Honest Question: When will Resolve Audio be Functional?

Hello,

I suppose this is a question to the Blackmagic team. I'll preface by saying I currently use Resolve 12.5 to color grade, and like most, I love it. The added editing functionality is also very good and allows last minute adjustments so I can do those last tweaks as I grade, and then export out of Resolve. Love it - amazing product - thank you.

But I do have an honest question? I saw the hype at NAB with Resolve 14, and I love the idea and goal. Who doesn't want the ability to do everything in one program. I'm definitely on board. However, before upgrading I waited to see what others' experiences were. And after reading them, I'm pretty disappointed, and would actually be scared to upgrade to 14 (as users report older projects just disappearing). Why do I say that I am disappointed?

Well, the presentation at NAB was basically "hey, we added Fairlight, you can now download 14 and you're ready to do it all, including your audio work". However, as many have posted on this forum, the audio section doesn't even function for many users, and for others there are significant problems. Yes, I understand "Beta". But gee golly guys, you can't roll up to NAB and say "Come and get it, it's ready!", when it's not.

That said, if there were some unknown technical issues with certain individuals systems, etc., then I would hope to hear something from you that you're going to make this a stable product.

So bottom line - when will Resolve actually have a functional Audio/Fairlight tab?

I must reiterate - I'm a huge Blackmagic and Resolve fan, and I really want the total package of 14 to work. Your work is much appreciated.

Thanks,
Matt

I thought I would jump in here, even though I'm not, nor every have been employed by BMD.

I can understand your frustration, but perhaps maybe you have a miss-understanding of what beta software is.

Most software beta programs are closed to the general public. BMD however choose the more difficult but in many cases significantly faster route to have an open (public) beta stage. As long as BMD commits enough of it's resources to the development team these issues/problems/bugs will get sorted out pretty quickly. (beta stage can go on for months, sometime years.)

What has me the most disappointed is the lack of a structured error reporting system. I think in order for the dev team to quickly pinpoint and repair these problems in quantity , there need to be a much better system/structure in place for log/media/etc information to be sent/transferred to them.

It's not only a pain in the butt, but extremely inefficient trying to handling these things via PM's with users storage restraints.

you can't roll up to NAB and say "Come and get it, it's ready!", when it's not.

I've only ever heard it called a Public Beta, which by definition means "It ain't ready yet!"

If BMD follows past patterns, I'm guessing that 60 days from the first Beta on April 22, they'll have a .0 final release version of v14 in late June/early July. Total guess on my part.

This is a huge, huge release, and I think we need to cut them some slack. I always say, I'd rather give them another month to perfect what they have instead of rushing a buggy version out to hit an imaginary deadline.

Agreed Marc -
Looks like almost a complete re-write plus all the new features and they have to stabilize it across three platforms/OS's. If they manage that in a couple of months I'll be amazed.
Let's give them credit for what they have achieved - and the NAB 2017 award for Best Software against some stiff, well known competition.
https://www.videomaker.com/article/s12/19100-videomaker-presents-the-best-of-nab-2017-award-winners?utm_source=enews&utm_medium=email&utm_content=article1_2017_mon_05_22&utm_campaign=traffic
NLEs are incredibly complex and BM is a relative newcomer vs Adobe, etc who have had decades of of development and refinement. Maybe we'll see another beta before final release - but there are already several "how to" videos out there for 14 including new audio so it appears many have it running well enough to demo new features.
I just wish they had started a new forum topic for 14b - and an error reporting form to include user OS ver, hardware, GPU drivers etc. Some users are still reporting problems with Win 7 which is not supported.

Yep, some good points guys. I'm in no rush. However, I really hope the issues with lost or missing files is resolved ASAP. Blackmagic should really be responding to those users immediately. Perhaps it's being handled via email and phone support, or maybe I missed some Blackmagic posts in this forum. I'd suggest they issue a post on this topic, if it hasn't been addressed yet. I'm looking forward to the non-beta Resolve 14. Keep up the good work Blackmagic.

