Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

Get answers to your questions about color grading, editing and finishing with DaVinci Resolve.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Adrian Mcyorian

  • Posts: 74
  • Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:02 am

Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostTue Feb 04, 2020 4:52 pm

Blackmagic guys... sorry to say but you have been scammed when you buy Fairlight.
maybe the integration in davinci make it look a little bit modern but the whole thing is a PAIN!

-multiple fx on a channel cannot be moved WHAAAAT? (is 2020!!! anything moves!)
iknow... you can use the ispector.... well you could take 2 hours to discover how to
-the editing tab seems to have been covered in audio processing capabilities just to make Fairlight seems useful but really everything fairlight does could be done in the editing tab without problems ( if you want )
-The whole philosophy of audio treatment is very old, not to say obsolete in many ways, the approach to routing buses and channels is a disaster.


Davinci Resolve is a great software guys! Give davinci a true DAW today! See Cockor Reaper! (example)
It's a really cool DAW and I'm pretty sure that buying Cockos would have been more profitable and useful than buying Fairlight.
System specs:
Resolve Studio version: 16.2

OS: Mac OS Catalina
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700x 8Cores
RAM: 32GB
GPU: RX 580 8GB
Offline
User avatar

Charles Bennett

  • Posts: 1418
  • Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 11:55 am
  • Location: United Kingdom

Re: FAIRLIGHT... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostTue Feb 04, 2020 5:13 pm

Fairlight is fine for doing simple jobs but does need development. I agree with you as to setting up routing. The last thing I would want is Reaper. Tried it and hated it, found routing a pain and un-intuitive. It's great for music production but I wouldn't want to use it for post. I for one am sticking to Pro Tools because after 25 years I know it inside out.
Resolve 16.2.2.012 (free)
Dell XPS 8700 i7-4790 @ 3.60GHz, 24GB RAM, GTX1060/6GB (442.92 Studio driver), Win 10 Home-18362, 2 Screens
Pro Tools 2018.4
Dell Workstation, 2 X 4 core Xeon , 16GB ECC RAM, GTX650, Win 7 Ultimate, Digi 002R, 3 Screens
Offline
User avatar

Adrian Mcyorian

  • Posts: 74
  • Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:02 am

Re: FAIRLIGHT... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostTue Feb 04, 2020 6:42 pm

Charles Bennett wrote:Tried it and hated it, found routing a pain and un-intuitive.
man! you only have to drag n drop channels!
and for buses you have a map!
System specs:
Resolve Studio version: 16.2

OS: Mac OS Catalina
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700x 8Cores
RAM: 32GB
GPU: RX 580 8GB
Offline
User avatar

Charles Bennett

  • Posts: 1418
  • Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 11:55 am
  • Location: United Kingdom

Re: FAIRLIGHT... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostTue Feb 04, 2020 7:59 pm

Don't need a map for routing in PT. You can choose an in or out bus or main output with two mouse clicks on any channel. Adding channels is just a keyboard shortcut.
Resolve 16.2.2.012 (free)
Dell XPS 8700 i7-4790 @ 3.60GHz, 24GB RAM, GTX1060/6GB (442.92 Studio driver), Win 10 Home-18362, 2 Screens
Pro Tools 2018.4
Dell Workstation, 2 X 4 core Xeon , 16GB ECC RAM, GTX650, Win 7 Ultimate, Digi 002R, 3 Screens
Online

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 6848
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 2:12 am

Try Nuendo. For Film.
Resolve Studio 16.2 and Fusion Studio under MacOS Mojave 10.14.6
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Mac mini 16 GB RAM plus eGFX Breakway Radeon RX 580
Offline
User avatar

Mike Warren

  • Posts: 298
  • Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:28 am
  • Location: Cairns, Australia

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 2:21 am

Uli Plank wrote:Try Nuendo. For Film.


+1

The Fairlight tab is certainly lacking. I've never even considered it as DAW. Just something to allow basic audio processing, and for that purpose it works fine.
Resolve Studio 16.2 - Fusion Studio 16.1.1 - Windows 10
Gigabyte GTX1080ti 11GB - AMD 1950X - 32GB 2400
Gigabyte X399 AORUS Gaming 7
Intensity Pro 4k
Presonus 192 Audio Interface
Separate M.2 SSDs for OS and Resolve Cache
Offline

Dante Stiller

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:20 pm
  • Real Name: Dante Stiller

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 11:32 am

Even for simple audio work, Resolve is quite painful to use. The gui seems inexplicably designed to annoy the user.
The effect settings in the inspector for the native effects can't be saved or copied to other clips. So how to I get the same EQ setting to another clip for example? Also I need my effects settings in other projects so I need to be able to save my own settings. Both of the effect and of the entire chain of effects on one clip.
Even worse: why do the effects settings in the inspector pop open all the time? This is just aggravating. I delete one effect, boom, all others pop open, I switch clips, boom, all settings pop open. I can't even organize them hierarchically so I have to scroll and scroll. And why can't I delete the native effects settings, if I don't use these? It's just cluttering everything up.

All this should be really easy to program. It's just gui.
I'm very grateful for the Resolve software and it's affordability. Overall great job, but the audio section seriously needs some improvement before becoming actually operational.
Resolve Studio 16.1, Windows 10, Nvidia Quadro 4000 + GTX1080, HP Z4G4
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 12:06 pm

Dante Stiller wrote:The effect settings in the inspector for the native effects can't be saved or copied to other clips. So how to I get the same EQ setting to another clip for example?
(1) Select the Source Audio Clip
(2) Copy
(3) Select Destination Audio Clip
(4) Paste Attributes

Currently with version 16.1.2, options for Clip Gain (Volume), Plugins, and Fairlight Equaliser are available in the Paste Attributes window.

