video? I'm no marketing expert, but if you look at the bigger picture the product name is not at all trivial as it seems to some of you. I think SR_C pointed it out clearly, that there are audio retailers who do not carry the software because it is not thought of as an audio app. This is not rocket science; More customers means more money which means more profits which means Sonic Foundry can continue to pay people to program the software we so dearly love and continue to grow and exist as a viable and competitive company that provides us with the tools we need to produce amazing and creative stuff that might in turn make some of us money which we can then use to buy upgraded versions or new SF products, or even fly to Las Vegas and gamble it all away under the glittery lights. But hey, what do I know? Maybe SF doesn't want to market VV3 to audio people! But that will never make sense to me since it is such awesome and powerful audio software app too. Bottom line, brand-name identity matters and I think its pretty cool that we as customers could potentially have a say in it. In the end I have to admit that the name "Vegas" is not all that appealing to me. If you take away the "s" you are left with "Vega", and how many of those do you still see around?

shaunn wrote on 8/28/2002, 1:36 PM

1) Vegas studio
2) Vegas pro 4.0 (got this idea from another thread)
3) Sonicfoundry Studio (SF studio for short)

VOGuy wrote on 8/28/2002, 2:04 PM

(Suggested long ago in another thread)

Both sides of the Vegas box should appear to be the "Front". On one side the product should be labeled "Vegas Video" - in smaller type "Includes Vegas Audio FREE!" ... Turn the box over and the other side should be labeled "Vegas Audio"., in smaller type "Includes Vegas Video FREE!". Product details/system requirements, etc. could be listed on the sides of the box. Two product website pages should be configured similarly. Retailers who specialize in audio would display one side of the box, those with video would display the other. Software dealers could display two boxes.

Users should be given the option of three startup splash screens, "Vegas Video", "Vegas Audio", or "Vegas A/V".

-Travis ( www.announcing.biz )

BillyBoy wrote on 8/28/2002, 6:48 PM

The truth is with the possible exception of Final Cut, none of the medium to high priced editing applications have a very descriptive name. Premiere for sure don't give a clue, and relies on word of mouth, reviews and the Adobe name to get its foot in the door.

Also face it, people aren't about to be browsing the isles of their local software retailer and decide on the spot to oh geez, that's a pretty box and decide they need a video editing package, here's my $500. They may be heading to the store to see if they have brand X, but for sure they aren't going to pop down that kind of cash on a whim or for other capricious reasons.

Nope, people no doubt hear about a product in forums like this, or read a review, get told by someone or try a whole bunch of similar products by downloading a trial THEN actually buy the one they like the best, so the product name and design of the box for this kind of software isn't really a big issue.

Contrast that to Ulead's DVD Movie Factory, which fills a nitch, and is dirt cheap. Something that will and no doubt does benefit from impulse buying. That's how I got my copy. The box caught my eye, I said what the hell for $40 bucks, I'll try it. I'm not that impulsive when it comes to software costing hundreds of dollars and I doubt few people are.

Also changing a name especially when it is still trying to get a foothold can be dangerous unless the software company can budget millions to promote the name change. SoFo probably can't/don't want to go that route.

Further most people don't look at 'editing' as a video or audio only task. Most users probably want and expect any product that costs upwards of $500 to do both and do both well. Vegas Video does. Also except for maybe diehard audio nuts I would assume most people put far more work into the video portion of any presentation, than the audio portion. As far as Vegas being in the name, I think that impacts showbiz, pizazz, excitement, bells and whistles, and again Vegas delivers. It ain't broke, don't try to fix it.

BarryB wrote on 8/29/2002, 1:44 PM

Hey! I happen to be one of those "audio nuts", and proud of it thank you very much. I know all about working with audio for video. I do it everyday for a living. Obviously, a video editing project will demand much less effort in the area of audio because you will be working with mostly produced pieces of music that may need to be looped, combined, sweetened, filter out noise, minor eq, match levels, etc... What I am talking about however, is multitrack recording like at a recording studio and using Vegas Video to do it. The whole deal, miking up drums and guitars and overdubbing vocals and other guitar parts and then mixing it together, adding eq and effects and finally mastering it and making a CD that you can listen to....Vegas Video is a great program to do that kind of production with, but there may be some other "audio nuts" out there who are stuck on the ProTools thing or cakewalk and may not realize VV3 is as good a prodcut for AUDIO ONLY PRODUCTIONS as Cakewalk or Digi 01 or Logic claim to be. I am not aware of any other program that can do both well. Other Video editing programs are getting stronger in the audio department, but no other software is intended to do the all out audio recording and mixing that Vegas is built for. Ultimately, they didn't have a problem changing the name from Vegas Audio to Vegas Video so why should they have a problem changing it again to reflect what the product really does? I'm wondering, if the name is as unimportant as some of you feel, why are there 50+ replies to this post?

BillyBoy wrote on 8/29/2002, 4:11 PM

I'm wondering why some think SoFo would name yet another product audio anything when they already have a stable of really good audio applications. For those that know SoFo, they already know they make great audio applications. That's where they got their reputation for quality software from, and also why I grabbed my first copy of Video Factory when it came out. Since SoFo is staying silent on this topic, and I can understand why, its just something for us to chew on.

I think going with Vegas Video was a good move, because it gets their foot in the door in the all important video editing market. That Vegas Video happens to also do excellent audio, is great, but trying to sell it as an audio editor that also does video or even over pushing its audio bloodline I think would have been a mistake from a marketing standpoint and would not have generated much splash in the various magazines, certainly not in the VIDEO magazines which obviously was what SoFo was targeting.