Matt - Agreed. Many of us want to make use of the new features plus improved performance of 14 and many are complaining about stability and criticize BM - but that's what beta software is - still in final development and debugging stage.
I would hate to be working in product support on 14 at the moment trying to decipher much of the user feedback scattered all over this forum. My 14 is reasonably stable at the moment but I'm just playing with 4k H.264 clips trying new features and I'm impressed so far - but haven't used the new audio.
Here's what I've seen so far.
Basic FairLight Mixing In Resolve 14! - DaVinci Resolve Audio Tutorial

Doh... and since there's a 3rd Beta version available on May 25th, I may be wrong about the July release for the .0 version. They may well beat this by several weeks.

Yep, just saw that 14 Beta 3. BM is really cruising. Very cool.

It's almost November, beta versions are history, and , despite of being a huge Resolve fan, audio is still very.. VERY unreasonable. Fairlight reminds me those open source tools in linux that claimed lots of feature during the first years of 2000's but they could actually be taken seriously after some attempts. A quick search in this forum we can find lots of complaints about basic things. Honestly, after some months of attempts to use it in a professional workflow, I have a strong feeling that FairLight was integrated too soon. I actually think that the word "integrated" doesn't apply. One thing is to make an existing feature, edit page in this case, communicate with a "integrated" code base, Fairlight, and not being quite there. Another thing is when the integrated product , looked isolated, with all the reputation it has, cannot do basic things such as panning, or have a audio waveform engine that, for instance, copies the upper part to the lower. This is, to me, a clear sign of a lame product. I wonder how this tool got such a reputation (maybe the old standalone product was *actually good* ?), because IMO, Fairlight is comparable only to some shareware tools you can find in download.com .. Sorry, maybe it's my disappointment speaking for me now... BMD, we still love you

Maybe BMD should have simply added some gain and pain automated curves in edit page, some basic VST support, make it very stable, and that's it. O strongly hope this situation will change along the 14 series, but right now, Fairlight is a tab that we just skip. We were actually trying to migrate a feature film audio, as I posted in another thread, but we probably giving up and stick with external tools .

A quick search in this forum we can find lots of complaints about basic things.

Majority of user issues with Fairlight on this forum are:
(a) not reading the manual
(b) not taking the time and putting in the required effort to learn a new system.

The same issues are repeated, which have been explained and clarified repeatedly on this forum.

It takes 10,000 hours to master a discipline, or a new tool. With my current audio workstation I have spent almost twice that amount of time, or roughly 23,040 hours at minimum since it was ported from OS 9 and released on OS X in 2006.

To truly learn the intricacies of the Fairlight system, one needs to put in time and effort. There are no shortcuts or workarounds.

Honestly, after some months of attempts to use it in a professional workflow, I have a strong feeling that FairLight was integrated too soon.

When is too soon? Surely, the opposite is more true.

Delaying integration, would have ensured that it would have been too late to remain competitive.

Avid has already added Fairlight type functionality over the last year out of the blue.
Strange coincidence? Collective consciousness?

I actually think that the word "integrated" doesn't apply. One thing is to make an existing feature, edit page in this case, communicate with a "integrated" code base, Fairlight, and not being quite there.

Sure it does. Integrating an advanced code base in to another existing and well developed code base isn’t exactly simple. It's not a simple copy/paste procedure. And, it takes time. A lot of time.

Now take a code base that has run exclusively on Windows, and optimised for that platform for well over a decade. Now port that system to both OS X and Linux. The only other application that has achieved that is Reaper. BlackMagic is in a very tiny group here, within this minuscule niche we work in.

The mere fact that a year in from purchasing Fairlight, BlackMagic devs have ensured that the Fairlight page functions fluidly on old hardware such as mine, and many of the basics have been implemented. That is pretty incredible in my book, all while improving the Edit and Colour pages and adding a ton of new functionality there for all three platforms.

I have no idea how large the Resolve dev team is, but to date they have impressed me with improving the software and fixing bugs and supporting 3 platforms. Just look at the change list for each new release, and look at the change lists for the betas.