A similar procedure is available for Track-based processing, the Track header provides options to Copy and Paste Attributes, with options for Volume, Mute, EQ, et cetera, available in the Paste Attributes window.

Fairlight > Presets Library.

Options include Equaliser, Dynamics, Plugins, Global Track, Global Bus, and Full Console presets.

Attributes may also be removed from Audio Clips and Tracks.
Offline

Dante Stiller

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:20 pm
  • Real Name: Dante Stiller

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 1:13 pm

Thanks for the reply!
Paste attributes menu already helps a lot. I misunderstood the term and therefore the function.

The preset library had me frustrated before and I just checked and it still is frustrating.
I don't seem to be able to comprehend the logic behind this: is it possible with the preset library to save an entire set of effects with their specific settings from one clip - Resolve calls all of these 'attributes' - and then load them up in another project? Because I can't get this to work and can't find anything in the manual.
Resolve Studio 16.1, Windows 10, Nvidia Quadro 4000 + GTX1080, HP Z4G4
Offline

Jim Simon

  • Posts: 7361
  • Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:47 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 3:19 pm

Adrian Mcyorian wrote:Give davinci a true DAW today!


Fairlight isn't supposed to be a DAW, it's a film/broadcast mixer.

(At least, that's what the promo says.)
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 3:42 pm

Jim Simon wrote:
Adrian Mcyorian wrote:Give davinci a true DAW today!


Fairlight isn't supposed to be a DAW, it's a film/broadcast mixer.

(At least, that's what the promo says.)


What's the difference in your view?
Offline

Jim Simon

  • Posts: 7361
  • Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:47 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 3:46 pm

A simple example would be creating a music track in ProTools, and mixing it with the rest of the project in Fairlight.

But that's just my own idea. What I remember reading is that Fairlight is designed for the needs of film production, which it was claimed don't necessarily match those of music production.
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 4:29 pm

Well I think things have progressed quite a bit in the past couple of decades. There isn't really that much of a difference between mixing music in PT and mixing a film in PT, from a signal processing standpoint. In addition to that we have editing functionality. Really the only thing that's significantly different in terms of needs is probably controlling virtual instruments and musical notation.

But generally speaking I think it's fair to say that "DAW" should apply to both Fairlight and Pro Tools alike.

As for actual workflows I have to agree with criticisms of Fairlight. Just having such an inflexible, clumsy and in my opinion ugly user interface is a pretty poor start for a user. And then there's the criticism against actual processing of different kinds and related functionality... which I also agree with.

Really the way it looks to me right now is that the best use is either for very simple projects (i.e. definitely not actual film audio production), or for creating deliverables, or maybe for importing stems/premixes and doing relatively minor changes only.

All of the above is just to say that I think your objection might be based on a misunderstanding of what the original complaint was.
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 4:30 pm

Just for 'reference': "Reaper" for sure isn't really the right way forward in my opinion. Something along the lines of PT/Nuendo seems far more appropriate.
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 4:51 pm

Fairlight has always been unique in that it employs a hardware controller-based editing paradigm (where it’s flexibility and speed originate), as opposed to subsequent digital audio workstations which employ the keyboard/mouse editing approach.
Offline

Frank Engel

  • Posts: 439
  • Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 11:09 pm
  • Real Name: Frank Engel

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 5:01 pm

Yeah, I think too that some of the apparent complexity in the routing configuration comes from the heritage of Fairlight being designed to operate in conjunction with custom hardware.

It actually works more like routing on a digital audio mixing console, rather than the way it is done in generic computer DAWs.

I think Fairlight's interface and some of its limitations make more sense when approached from that perspective, but I agree that this is not an excuse to avoid improving it.
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 5:03 pm

Reynaud,

that was my impression as well. I think that where we are now however the demands are a bit different. When incorporating so much into one app the demands change also for audio. It simply seems odd to have an older "paradigm" in such a software in 2020.

Or to put it more "bluntly": Resolve is free, Resolve Studio is very cheap. The hardware controllers are by comparison very expensive.
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 7:19 pm

Mattias Murhagen wrote:It simply seems odd to have an older "paradigm" in such a software in 2020
Perhaps the perception if you've only ever been exposed to the keyboard/mouse editing model.

I wrote the following in a previous thread that may clarify why Fairlight users are so passionate:

The Fairlight Audio Editor panel (which is available in standalone form and included as standard in all the Fairlight Consoles) is designed specifically for audio editing and the tactile control of Fairlight parameters, and its unique implementation ensures a much faster and more flexible audio editing environment than what a mouse and keyboard are ever able to provide.

The Audio Editor is context sensitive, in that its key layout changes and adjusts depending on the selected function (e.g. editing and manipulating Audio Clips, or operating in the Media Pool) and operating mode (e.g. setting up Audio Editor preferences, Recording and ADR, Editing, Mixing and Automation, Monitor Control and Loudness monitoring, Talkback, and Macros).

Keys change with clear colour indication and button highlights, unique icons, and text to reveal the current active mode, selected function, or available recording and editing functions - much of which only requires a single key press. For those tasks that are often repeated and may require several steps, Macros may be created and executed in an instant at the press of a single Macro switch or key.

The Audio Editor's Pad (the central display) and rotaries also adjust according to function, such as adjusting Pan in both standard surround and immersive formats, Track Level, Path Settings, routing to and adjusting send levels to Main and Sub Busses, adjusting Aux Send Levels, Fairlight Channel or Clip EQ, Fairlight Dynamics, or controlling Plugins (both 3rd party and Fairlight AFX).

