Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar?

Author
Infinite5ths
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3631
  • Joined: 2005/05/08 16:46:11
  • Location: USA
  • Status: offline
2005/09/15 16:53:15 (permalink)

Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar?

Hey folks. I HAVE searched the forum archives...but can't find a clear answer to my question.

Do to some of the issues with using Sonar 4 (including all patch versions) for post-production and/or video related work, I'm considering a companion application. I do some live acoustic (classical) recording, so I've had my eye on a serious wave editor for some time anyway. I will choose between Adobe Audition 1.5 and Sound Forge 8.0. Whichever I choose needs to work right consistently and make video/post-production work easier & more stable than it is in Sonar 4.

Either will do what I need in the acoustic realm (noise reduction, sample level edits, basic mastering, etc.). I need something that allows me to lock things to SMPTE time, sync with video (AVI, MOV & MPEG format at least) down to frame level, navigate fluidly at frame level, and work at any professional frame rate (film or TV).

I think I can handle my multi-track audio in Sonar for now (as long as I don't mix MIDI with it...), and mix it down to two-track before doing the video/post work. But if you think that Audition's multi-track capabilities are a BIG plus for video/post, PLEASE say so. Also, I presently don't work in surround formats; and I don't know if either Audition or Sound Forge supports surround in any way. Thoughts on this would be appreciated. (Keep in mind, I do have Sonar 4 Pro. But if I'm doing post-production in another package, S4's surround capabilities might not help much.)


Does one of these two applications stand out for this type of work, or are they comparable?

I'm particularly interesting in input from tarsier and those who've contributed to our SMPTE/video threads.

--
Mike
post edited by Infinite5ths - 2005/09/15 17:09:55
#1

7 Replies Related Threads

    Infinite5ths
    Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3631
    • Joined: 2005/05/08 16:46:11
    • Location: USA
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/15 17:45:34 (permalink)
    OK...one question answered: Audition 1.5 supports 5.1 surround.
    #2
    brucie
    Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 118
    • Joined: 2003/12/13 13:04:28
    • Location: London, UK
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/15 18:29:24 (permalink)
    I use Audition and I think it is pretty good. I have used it to do a few quick promos (as we know that there are issues in Sonar as you mention!). It has great noise reduction tools and it has been rock solid for me. Obviously it is multitrack (and you can lock clips and work at frame level!) and has 5.1 surround. The ability to cut out things in the frequency domain (on the spectral view) is amazing and can lead to the design of some seriously crazy sounds...or the ability to cut out a cough or rustle from a classical recording.

    You can import you two track master and like you say then add in your dialogue, foley and FX's (locked intime!). It has great tempo stretching (just grab the side of the clip and move!) and pitch shifting too.

    Audition is not good at midi!

    It may also worth looking at Samplitude if you are serious about your post work (although it does lack some of the noise reduction tools) but is a dream to work with.

    Currently I do composition in Sonar, some audio editing and restoration in Audition and everything else in Samplitude. The amount of audio editing is moving into Samp now and I am saving the pennies for the high end noise reduction system to go along with it.

    If you have any further questions, just shout.

    All the best

    Neil

    Neil S. Bruce Msc B.Eng(Hons) Dip(Mus)
    Sound Designer, Composer and Audio Engineer

    - Manchester
    Tel : +44 (0)7771 877690
    Web : www.spencerbruce.com
    #3
    Infinite5ths
    Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3631
    • Joined: 2005/05/08 16:46:11
    • Location: USA
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/15 18:56:20 (permalink)
    Hey Neil! Thanks for your thoughts.

    I chose Sonar in part because I wanted the best MIDI & soft-synth platform available. I felt like its MIDI editing and overall synth/sampler recording and arranging capabilites were the best around. I guess this emphasis (which makes sense in light of the history of Cakewalk software) shows in the problems with the audio side of the program. That said....I'm not too worried about Audition's MIDI inadequacies.

    How much overlap is there between Sonar & Samplitude? I'm trying not to buy features twice. The budget is still a factor. :-\

    Is Audition up to long projects (i.e. feature-length films, Broadway-length soundtracks, etc?)

    EDIT: OK, I downloaded the Audition demo. The program looks quite nice and very capable. But I'm confused by one thing. I Sonar, when you zoom in to frame level, the frames eventually spread out, with space in between. With Audition, it looks like it just visually repeats the same frame to fill the screen, regardless of how far you zoom in. Is this the case Neil? Is there any way to change that?
    --
    Mike
    post edited by Infinite5ths - 2005/09/15 19:48:58
    #4
    Infinite5ths
    Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3631
    • Joined: 2005/05/08 16:46:11
    • Location: USA
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/15 20:52:59 (permalink)
    Hmmmm.....I think I found a problem with Audition. It seems that it's sessions (multi-track sessions) cannot be saved or exported in any format except Audition. That means that I can't export them to other packages without first mixing down. ....not good.

    --
    Mike
    post edited by Infinite5ths - 2005/09/15 21:00:17
    #5
    brucie
    Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 118
    • Joined: 2003/12/13 13:04:28
    • Location: London, UK
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/16 05:15:13 (permalink)
    Hi Mike

    In terms of overlap there is a considerable amount between Sonar and Samplitude. Except Samplitude is stornger on the audio front (except when doing loop style work) and a little weaker in terms of midi. So in terms of budget Audition is probably the best bet. Plus you can use it as a wav editor within Sonar.

    I would say Audition is up for long projects, the longest I have done was just ovr an hour of some outside field recordings and it was fine. There are a few things about the interface which at first seem odd, but that is just Auditions way of doing things, once you learn a few key command you can be flying. There are also some good books out there too.

    In Audition, when you zoom in to frame level, you actually go beyong frame level to sub frame level, which is why you are seeing the same image. This is because it is allowing to edit it sample level, but I can really see a reason to edit at 100th of a frame! eg 00:00:02:05:568 a bit small. I am not sure if you can turn off the fact there is no gap between the frames and it is possible there may a stray information in there. I personally prefer this over Sonar as I can see what frame i am at. But that is just me.

    In terms of sessions, they can only be saved as .ses file, which is similar to a cakwalk .cwp file. but you can export them as wav files and a whole host of other formats, including multichannel wav files.


    Hope that help

    Neil
    post edited by brucie - 2005/09/16 05:26:38

    Neil S. Bruce Msc B.Eng(Hons) Dip(Mus)
    Sound Designer, Composer and Audio Engineer

    - Manchester
    Tel : +44 (0)7771 877690
    Web : www.spencerbruce.com
    #6
    Ash
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 15
    • Joined: 2003/11/05 21:05:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/16 05:53:24 (permalink)
    Whilst you're checking out solutions, have a good look at Vegas too. It might be overkill for your needs, and probably beyond the budget, but a combination of SF8 and Vegas 6 would cover you for just about anything. As SF integrates so well into Sonar via the tools Menu, and likewise SF and Vegas integrate well together, the combination makes for a simple yet extremely powerful solution. Highly recommended.
    #7
    Infinite5ths
    Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3631
    • Joined: 2005/05/08 16:46:11
    • Location: USA
    • Status: offline
    RE: Audition or SF for post & video work w/ Sonar? 2005/09/16 07:38:52 (permalink)
    Fabulous! Thanks for all the input folks.
    --
    Mike
    #8
    Jump to:
    © 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1