Avid required 20 years to fix the Digidesign code base (e.g. bit transparent gain changes, bounces that nulled with the source). Imagine the time required for Avid to integrate ProTools in to Media Composer. And Avid's dev team, while reduced today, is still pretty large. Based on track record, it wouldn’t be a quick and easy integration.

So, no, integration wasn’t too soon, and the Resolve devs have been working at a rapid pace improving the application. We have come a long way since the early betas, and we're still not even a year in with Fairlight integration within a public release. Who knows where we'll be in another 12 months time.

Another thing is when the integrated product , looked isolated, with all the reputation it has, cannot do basic things such as panning

Sure it can.

I'm automating Pan for audio objects daily, which will only become easier once a Panner joystick is available (and I can unplug my mouse) and AirPan has been implemented.

With the “3D” Busses, Pan will be even more flexible and adaptive.

or have a audio waveform engine that, for instance, copies the upper part to the lower.

I agree (and this is one of many feature requests on my lengthy list), but have you seen the ProTools waveform rendering lately?

There's a reason ProTools was let go once more advanced Audio tools were ported from OS 9 to OS X.

ProTools is a terrible editor and doesn’t provide sample accurate waveforms, and yet it widely used by a majority of dub stages and post editing suites. Go figure.

Maybe BMD should have simply added some gain and pain automated curves in edit page

Check.

Pan automation is much more advanced than a node-based system, and will improve when completely fleshed out, as mentioned above. Pan automation using nodes is antiquated and limiting in immersive workflows.

some basic VST support

Check.

AU support is also available on OS X.

Perhaps LV2 support will be included on Linux at some point. Who knows?

I have tested well over 100 plugins within Resolve in both VST and AU format, and only 10 plugins have had issues. That’s impressive, considering some very expensive and specialised workstations have issues with basic plugins such as iZotope.

Even the latest builds of Reaper (which I use to test plugin integration and bugs, since traditionally Reaper functions with anything you throw at it, to a large extent) have had issues with several plugins. No software is perfect. None.

make it very stable

Check.

Crashes are a rarity here, and even rarer are the completely random crashes. A crash is usually due to a very specific issue, such as hardware.

Lately, I have only been able to reproduce two specific crashes. The first is an “illegal” action, and the other is tied to a specific gesture. Both will no doubt be fixed with the next release, based on the track record of the Resolve devs.

and that's it

You have that today.

Fairlight is a tab that we just skip. We were actually trying to migrate a feature film audio, as I posted in another thread, but we probably giving up and stick with external tools .

Speak for yourself.

With each new release, more time is spent within Resolve, and more of a Project may be completed within the Fairlight page. And, while today, it doesn’t necessarily cover all of my requirements (since I have over 140 feature requests based on my workflow), I do see its potential and its trajectory is up. There is a ton of stuff still to be implemented based on the Resolve 14 marketing pages on the BlackMagic site, and who knows what will be implemented that hasn’t been announced.

Thus far, the BlackMagic devs have illustrated through action that my time with Resolve isn’t wasted effort. My investment in Resolve has been a good one.

@Reynaud

I truly admire you patience with these kinds of users. I have given up after the 20th time explaining the same things over and over. Why look at other posts when you can ask the same question over and over right ?
The forum seems to be in a repeat loop where users just dont even take the time to look up anything anymore in the manual and just claim the product is crap or broken. They all seem to expect that for a DAW you dont need a manual. Laughable. Give them any other daw on the market they have never used before and they will be just as lost , or more, but somehow for Resolve/Fairlight they expect that all will work by itself.

Regarding stability , i guess that depends as always on many factor.
I happily have the same experience as you. Zero crashes since a long time , fluid audio and plugin experience , very good routing experience once taken the time to properly understand , etc etc.
The rest , remaining edit features etc, will come in time .

And support wise BM has risen to stellar levels.