The full breadth of Fairlight editing functionality is immediately available under both hands, without reaching for a mouse or keyboard. Editing and parameter control is possible without looking up at the computer displays and using the Resolve UI, since all editing functionality and available parameter controls are laid out clearly across the surface in zones for quick and easy access - and building muscle memory is possible within a very short space of time.

The Audio Editor will also transition automatically in to a full QWERTY keyboard across its surface when text needs to be entered in to a dialog box (e.g. editing ADR Cue text, renaming an Audio Clip or a Track, searching within the Media Pool or within the Sound Library), or numeric fields (such as Inspector parameter fields), as well as when switching to an open third party application (extremely useful when switching to External Audio Processes and using keybindings within that application from the Audio Editor surface).

And the electronic clutched jog wheel is an absolute pleasure to use for both jogging and shuttling (the gearing is completely user definable or it may be configured to auto-adjust based on zoom level, along with other options such as setting the monitoring to auto-dim while jogging and automatically cancelling that state when the transport is started), the mouse and keyboard are a significant step backwards.

The hardware controllers are by comparison very expensive.
An entry-level 8 fader Avid S4 console without displays or chassis requires a larger investment than the much more complete Fairlight 2 Bay Console that provides these as standard.

A 48 fader 5 bay Fairlight Console is almost $30k less than the entry-level 16 fader Avid S6 Console which doesn't include a chassis.

Yamaha's Nuage is also more expensive than the fully modular Fairlight consoles once configured with equivalent displays, chassis, and fader options.

The Fairlight Audio Editor though is unique and without comparison, as there isn't currently an equivalent available from Avid, Steinberg/Yamaha, or surprisingly with any of the other available control surface options within any price range or form factor.

Honestly, I don’t think Blackmagic can price the hardware any lower while maintaining reliability and the incredible build quality, but they can certainly go a lot higher and still compete quite comfortably with the alternatives.
Offline

Rick van den Berg

  • Posts: 695
  • Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:47 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 10:42 pm

Jim Simon wrote:
Adrian Mcyorian wrote:Give davinci a true DAW today!


Fairlight isn't supposed to be a DAW, it's a film/broadcast mixer.

(At least, that's what the promo says.)


funny, just checked and its true, i dont see "daw" anywhere on the website. But im pretty darn sure that's they did advertise it the first few versions.
resolve 16.2.1
windows 10
i7 6950x
2x gtx 1080 8gb
96gb DDR4 3200
Offline
User avatar

Charles Bennett

  • Posts: 1418
  • Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 11:55 am
  • Location: United Kingdom

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed Feb 05, 2020 10:57 pm

They do advertise it as that. I can see that with the Audio Editor Panel it should be a great DAW.
Attachments
Fairlight.JPG
Fairlight.JPG (81.45 KiB) Viewed 1943 times
Resolve 16.2.2.012 (free)
Dell XPS 8700 i7-4790 @ 3.60GHz, 24GB RAM, GTX1060/6GB (442.92 Studio driver), Win 10 Home-18362, 2 Screens
Pro Tools 2018.4
Dell Workstation, 2 X 4 core Xeon , 16GB ECC RAM, GTX650, Win 7 Ultimate, Digi 002R, 3 Screens
Offline

Will Howard

  • Posts: 285
  • Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:25 pm
  • Real Name: Will Howard

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu Feb 06, 2020 6:47 am

I don't see how routing is obsolete. It's a Source - Destination router like a proper console. A matrix would be a welcome addition but I wouldn't want to lose the current model. Routing in Pro Tools is abysmal and outdated just like the panning.

I think the main issue with Fairlight is development pace and teething pains. Combined with the fact that 99% of users are used to a keyboard and mouse and BMD trying to adapt a controller based UI to that. It is an extraordinarily powerful mix engine but it is taking time to build out.

And no it is not meant for music and probably never will be. It's still a DAW, even if it lives inside a NLE.
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 3:14 am

Reynaud Venter wrote:
Mattias Murhagen wrote:It simply seems odd to have an older "paradigm" in such a software in 2020
Perhaps the perception if you've only ever been exposed to the keyboard/mouse editing model.

I wrote the following in a previous thread that may clarify why Fairlight users are so passionate:


Reynaud Venter wrote:
The hardware controllers are by comparison very expensive.
An entry-level 8 fader Avid S4 console without displays or chassis requires a larger investment than the much more complete Fairlight 2 Bay Console that provides these as standard.

A 48 fader 5 bay Fairlight Console is almost $30k less than the entry-level 16 fader Avid S6 Console which doesn't include a chassis.

Yamaha's Nuage is also more expensive than the fully modular Fairlight consoles once configured with equivalent displays, chassis, and fader options.


You're completely missing the point.

The point is that Resolve is a free or very cheap software that more and more people are using. The value proposition of having Fairlight integrated drops pretty quickly if the caveat is a $4,500 expense to go with it. Fine, some facilities can spend that and that's great for them. But again, the industry standard is Pro Tools and Nuendo is probably second in the professional world. Why anyone would spend $4,500 to be able to execute the basics in Farilight with decent efficiency is beyond me if there are better alternatives.

So I'm not saying that the Fairlight controllers aren't great or aren't offering great functionality, they probably do. What I'm saying is that in 2020 nobody is developing a system that's depending on hardware controllers just to do basic things with ease when the competition is what it is.
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 5:55 am

Mattias Murhagen wrote:Why anyone would spend $4,500 to be able to execute the basics in Farilight with decent efficiency is beyond me if there are better alternatives.
That's an opinion which is not based on experience with the Fairlight hardware.

