I track with Vegas (V4)
I edit, mix, and master with Audition (V1.5)
I like Audition a lot, but multitrack mixing with it is a pain. No automation, tedious envelope editing, can only route tracks to 1 bus, no master effects, no envelopes for submixes, no aux buses - there's a lot of room for improvement. Also, Audition doesn't seem to be able to run as many tracks & effects as other programs. Vegas will outrun Audition, but Audition sounds better - so I blame it on better math.
At this point it's probably worth holding out for a while to see what Audition 2.0 brings to the table, but I think my goals for mix effeciency are more than I can hope to see in a single version update. Ultimately my goal is to get the same (or better) results in less time - to increase my hourly rate without costing individual clients more money. My work is mostly acoustic & choral location recording, live concerts, and some silly little projects where time matters more than quality. (someone's daughter singing along with a Karaoke CD, for example).
So in looking around at the other DAW programs, it looks like Samplitude (or Sequoia) might be the right answer. It will take some time to save up that much $$$, but increasing my efficiency seems like the only investment I can make that has a chance of actually paying back. Better mics with better preamps will cost that much or more, but my clients are satisfied with the sound they get from me now. They want their work completed sooner.
1) What's wrong with my thinking here?
2) Will different software help? Maybe I could be just as quick with Audition if I just learned how to mix.
3) If adding a new tool to my toolbox is the right thing to do, is Samplitude the right tool?
4) Are the additional features in Sequoia necessary to make the mixing environment complete?
Tags
Comments
I don't know that I can isolate just what it is, but something a
I don't know that I can isolate just what it is, but something about the vegas UI makes me wrinkle my nose and say "EWE". I like it for tracking. I've used Vegas for years and have made honest attempts at mixing with it, but I've never been satisfied with the process or the results. Also, if the software has no future (which I have been following, and I'm not about to "upgrade"), I'm not real keen on jumping ship into a sinking ship.
zemlin wrote: Also, if the software has no future (which I have
zemlin wrote: Also, if the software has no future (which I have been following, and I'm not about to "upgrade"), I'm not real keen on jumping ship into a sinking ship.
I'm with you on that! I have decided to upgrade my Soundscape to a REd32 and skip the native thing all together.
I think you will find quite a bunch of diehard Samplitude / Sequ
I think you will find quite a bunch of diehard Samplitude / Sequoia fans up at the Acoustic forum. I am one them for sure, albeit a lowly amateur as compared to some of the pros.
To say it short, from my own experiences: Sam does have a bit of a learning process, it does not quite do things the same way other DAW-s does it. But for cutting up an acoustic recording and quickly making a master CD it beats everything else I have ever seen. Add to that good sounding effects and a mixing engine that sounds as good as the rest (some swear by that it sounds better), giving me a hearable positive difference as compared to ProTools LE which I used before this.
For many users, the Samplitude Classic would probably be a good solution. The main thing you will want to add is probably a good reverb, I used Sir for a while which is free for download. Add to that the Sam for rent model, which changes the price from a one-time cost to a 36 month rent. You may compare the features on the home page
http://
And, no, I have not upgraded to Sequioa, could not really see that it is worth it for me. But I´ll let the other people chime in there.
Gunnar.
This is actually quite funny. Cause I use Vegas 4 for mixing! An
This is actually quite funny.
Cause I use Vegas 4 for mixing!
And to me it is what the program does best. Editing and mixing is its primary strengths.
I record everything in Soundscape, and then transfer the files to the PC and start mixing in V4. V4 is actually quite known to sound good - if one now can say that a software sounds. It's just when you use plug-ins and other processing stuff that the program effects sound.
By the way, don't consider updating. V5 & 6 has taken the turn to more of a video tool than sound, and really gives no benefits for audio (well except 5.1 mixing...).
My suggestion is that you seriously try V4 again for mixing.
I may very well be so that Audition sounds "better", but Vegas sounds more "correct". :?
OH! You should start by disconnecting ALL FX on all channels and buses, cause Vegas has a default setup with effects (compressor or limiter) set active. Maybe this causes it sound strange?