Yes, a lot of patience. Thank you Reynaud

Maybe BMD should have simply added some gain and pain automated curves in edit page

Page 484 You can not record automation in the Edit page. Comprehensive mixing controls with full automation are in the Fairlight page.

I think my post was completely misunderstood. I have other posts making specifics reports of bugs, this was just a "disappointment report", following the original poster. Yes, I do read manuals. The automation in edit page was a hypothetical suggestion for a scenario where we wouldnt have Fairlight. Since you like to read manuals, how about reading posts more closely ? And when I say "we", I am talking about we at our production company. That, I agree, was ambiguous.

I think forums of the future will include some kind of AI whereby when you post a new thread it will be able to tell you before a new thread is created if the answer already exists, including whether it is in the manual

Reynaud, I agree with everything you say. But, as to Pro Tools and why it's used extensively, there are two main reasons. It was the first DAW capable of being run on a basic computer because of the separate DSP cards. It's potential for post was immense. Therefor studios have invested heavily in PT systems. Secondly, the workflow. Right from the start PT has emulated the multitrack recorder plus mixer, something us oldies were totally familiar with, which made it intuitive to use. I personally have no problems with editing in PT, but each to his own. Before it's integration into Resolve, Fairlight was a well respected DAW and I can see that its' future is bright.
As for me I will stick with PT, only because after 23 years it's so ingrained and I'm too old to learn a new way of working.

It was the first DAW capable of being run on a basic computer because of the separate DSP cards.

No, that would be Sonic Solutions who provided a commercially available multichannel audio workstation with the Sonic Station which provided sample accurate waveforms, with summing Busses that used 56bit accumulation, along with audio restoration tools in 1987 on a Macintosh II with dedicated DSP.

Its earlier incarnation was Lucas Films' touch screen-based SoundDroid in 1980:
http://www.typewritten.org/Articles/Dro ... sd-485.pdf

Its visual editing brother was the touch screen-based EditDroid (which Avid later purchased):
http://www.typewritten.org/Articles/Dro ... ed-485.pdf

Some good weekend reading:
https://www.amazon.com/Droidmaker-Georg ... B007IIC9P6

Some good viewing:

Digidesign's Sound Designer was very basic and SoundTools was still two years off from the first Sonic Station, and also Digidesign software was still two channel only.

I could discuss this stuff all day, as it’s a deep and fascinating history, and illustrates how far we truly have come with modern technology, and at the same time how far we have deviated from certain possibilities these system provided in the early 1980s.

Few appreciate the innovation.

It's potential for post was immense. Therefor studios have invested heavily in PT systems. Secondly, the workflow. Right from the start PT has emulated the multitrack recorder plus mixer, something us oldies were totally familiar with, which made it intuitive to use.

Audio engineers and studios initially bought in to ProTools since it was cheaper than any other system (Sonic was over $100k in 1994 for a basic system vs $30k for an entry level ProTools system), and a Digidesign workstation could be leased at a fraction of a Sonic system, even if it was limited in many ways as compared with a Sonic system.

When working across an audio network with shared storage, requiring sample accuracy and absolute bit transparency, while working at high sampling rates and bit depths, and with all processing being available in real-time, as many Sonic users required, ProTools simply wasn’t an option no matter how inexpensive it was, and functional alternatives weren’t available at the time.

I personally have no problems with editing in PT, but each to his own.

Once you’ve been exposed to a 4 Point editor (sometimes termed Source/Destination editing), it becomes immediately apparent that the majority of audio workstations are fine for only the simplest of edits.

If you require absolute sync across multiple audio channels from several recorded takes, sample accurate edits (without clicks or timbre and level changes), where moving sections of audio between multitracks only requires 4 keyboard shortcuts, you can easily perform 7 or 8 musical edits from multiple recorded takes in a 60 second period, more if one marks the Score correctly and all takes are marked appropriately. Moving between edit points across tracks and cross fades is a breeze without scrolling and finding the next fade, and fade manipulation is extensive and flexible.

ProTools users without fail sigh a deep sigh of despair when illustrating 4 Point editing workflows, especially dialogue and music editors.