As you recently said on the Nuendo forum, you still have to take the time to learn the Resolve software. My suggestion would be to start there before dismissing the product.
Offline

Vess Stoytchev

  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:10 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 7:59 am

As and editor, the Fairlight part of Resolve recently helped me mix/balance a project that didn't have budget for sound. It was supposed to have a royalty free music stuck to it but I decided to use a shotgun mic with the cam on the day of the shoot. End result is great as a documentary sound - machines, working process, no speech. So for this, balancing, a bit of EQ, a simple effect - it is great. Other than that, I would always work with a colleague for sound. This has been a complaint by me about Resolve - it is not a simple strait forward process of delivering .omf/.aaf for Nuendo or ProTools.
www.cinap.eu
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 3:34 pm

Reynaud Venter wrote:
Mattias Murhagen wrote:Why anyone would spend $4,500 to be able to execute the basics in Farilight with decent efficiency is beyond me if there are better alternatives.
That's an opinion which is not based on experience with the Fairlight hardware.


I don't think you understand what I'm saying to be honest. Can you explain what specific opinion of mine would change if I had hands-on experience using Fairlight hardware?
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 3:38 pm

Vess Stoytchev wrote: Other than that, I would always work with a colleague for sound. This has been a complaint by me about Resolve - it is not a simple strait forward process of delivering .omf/.aaf for Nuendo or ProTools.


And I suppose that my point would be that if Fairlight in Resolve was more "accessible" to those of us with a solid foundation in PT/Nuendo then we'd 'easily' learn to use it and rather than you having to jump through hoops to get your edit to your sound guy via omf/aaf you'd just have them do the work in Fairlight. And when done you get back an updated Resolve timeline/mix.

Surely that should be the optimal path forward.

As it stands now I find it cumbersome to even navigate in Fairlight so what's my motivation for getting as good at editing in it as in the others?... without spending thousands to do it...
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 4:49 pm

Mattias Murhagen wrote:Can you explain what specific opinion of mine would change if I had hands-on experience using Fairlight hardware?
The Fairlight Audio Editor is unique and without comparison, and there isn't currently an equivalent available from Avid, Steinberg/Yamaha, or from any of the other available control surface manufacturers within any price range or form factor.

Quote from a Nuendo forum member describing what is now the Fairlight Audio Editor:
“I think Fairlight nailed it when they made Xynergi. It's what the (Avid) S3 SHOULD have been, modular, well built and professional! You could scale that system all the way up to a large format console. But if you had a small shop with a small space, you could buy just the master module with a couple of fader modules (or none) and have all of the function of the full console! ... I would love to have been able to purchase this setup for use with Nuendo.”

Here's a quote from a Pro Tools user on the DUC discussing the benefits of a control surface versus a keyboard and mouse:
“Avid has tried to incorporate editing capabilities into their consoles but IMHO, they have always fallen short. Too many button pushes required to achieve the same goal a mouse click or keyboard shortcut would achieve. This aspect of Pro Tools has always been mouse and keyboard based. The only DAW to ever achieve true hardware based editing was Fairlight. Therefore, I agree that if you are primarily editing tracks, then a (control) surface will not improve your workflow.”

The Fairlight Audio Editor has always been one of the unique selling propositions of the Fairlight system, along with it being one of the most scalable and backwards compatible and it remains the fastest audio editor currently available.

To quote that Pro Tools user again:
“You also have to be willing to break old habits and learn new tricks. Once you do, you will be rewarded.”
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 5:43 pm

Yeah, you aren't getting what I'm saying. I'm not sure how else to explain it.

I'm not saying the hardware isn't very, very good. In fact, my whole point is about NOT the hardware.

You have an objection against something I'm not saying.
Offline

Vess Stoytchev

  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:10 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostFri Feb 07, 2020 7:34 pm

Mattias Murhagen wrote:
Vess Stoytchev wrote: Other than that, I would always work with a colleague for sound. This has been a complaint by me about Resolve - it is not a simple strait forward process of delivering .omf/.aaf for Nuendo or ProTools.


And I suppose that my point would be that if Fairlight in Resolve was more "accessible" to those of us with a solid foundation in PT/Nuendo then we'd 'easily' learn to use it and rather than you having to jump through hoops to get your edit to your sound guy via omf/aaf you'd just have them do the work in Fairlight. And when done you get back an updated Resolve timeline/mix.

Surely that should be the optimal path forward.

As it stands now I find it cumbersome to even navigate in Fairlight so what's my motivation for getting as good at editing in it as in the others?... without spending thousands to do it...


Of course that is the dream situation. But I don't even have hopes for this kind of scenario. Maybe a good comparison would be that Fairlight is as advanced as Premiere is in color grading. For Fairlight to catch up, a lot of time is needed. For now it is good for a few occasions, an editor to play around with sound. Something that I find very interesting but much prefer for the proper people to do it.
I guess that if you ask the "content creators" and youtube "cinematography breakdown" gurus, Fairlight is very good. :D
www.cinap.eu
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSun Feb 09, 2020 5:42 am

Mattias Murhagen wrote:you aren't getting what I'm saying. I'm not sure how else to explain it.
It is quite clear from your comments here and on other forums, that you have no real intention of committing to or investing in the Blackmagic/Fairlight ecosystem, no real desire to learn the Fairlight software, and do not see “many relevant differences” between the Standard and Studio editions of Resolve.

I'm not saying the hardware isn't very, very good. In fact, my whole point is about NOT the hardware.
It is quite clear that you desire a cheap ProTools clone, and have no real interest in the Fairlight system itself.