People that get the catalog might have just given a yawn if another product came out that supported video (other products SoFo has already did) so they wanted to make a splash and set the new product apart from the rest of the stable. Of course I'm just guessing. <wink>

I hope you don't take offense at my use of "audio nut", I'm a video nut, not that I skim over the audio portion, rather video is by far the more powerful if you're talking multimedia. So if you're into multimedia, meaning the rapidly growing home market which obviously a lot of people are judging the way DVD players, burners and cameras are flying off the shelves, going with Vegas VIDEO was a logical choice to name the product. Again in my never humble opinion. <wink>

People doing audio/video work professionally (I hope anyway, but I'm wondering seeing some of the comments in this and similar threads) would buy the product regardless what its called. I would have. <wink>

BillyBoy wrote on 8/29/2002, 4:29 PM

Silly sidebar on names.

In my youth, now a distant memory, I was on a bowling team made up of guys in their late teens. It was a serious league for better than average bowlers and our team was one of the top teams in a 30 team league. Well, the teams were sponsored, the fancy shirts, etc.. Our sponsor was FritoLay, the snack company that makes chips, etc.. We had what at the time we thought would be a "cute" name for our team, Free Doe Lays. For some reason the league didn't agree with us, and didn't let use do it. Now I can understand why. <wink>

seeker wrote on 8/30/2002, 3:42 AM

BillyBoy,

For the vast numbers of uninitiated video camera owners, "Frito Video" would make just as much sense as "Vegas Video". Maybe it would be catchier. (grin)

BarryB wrote on 8/30/2002, 8:18 AM

You said, "For those that know SoFo, they already know they make great audio applications". My point is, and has been all along, that the people who don't know SOFO may not know that VV3 is a great audio program. But I've said this a million times already. I totally understand why they are pushing the video side. Its a bigger seller as a video application than an audio-only application. There are more amature filmakers and multi-media producers than you can shake a stick at, and the price is right for the weekend enthusiast and semi-pro production types, or nuts as we like to say :) All this is about is that they need to make it more clear that VV3 includes the full version of Vegas Audio. Make it more obvious to the people browsing through the catalogs who may be looking for a great audio program. Don't forget that VV3 is based off of Vegas Audio and it was an audio application first. The video app came later.
About what professionals use, I have to say, it is in my not so humble opinion that anyone doing professional level work would probably opt for a higher end product such as AVID for video and ProTools for audio. Sorry but its true. I'm not bashing VV3 at all (I'm obviously a SOFO fan) and I'm sure there are plenty of small post houses and independent producers who use VV3 and hopefully it will get a bigger name for the professional market, but its a fact that a majority of professional post production houses and recording studios use Avid and/or Protools. But that's a whole other topic on its own.

Widetrack wrote on 8/30/2002, 11:19 AM

Video Hammer

Widetrack wrote on 8/30/2002, 11:22 AM

you gotta remember: to guys who live in Wisconsin, Las Vegas is the coolest vacation there is ;-\.

BTW, "Vega" is a good suggestion.

Widetrack wrote on 8/30/2002, 11:40 AM

To those of us who feel the name of the product is not important, consider this.

The odd looks we all get when mentioning "Vegas" clearly reflect people's...well, "discomfort", let's say, with the name.

As long as VV is fighting the perception that it's not "professional", that discomfort impedes acceptance in the demanding pro ranks. That, in turn, limits the success of the product, and thus the impetus to Sonic Foundry to support and improve it.

It's a tough industry and Apple markets the hell our of FCP. (I recently asked on a DVD producers' forum if anyone had any impressions of VV and Main Concept, and got the equivalent of a lot of blank stares.)

For all of us who appreciate the pure elegance and power of the vegas, sound forge and acid interfaces, the more success SOFO has, the longer we get support and improvement.

Each time I log on here, I dread seeing some awful notice of VV or SOFO drifitng into the oblivion of the tech implosion, so I promote the software whenever and wherever.

I've tried FCP and, with apologies to Dr. Seuss, I DO NOT LIKE IT!

The longer SOFO supports the great (if flawed) editor, the happier I'll be.

WT

vitalforce2 wrote on 8/30/2002, 2:02 PM

Alternative point of view: Have to keep the Vegas Video name. Reason: Goodwill. The value of the name is growing so fast due to large market-share sales, if SF tries to change the name during a boom, there could be a shareholder's action to drive out the CEO!

No, SF has built a better mousetrap, and the world is beating its path. Look at the latest upgrade Adobe put on Premiere 6.5: Print from timeline & a few other Vegas features (but nothing major on the all-important AUDIO). Let the other "name" NLE makers have their time in the sun. Vegas is a name to remember.

DGates wrote on 9/3/2002, 7:02 PM

Vid-Aud-Pro-DV
Reno Video 3
Indian Gaming Casino 3

rique wrote on 9/3/2002, 8:22 PM

BillyBoy wrote on 9/3/2002, 10:30 PM

I detest how the street I live on is spelled. Its Roanoake. That extra 'a' drives me nuts. What was the town thinking? They must be nuts. Geez, how does the mailman, UPS and FedX driver find my house? Damn, all my relatives and friends when they send Christmas cards probably snicker or laugh as they write the address on the envelope. Nearly everytime I order something I have to explain the spelling and then half the time they "correct" the spelling and spell it wrong. How could I buy a house on a street with such a dumb name. I'll never be able to sell the house. Why all the prospective buyers would be in shock. Live on Roanoake Court, no way. Its horrible. I can't sleep through the night and I wake up in cold sweats. Oh the shame of it.

I think that's how a lot of people 'read' this thread.