Back to Fairlight, Resolve is actually constructed in a very similar way to the 4 Point editing audio system pioneered by the Sonic system, where this type of flexible and efficient audio editing could be implemeted with some time and effort, since the building blocks are in many ways already available to the audio operator in some form or another, it only requires consolidation and a few tweaks.

This is one of the glaringly obvious things I see whenever Resolve loads. I can see the statue but require someone with the skill and patience to spend the time chipping away at the marble.

As for me I will stick with PT, only because after 23 years it's so ingrained and I'm too old to learn a new way of working. :)

In many ways, Resolve with its collaborative workflows and potential Fairlight functionality such as immersive and metadata described object-based audio, is where the puck is heading.

After decades on other, more functional systems, Resolve's potential is still very apparent (even in its current form). At some point, the other audio tools will no longer satisfy evolving more advanced workflows and changing delivery requirements, and at a certain point the Fairlight functionality within Resolve may well be head and shoulders above the rest (since Fairlight with 3DAW in many ways already was 3 years ago).

Well that was my motivation for starting with the Resolve 14 betas early, and which continues to be the motivation behind staying with it, until it becomes the tool I know it has the potential of becoming.

(b) not taking the time and putting in the required effort to learn a new system.

If you read my post closely, you would have read that we are migrating an ENTIRE feature film audio to FL. Isnt this effort enough ?

The same issues are repeated, which have been explained and clarified repeatedly on this forum.

I agree with that, but the original poster is not exactly complaining about an issue, rather, he's giving his general impression on FL. Please don't generalize behavior.

To truly learn the intricacies of the Fairlight system, one needs to put in time and effort. There are no shortcuts or workarounds.

As I said before...

Delaying integration, would have ensured that it would have been too late to remain competitive.

Google for software development quality control, which that states clearly that putting an unfinished piece of software out there is no solution/beneficial for anybody.

Now take a code base that has run exclusively on Windows, and optimised for that platform for well over a decade. Now port that system to both OS X and Linux. The only other application that has achieved that is Reaper. BlackMagic is in a very tiny group here, within this minuscule niche we work in.

Nor me or the original poster are judging BMD. Again, if you read closely, you will see that we are all BMD fans and we fully support FL integration. My particular criticism was specifically on releasing this "feature set" with so many bugs. The very decision to migrate an entire feature audio to FL is a clear proof on how we believe in BMD strategy. However, it doesnt change the fact they must have a much better approach to software quality control

many of the basics have been implemented.

That I agree.

Avid required 20 years to fix the Digidesign code base (e.g. bit transparent gain changes, bounces that nulled with the source).

I dont work with AVID nor PT nor any of products in which the company forces you to stay locked in their brand somehow (unless they do, but they offer open protocols/API so other 3rd manufacturers can integrate, which BMD does beautifully). So, I cant compare DR to Avid. However, and honestly, the very few times we had to use Avid the experience was so awful that I am pretty sure DR beats avid right now in any aspect.

it wouldn’t be a quick and easy integration.

It wont, surely. That's exactly why we users are reporting bugs and , like in THIS THREAD, disappointment. We are ultimately customers, and by participating in this integration process by these reports, we are all developers in a way.

So, no, integration wasn’t too soon,

Disagree. Basic software quality control will tell you how easy is to integrate features during development but setup a way to not include that feature in the final product (until it is stable). Linux's guys being doing this forever.

I'm automating Pan for audio objects daily, which will only become easier once a Panner joystick is available (and I can unplug my mouse) and AirPan has been implemented.

That I need to clarify. People tend to use the word automated pan for the action of , in real time, move the sliders in the mixer and "record" that movement. I agree that I wasnt clear about that. I mean simple track-level pan/gain curves which you can DRAW with a mouse, put keys, control the bezier in those keys. Just like Vegas' track envelope does.

Different people have different ways to automate. Real time mixer-slider-movement capture is not my thing. I have a much more precise control of the mixing by drawing the envelope at track level. I really thing this other approach is old school, but, this is just me

With the “3D” Busses, Pan will be even more flexible and adaptive.