As it stands now I find it cumbersome to even navigate in Fairlight so what's my motivation for getting as good at editing in it as in the others?... without spending thousands to do it...
With all hardware requirements and advantages removed from Resolve, and with a subscription software model instituted (one with a rate potentially a lot higher than a ProTools Ultimate subscription), what would your incentive or motivation have to be in order to learn Resolve and Fairlight?
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSun Feb 09, 2020 9:23 pm

Reynaud Venter wrote:
Mattias Murhagen wrote:you aren't getting what I'm saying. I'm not sure how else to explain it.
It is quite clear from your comments here and on other forums, that you have no real intention of committing to or investing in the Blackmagic/Fairlight ecosystem, no real desire to learn the Fairlight software,


Like I said, you don't understand what I'm saying. I do have a desire to learn the Fairlight software, but I agree with others that it is.. let's say "clumsy". Me complaining about that does not equal a lack of desire to learn it. The GUI is one thing, my desire is another.

As a matter of fact it's the exact opposite: I WISH the GUI and design was more appealing to those of us with extensive DAW experience so it would inspire us more to actually dedicate more time to learning it more in depth..

As for the investment part: I'm looking at this a large part from the perspective of Blackmagicdesign and community. What you should want is far more users, right? That's my basic assumption here. But not only that, you want to get the users that have long experience with at least Pro Tools and also Nuendo - both in post - to learn Fairlight. That's good for Blackmagicdesign and all its users. And the way to get that done is in my opinion to make Fairlight better. I'm not at all persuaded by having to spend $4,500 to get a better software experience just to learn the darn thing. And more importantly, how many of the Resolve users that are out there do you think are going to make the investment "for me"? Like I wrote earlier, the great thing about Resolve is that we can get so much done with the regular free version, and get it done at a very high level, and it'd undoubtedly be a great addition if also audio could be done as easily and well in it as in the other ones I've mentioned.... without the expensive hardware.

- And I have no idea what you're talking about when referring to other forums.

Reynaud Venter wrote:and do not see “many relevant differences” between the Standard and Studio editions of Resolve.


What are the relevant differences between the Fairlight software in Standard versus Studio when not using dedicated hardware controllers?

Reynaud Venter wrote:
I'm not saying the hardware isn't very, very good. In fact, my whole point is about NOT the hardware.
It is quite clear that you desire a cheap ProTools clone, and have no real interest in the Fairlight system itself.


No, that's not it at all.

Reynaud Venter wrote:
As it stands now I find it cumbersome to even navigate in Fairlight so what's my motivation for getting as good at editing in it as in the others?... without spending thousands to do it...
With all hardware requirements and advantages removed from Resolve, and with a subscription software model instituted (one with a rate potentially a lot higher than a ProTools Ultimate subscription), what would your incentive or motivation have to be in order to learn Resolve and Fairlight?


Getting paid?

Why is your question relying on either having hardware requirements/advantages or a subscription model? Seems like a false dichotomy to me. I mean, didn't Blackmagicdesign create a really good software including Fusion, editing and coloring without the need for dedicated hardware yet also without a subscription model?
Offline

Reynaud Venter

  • Posts: 1533
  • Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 9:34 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostMon Feb 10, 2020 6:09 am

Mattias Murhagen wrote:I have no idea what you're talking about when referring to other forums
One example from the Nuendo forum:
“I think if we want to not commit fully then this is just the way things are and we'll just have to deal with things not being perfect.

If we on the other hand want to commit to a DAW and its "eco system" then both Pro Tools and Nuendo provides excellent products. I think Nuendo is better and I think it's a better value, but both are very good. So I really don't think it makes much sense to lament the current poor performance of Fairlight controllers because once you're at that price range you might as well look at either Avid or Steinberg instead, and just go all in with s1/4/6 or Nuage.”

In your experience with the Fairlight controllers, which aspects have poor performance?

What are the relevant differences between the Fairlight software in Standard versus Studio when not using dedicated hardware controllers?
Several software-only Fairlight-specific additions in the Studio edition of Resolve:
[*]Dolby Atmos including connection to an RMU
[*]Auro-3D
[*]SMPTE ST2098
[*]SpaceView Scope
[*]B-Chain Control
[*]Higher Project rates (96k and 192k)
[*]LTC Timecode (Remote Control)
[*]Additional Fairlight AFX

The Fairlight audio hardware and controllers then provide additional benefits for those that require the more advanced feature set.

The Studio edition of Resolve also includes additional relevant software-only functionality for many audio post engineers such as:
[*]4K Timelines
[*]Higher Frame Rates
[*]Netflix IMFs
[*]ProRes IMFs (on macOS)
[*]ProRes Masters (on macOS)
[*]Kakadu JPEG2000 IMFs
[*]Photon Validation
[*]Remote Rendering
[*]Collaborative workflows
[*]Frame IO integration
[*]Additional Scripting functionality
Offline

Peter Chamberlain

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 7899
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:08 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostMon Feb 10, 2020 9:17 am

If I can add; we demonstrated at the NAMM show in LA last month a preview of a new mouse and keyboard shortcut operation on the Fairlight page without loosing any of the previous hardware edit controller benefits. This is the beginning of our next phase in Fairlight dev work so I’m expecting this pending release will show we are listening to those looking for a mouse alternative to their current system.
DaVinci Resolve Product Manager
Offline

Dante Stiller

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:20 pm
  • Real Name: Dante Stiller

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostMon Feb 10, 2020 12:01 pm

we are listening to those looking for a mouse alternative


That's great to hear. Looking forward to the next release!
Although it doesn't seem to bother many other people, I would like to use the opportunity to repeat my most urgent complaint about the Fairlight UI right now; the effect settings in the Inspector popping open all the time is a great nuisance. It would be great if they could stay closed until I open them manually, no matter if I switch clips or remove other effects or perform any other UI actions.
Resolve Studio 16.1, Windows 10, Nvidia Quadro 4000 + GTX1080, HP Z4G4
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostMon Feb 10, 2020 3:15 pm

Reynaud Venter wrote:
Mattias Murhagen wrote:I have no idea what you're talking about when referring to other forums
One example from the Nuendo forum:
“I think if we want to not commit fully then this is just the way things are and we'll just have to deal with things not being perfect.