I just hope the basic mono/stereo buses work flawlessly before that. Many people are reporting weird bugs on that regard, I myself reported a couple when you use nested timelines.

There's a reason ProTools was let go once more advanced Audio tools were ported from OS 9 to OS X.
ProTools is a terrible editor and doesn’t provide sample accurate waveforms, and yet it widely used by a majority of dub stages and post editing suites.

Man in that regard, I couldnt agree more. PT is the most piece of overrated software ever IMO.

No software is perfect. None.

Agree. But we're talking about disappointment here. BMD somewhat inflated our expectations for this release in regards to audio, and this is creating some frustration.

Crashes are a rarity here, and even rarer are the completely random crashes. A crash is usually due to a very specific issue, such as hardware.

Agree. I started using DR in version 11.something , and it's amazing how DR is improving stability. Also agree that too much specific hardware will cause issues, and, being aware of that, we (at the production company) always keep DR in a very "typical" machine. Even the audio is the system audio, we dont even tried to map DR to our UAC8 interface. DR should be able to handle a typical scenario like that, since they, are targeting a broader mass of users.

effort. My investment in Resolve has been a good one.

Ours too here. Again, this whole disappointment semi-rant was not because we dont believe FL integration was a good move. We here really admire BMD for its openness and care with users. But the same way that BMD learnt that announcing a new camera too soon was a bad move (and they did very well with the BMUMPro last time), they might still be suffering a little bit of too-early anticipation of features in DR.

(Edit to keep the discussion within the scope of this forum)

If you read my post closely, you would have read that we are migrating an ENTIRE feature film audio to FL. Isnt this effort enough ?

So you are learning a new audio system on a current and ongoing paying production?

Moving a running production on to a new system one hasn’t mastered isnt only risky, it’s somehat idiotic.

Agile

Agile is a software development philosophy with core principles, one of which is the tenet “release early, release often”, or “Fail fast so that you can fix early”, which is the direct opposite of what you seem to think Agile software development means.

Regarding the learning during paid work, yes and no. This particular project is over and delivered. We are using it as a Ginny-pig for improving our workflow, and future proofing our archives (exactly because we believe in FL's future)

Edited to remove some things outside the scope of this Forum.

Hi Giordano, if you know Agile, do you know what the principle is?
You have to consider KVI, KPI and CSE. Not easy
I am a strategist ownner in my company

Edit:
I forgot to tell you: You have Windows 8.1 ... Officially, only version 10 is supported. In short, it is necessary to read the manuals and not to train the customers in bad solutions.

Hi Giordano, if you know Agile, do you know what the principle is?
You have to consider KVI, KPI and CSE. Not easy
I am a strategist ownner in my company

Edit:
I forgot to tell you: You have Windows 8.1 ... Officially, only version 10 is supported. In short, it is necessary to read the manuals and not to train the customers in bad solutions.

Have no idea what you talking about. I am a filmmaker

Original poster : I share your disappointment with FL. Let's hope BMD continue the amazing work and make it the best audio platform out there.

...So, I cant compare DR to Avid. However, and honestly, the very few times we had to use Avid the experience was so awful that I am pretty sure DR beats avid right now in any aspect.
...

I can assure you that that's not the case. Avid may feel like an archaic clunker, but there are many things that it does much better than any other NLE out there.

But Resolve has a lot going for it right now, and offers a lot of promise, so I'm in.

BTW, BMD is working on a standalone training book specifically for Fairlight within Resolve, and I think that will be out in the next few months. There are still some issues with Fairlight (and how it's covered in the existing manual), but I'm positive these are being worked on and we'll see some improvements soon.

BTW, BMD is working on a standalone training book specifically for Fairlight within Resolve, and I think that will be out in the next few months. There are still some issues with Fairlight (and how it's covered in the existing manual), but I'm positive these are being worked on and we'll see some improvements soon.

Marc,

I'd be very interested in that as an audio professional. I take it it will be announced on the support page?