If we on the other hand want to commit to a DAW and its "eco system" then both Pro Tools and Nuendo provides excellent products. I think Nuendo is better and I think it's a better value, but both are very good. So I really don't think it makes much sense to lament the current poor performance of Fairlight controllers because once you're at that price range you might as well look at either Avid or Steinberg instead, and just go all in with s1/4/6 or Nuage.”

In your experience with the Fairlight controllers, which aspects have poor performance?


CONTEXT FFS!

I was responding to someone else lamenting that the controllers perform poorly due to the software, and since that was the Nuendo forum I simply said that if we don't commit to ONE ecosystem (regardless of which) then small incompatibilities are likely the way things are going to be in the future as well (i.e. small Avid controller with Nuendo, Nuage with Pro Tools etc). Then my point was that even if one doesn't like the performance of a Fairlight controller it doesn't make much sense to complain about that as a Nuendo user because at that point we're spending so much money we might as well just get PT or Nuendo with the dedicated controllers instead, because those are the two main DAWs in the post market.

You really have a terribly hard time understanding what people really mean and instead leap to incorrect conclusions which you then try to argue against. Why don't you just ask people what they think about something and when they tell you just take that at face value?

I've already told you a million times in this thread that this isn't about the controllers, and yet here you are again bringing them up!? I mean... really?

Reynaud Venter wrote:
What are the relevant differences between the Fairlight software in Standard versus Studio when not using dedicated hardware controllers?
Several software-only Fairlight-specific additions in the Studio edition of Resolve:


None of those things have anything to do with the topic, and so none of them are relevant.
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostMon Feb 10, 2020 3:17 pm

Peter Chamberlain wrote:If I can add; we demonstrated at the NAMM show in LA last month a preview of a new mouse and keyboard shortcut operation on the Fairlight page without loosing any of the previous hardware edit controller benefits. This is the beginning of our next phase in Fairlight dev work so I’m expecting this pending release will show we are listening to those looking for a mouse alternative to their current system.


Very good to hear Peter!
Offline

FellaBrando

  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:49 pm
  • Real Name: Brandon Whited

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSat May 23, 2020 2:20 am

Peter Chamberlain wrote:If I can add; we demonstrated at the NAMM show in LA last month a preview of a new mouse and keyboard shortcut operation on the Fairlight page without loosing any of the previous hardware edit controller benefits. This is the beginning of our next phase in Fairlight dev work so I’m expecting this pending release will show we are listening to those looking for a mouse alternative to their current system.


May I ask if Fairlight will also be friendlier to music production? (Stuff like synthwave etc?)

If it isn't already
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSat May 23, 2020 8:39 pm

I think it would be a mistake to try to cater to music production.
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSun May 24, 2020 3:58 am

Mattias Murhagen wrote:I think it would be a mistake to try to cater to music production.


I disagree. If it's implemented well then it could be really cool.

I just posted my vision for where Resolve should go and I suggested adding audio nodes to Fusion to create music and soundscape assets.

Think about Fusion comps can have certain parameters available for the editor to change from the Edit page. That same concept applied to music composition could allow multiple versions of a song to be contained within one file: normal, instrumental, alternate instrumentation, etc.
Offline
User avatar

Mike Warren

  • Posts: 298
  • Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:28 am
  • Location: Cairns, Australia

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSun May 24, 2020 4:25 am

Mark Grgurev wrote:
Mattias Murhagen wrote:I think it would be a mistake to try to cater to music production.


I disagree. If it's implemented well then it could be really cool.



It would be, but Blackmagic are struggling with resources to get bugs fixed and key video features properly implemented. This might be nice later, but I definitely wouldn't want to see this done at the moment. There are many very capable DAWs around, some free, that can reliably cover people's music needs.

All IMHO.
Resolve Studio 16.2 - Fusion Studio 16.1.1 - Windows 10
Gigabyte GTX1080ti 11GB - AMD 1950X - 32GB 2400
Gigabyte X399 AORUS Gaming 7
Intensity Pro 4k
Presonus 192 Audio Interface
Separate M.2 SSDs for OS and Resolve Cache
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostSun May 24, 2020 3:31 pm

Mark Grgurev wrote:
Mattias Murhagen wrote:I think it would be a mistake to try to cater to music production.


I disagree. If it's implemented well then it could be really cool.


Well, I don't think anyone will disagree with any feature request being implemented as long as it's done right and can be either used or ignored by the user and as long as it doesn't stand in the way of progress in other areas of the software.

Problem is that businesses are always balancing things to profit over X years. So I think what many are worried about is spending resources on some things at the expense of others, and since this is a software company the most typical concern is new features over fixing things that are broken and improving things that need improvement.

There's also this;

Mark Grgurev wrote:I just posted my vision for where Resolve should go and I suggested adding audio nodes to Fusion to create music and soundscape assets.

Think about Fusion comps can have certain parameters available for the editor to change from the Edit page. That same concept applied to music composition could allow multiple versions of a song to be contained within one file: normal, instrumental, alternate instrumentation, etc.


I think that partially we might be looking at terminology somewhat differently.

To me "music production" is exactly that, producing music and all that goes into that. I'd say that typically you find that done in either Ableton or DAWs like Cubase (/Nuendo), Pro Tools and Logic. From the standpoint of producing music I really don't think what you propose in that other thread (or here) offers any advantages at all really. There typically are very good reasons for why those DAWs look and function the way that they do.

When it comes to Resolve though I can see why some of what you say appears appealing. I do however think that some of it looks like changing how you interact with what is effectively in Fairlight in other places in Resolve. So as far as for example adjusting vocals relative to the rest but within a node in Fusion I can get that. What you're effectively doing is accessing track volume from within a Fusion node... sort of.

The thing is though that as you've shown in your block diagram if you adjust clip gain then it changes dynamic processing that comes later in the audio signal chain, and if you change track level you have to decide just how you're doing that - are you attempting to just trim existing automation or rewrite what's there? You're basically pulling in the automation track into that node at least if it's not static trim. At that point you really need a timeline to adjust it, which I suppose you have... Thing is though that at that point you really have to ask yourself what is faster: Adjusting automation levels over time in Fusion or just swapping tabs back to Fairlight? Like I said earlier, there's a reason why DAWs look the way they do.

I also think that beginning to interact with Fairlight this way in Fusion has the potential to greatly complicate how things appear to the user and one should ask oneself if it's going to be either intuitive or easy to learn just how you're affecting things.

So on the most basic level this all appears like reasonable but not a priority - i.e. just get the ability to pull in elements that you can do coarse changes on in Fusion, and maybe then actually be working with already produced audio meaning things delivered from music producers - and on another level it looks entirely undesirable for the foreseeable future... to me...
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostWed May 27, 2020 10:37 pm

Mike Warren wrote:It would be, but Blackmagic are struggling with resources to get bugs fixed and key video features properly implemented.


I highly doubt that the same people working on the graphics side of Resolve are also working on their audio.

That's kind of why it isn't a waste to explore the stars when we haven't finished exploring the ocean: marine-biologists and astronomers are different groups of people. :-)
Offline
User avatar

Charles Bennett

  • Posts: 1418
  • Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 11:55 am
  • Location: United Kingdom

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 12:17 am

Well, as Mark and I have found out in our postings in the Feature Requests section, you'll never please everyone. ;)
I see that I'm also at odds with Will Howard. I like the routing and panning in PT, he does not.
I can empathize with Reynaud as I use a hardware controller with PT. It makes the job so much easier.
Attachments
06A.JPG
06A.JPG (849.04 KiB) Viewed 420 times
Resolve 16.2.2.012 (free)
Dell XPS 8700 i7-4790 @ 3.60GHz, 24GB RAM, GTX1060/6GB (442.92 Studio driver), Win 10 Home-18362, 2 Screens
Pro Tools 2018.4
Dell Workstation, 2 X 4 core Xeon , 16GB ECC RAM, GTX650, Win 7 Ultimate, Digi 002R, 3 Screens
Offline

Will Howard

  • Posts: 285
  • Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:25 pm
  • Real Name: Will Howard

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 2:12 am

Charles Bennett wrote:Well, as Mark and I have found out in our postings in the Feature Requests section, you'll never please everyone. ;)
I see that I'm also at odds with Will Howard. I like the routing and panning in PT, he does not.
I can empathize with Reynaud as I use a hardware controller with PT. It makes the job so much easier.


Yes I do believe the panner in PT is a joke. Spanner is a near requirement if you're working in multichannel formats. Avid refuse to change it since it was implemented back in v5.1 because of backwards compatibility... I'm guessing that's the same reason they won't allow an automated Pre/Post aux send button.

The routing in PT got better now that you can select more than one bus at a time. But still doing one track at a time or selecting multiple tracks and using a key combination isn't as efficient as a routing window to me. Be it Fairlight style or a matrix. Seeing the routing at a glance is really nice in a big project.

I criticize PT because I use it every day with various control surfaces. I know its flaws very well just as I know its advantages. I used to go back and forth between legacy Fairlight and PT in the same day. So I'd get frustrated at both of them and wish they could have a baby :lol:
Offline

Steve Fishwick

  • Posts: 92
  • Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:35 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 7:55 am

Interesting discussion!

I agree with others there is no need for music abilities in Fairlight, that is an overcrowded market best left to others. There is only a handful of serious daws catering specifically to post production (perhaps only Fairlight and Nuendo). There is Pro Tools, of course, Pyramix and Sadie too but absolutely nothing with the value proposition of Fairlight. As a long time Pro Tools user, with a background in sound editing and mixing/location recording, I have been transitioning to Fairlight for some time (My Digi 002 finally blew up and having only 8.0 LE I have not been prepared to upgrade to Avid's subscription model).

My main job is as a picture editor, both offline and online, on Avid Media Composer. Davinci Resolve Studio is an important and perfect companion, both hardware/software, to that workflow in so many areas - except editing. If my main job was dubbing and mixing then I would have no hesitation in investing in Fairlight hardware. The edit controller together with the accelerator/madi interface, for around £8000 is incredible value, I think. However I can't justify that for my business.

We are a demanding lot. BMD's business model is unique in the industry: software subsidised by hardware. Others have been there before (Avid for example) but have failed. BMD have succeeded because their free software is incredibly fully featured and their hardware incredible value.

The paid for Studio version offers, amongst many many other things, so much in Fairlight that it simply becomes a no brainer. Surround, immersive and AAF import/export are so important to me with an Avid centric facility that Fairlight becomes the only economic choice. We complain about the lack of ASIO in windows or cheap control surfaces when such things would make subsidising the software pointless for BMD. It is not true that Fairlight is only good for simple audio - as some have said - that is demonstrably not the case. It is an extremely powerful audio tool - it just has to be learnt - it is not Pro Tools.

Regarding the edit controller, Reynaud is absolutely correct, there is practically nothing like it. Yet I doubt it was ever faster than AMS Audiofile, that came before it (sadly obsolete now). It's truly unique proposition, I think, though is the modal configurable buttons. It would be great if BMD could transfer some of that technology to the keyboard so it could function as a cheaper alternative for Fairlight, as well as editing. I would pay for that, even a little more. However since most of the post world is Pro Tools, it is undeniable that mouse and keyboard are muscle memory ingrained. So it is welcome to see BMD move towards catering for that whilst maintaining the unique edit controller functionality.

My only small gripe with BMD is that their i/o hardware should be able to function as an audio interface too, for editors - I wasn't keen on having to buy a cheap interface just to be able record VO, when there is a perfectly good XLR input on the Ultrastudio. It can in Avid MC, so it is possible technically but to be fair Pro Tools is exactly the same and proper daws require proper audio interfaces, so I was happy in the end to pay the 2 dollars.
Offline

Mattias Murhagen

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:09 am
  • Location: New York

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 2:30 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:Interesting discussion!

I agree with others there is no need for music abilities in Fairlight, that is an overcrowded market best left to others. There is only a handful of serious daws catering specifically to post production (perhaps only Fairlight and Nuendo). There is Pro Tools, of course, Pyramix and Sadie too but absolutely nothing with the value proposition of Fairlight.


Just for the record; Nuendo is basically Cubase on steroids. It has all the music features plus a bunch of post-specific features that Cubase doesn't have. It's also seemingly tested a bit more thoroughly.

I agree with what you write in general. The value proposition of Fairlight is obvious. I think Nuendo is a close second for what it does, but that's neither here nor there.
Offline

Will Howard

  • Posts: 285
  • Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:25 pm
  • Real Name: Will Howard

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 5:43 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:My only small gripe with BMD is that their i/o hardware should be able to function as an audio interface too, for editors - I wasn't keen on having to buy a cheap interface just to be able record VO, when there is a perfectly good XLR input on the Ultrastudio. It can in Avid MC, so it is possible technically but to be fair Pro Tools is exactly the same and proper daws require proper audio interfaces, so I was happy in the end to pay the 2 dollars.


I've brought that up before with BMD and didn't get a response. They have hardware that is sold as including Audio I/O. At one point the Resolve manual stated that you could use the BMD Audio I/O. But for some reason you can't. And yet it works in MC is kind of embarrassing. Most editors I know just need the one input for VO. It really should just work.

(I don't have any use for it but I can't understand why it isn't supported.)
Offline

Steve Fishwick

  • Posts: 92
  • Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:35 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 6:33 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:Just for the record; Nuendo is basically Cubase on steroids. It has all the music features plus a bunch of post-specific features that Cubase doesn't have.


I stand corrected. Then that makes Fairlight truly unique. When I was an assistant mixer in 35/16mm dubbing theatres we didn't mix music. I still don't think they do in Pinewood either. Fairlight is what AMS Audiofile might have been if it had survived.

Will Howard wrote:Most editors I know just need the one input for VO. It really should just work.


Agreed. I can do that in Avid quite well, so that's OK for me (I think Avid inspired and designed it specifically with BMD that way) But although I don't really mix I have a need for sound design, editing and some ADR and that's why I need to be able to record in Fairlight. My Sound Devices 302 mixer works well into the 1/4" of Ultrastudio for Avid, not Fairlight. So I route it to the Presonus and feed the monitor outputs to the Ultrastudio, so I can use the mixer in both Avid and Fairlight without repatching. The line up tone from the 302 was very useful for this.

I've brought it up with BMD too without a response but one of their people did use the words "not currently", so who knows?
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 10:49 pm

Charles Bennett wrote:Well, as Mark and I have found out in our postings in the Feature Requests section, you'll never please everyone. ;)
I see that I'm also at odds with Will Howard. I like the routing and panning in PT, he does not.
I can empathize with Reynaud as I use a hardware controller with PT. It makes the job so much easier.


For what it's worth, I understand that I didn't exactly give you the clearest idea of what I was envisioning. I was kind of expecting you to come to my side with what I was putting out there without a proper concept. Usually, I'll go all out with Photoshopped concepts and stuff but I wasn't willing to do it at the time because my air conditioning was working lol Maybe I'll try to put that together now though.
Offline
User avatar

Paul Draper

  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: Fairlight... or how to go back 20 years ago in audio

PostThu May 28, 2020 11:43 pm

Adrian Mcyorian wrote:Blackmagic guys... sorry to say but you have been scammed when you buy Fairlight. maybe the integration in davinci make it look a little bit modern but the whole thing is a PAIN!

Ha!
Uli Plank wrote:Try Nuendo. For Film.

Exactly. Round-tripping works well, although just a little more long-winded than I would like in some cases.

In my experience, Resolve is 'getting there' and of course there have been many other things for BM to do beyond only the audio /music concerns. Each layer of Resolve development continues to move forward, although very buggy at times. We get to know workarounds. Overall, I still don't see anything else in the NLE space that comes remotely close to what Resolve provides as an ambitious 'everything' workspace for audio-visual work.

To return to the Resolve DAW question, in my view it needs the following badly (and perhaps they will appear in time):

    ASIO driver support for Windows; on MacOS is not so problematic because of core audio.
    Tempo, click, hit points, MTC
    Full MIDI support including Virtual Instrument plugins, MIDI piano keyboard, MIDI control surfaces larger than 8 faders.
    Likely some more straightforward - dare I say 'industry standard' - routing, editing and arrangement tools. ProTools, Nuendo & the rest have set that standard for three decades or so
MacPro 7,1, 16 core, 2TB, 192GB, Vega II 32GB. UA Apollo x8, DeckLink MiniMon 4k. 8TB RAID 4 OWC Thunderbay 6, 2TB RAID 0 Sonnet M.2 4x4. Dell U3415W & BenQ SW2700PT. Nuendo, FCPX, Resolve Studio 16.2.
Next

Return to DaVinci Resolve

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 75 guests