Using Adobe Audition in Film Sound Design ..? a blood bath?

Hi..
I just wondering if I could use AA for developing the sound effects layer of a 90 minutes long 3D movie.. I never worked on the traditional "pro tools" suite, which seems very diffuse in sound design producing, perhaps for technological issues, and/or for a standard format issue.

Is there anybody out there who ever made use of AA for massive (long cut scenes) sound design?
I am afraid of what could happens by managing and handling thousand of samples alltogether in a cut scene of 10 minutes (supposing the animation cannot be cut in separate scenes due to some issues..)

Should I use Protools?
Any advice or comments?

I deleted your identical post in the General forum - one thread is quite sufficient, because most people I think use the 'view posts since last visit' facility, and will pick it up anyway. Also, it gets very confusing to have answers in more than one thread.

There's no reason at all why you shouldn't be able to do this with Audition - as long as the file sizes don't go beyond what the sytem can cope with. I've imported a half-hour cut video as an AVI into Audition, done all of the effects and normalised the dialogue, and exported it again without any problems at all. Whilst it's easiest to do this in conjunction with Premiere (using the Edit Original links), it's perfectly possible to use AVIs from other ssystems too - although there were some issues with one or two AVI generators which I believe have been resolved.

But this works fine with AA's multitrack view - you can put anything you like in there, and because the sytem will mix down to a single track within MV, it's easy to export again. In many ways, this is one of the strengths of the 'background mix' system - the entire job gets mixed to your satisfaction before you have to lay it back - you don't need to rely on a live mixdown in real time.

Thanks Steve, I'm sorry for the double posting..
You know, I'm accustomed to AA only regarding videogame sfx production, as I never used it for long video sfx editing, apart from those 2-3 minutes long cut scenes on the videogmaes, which are totally handled by the software.
Do you ever know of any web resources from which I could learn any technique about how to set and (most of all) organize the production of sounds effects for movies on a software?
do you have a personal idea of why pro tools is so used in the movie sound design market?  

regards,

Do you ever know of any web resources from which I could learn any technique about how to set and (most of all) organize the production of sounds effects for movies on a software?

There are articles to read here, and a website here with links to all sorts of useful things in it. In technique terms, you learn most by critical listening to other people's work and almost as much by experimenting. I'd be happy for people to post short examples of this sort of thing in the Showcase forum - as long as it's clearly the sound usage that we're commenting on. That way you get some (hopefully constructive) feedback before launching onto an unsuspecting public...

do you have a personal idea of why pro tools is so used in the movie sound design market?

This is mostly down to good marketing, and people's morbid fear of being different. I have no proof of this, but I wouldn't have put it past Digidesign to target their advertising at the accounting departments of big studios - simply pointing out that everybody else has their kit, and that if that's what their creative people want, then this is obviously a safe bet, because everybody else is using it... etc. There is no good reason why ProFools should be ubiquitous at all - it's by no means the only SW out there that will do the job. Their only real selling point is the hardware, which gives a guaranteed streaming track rate - but the quality isn't really that great - I know people working in film sound that really don't like it much at all. The only ProFools systems that actually get used by the big studios are the large, expensive ones with the huge amounts of outboard processing - the cheaper end products have nothing to commend them at all, really. The original free ProFools software was bugged to hell, and really didn't work very well. In fact the only reason that their software works at all is because they use the PC as little more than a front end for their hardware - anything they write that actually requires your PC to do a little work is a different matter altogether.

do you have a personal idea of why pro tools is so used in the movie sound design market?

When talking movie /tv production, "sound design" generally means creating sound effects, although that can be expanded to short passages of music that are used as effects.  The capturing of straight-forward talking or music for movie or tv production is generally not included in the definition of sound design.

I'm in Los Angeles and am connected to a number of "sound designer" (engineers??) folks.  The field is extremely competetive and is not for the faint of heart.  If you are just starting out and actually want to make a living doing sound design, I suggest that you apprentice yourself to someone who has actually been making money at this for some time.  Most of the studios sub-contract out this type of work to fellows who have all the necessary equipment set up in their basements - or living rooms in some cases (with audio files being passed around over high-speed connections as necessary; MIDI files are passed around as well).  This equipment may occasionally include CEP/AA as an editing tool - but the sound design work itself is done on Pro-Tools.  Why?  Because most sound design for movie effects/tv production is done with MIDI - and Pro Tools supports MIDI; CEP/AA does not.  I have a friend who does "sound design" for a couple of morning cartoon shows and gets pulled onto sound-design projects (groups of sound designers collaborating) for movies quite often.  I have sat and watched him work in his basement.  You cannot do what he does with CEP/AA.  Neither can the other folks with whom he collaborates and passes audio/midi files over high-speed connections.  If you try to break into their ranks with only CEP/AA, they will eat you for lunch.    (Actually they would probably consider you only a mid-morning snack, not lunch. )

thanks Bonnder...

Now, regarding the positioning of audio clips (sound effects) on the movie track, which to me is the second main issue in sound design after creating the sound itself, well what MIDI has got to do with it?  I dont' catch the picture.. what's the role of MIDI interface when it comes to crate sounds and positioning them in synchronization with the movie?

Most of the sound effects you hear in TV and movies are generated from sound modules or samplers.  Sound modules and samplers can both contain synthesized sound as well as samples of sounds that occur in nature (bird calls, females screaming, orchestra stabs, piano chords, etc.) Both sound modules and samplers respond to MIDI code.  In the creative process, it is far easier to place MIDI code at the appropriate entrance and exit points for your sound effects than to work with audio files.  If you are collaborating, it is also easier to pass the smaller MIDI file to fellow workers than the much larger audio file.  Since co-workers are likely to have sound modules and samplers with the same sounds and samples you have, they can immediately hear your ideas and what they sound like, add their input in the form of new MIDI code, and send the file back to you.  Since you have the same sounds and samples as your co-workers, you can immediately hear your co-workers ideas and what they sound like.  Everyone agrees that they don't like the sound at a particular spot?  You don't have to trash an audio file - you simply tweak your sound module or sampler patch.  The MIDI code itself stays in place.  Keep in mind that MIDI code can be synced to the picture in whatever format you have it - video, AVI files, etc.

At the last stage, when everything has been signed off on, the MIDI must be transformed into audio.  At which point you end up with very large files.  But at that point, you are done with the creative process and it doesn't matter that the files are large.

Does that address your question at all?  You sound as tho you are not much familiar with MIDI.

ok.. thanks a lot for the time spent for answering...

I really never thought there might have ever been this cleaver way of using midi signals for placing sound effects on a movie..and of course, considering a group of people sharing the same hardware resources, it is the fastest way for asking a feedback about the work being developed..

 (btw I'm very accustomed to MIDI, but only regarding music composition, either by the use of hardware modules (those who still exist around) or by the use of sample-based virtual synths like Gigastudio, EWQL Gold Orchestra or what else...).
..and personally, I find it very limitative (apart of any standard issue) being forced to work on a pre-configured hardware in order to enjoy a quick feedback by others.. whatever up-dated the library is.. you have a finite number of sounds available, and that' all folks!!

thanks again.

.. whatever up-dated the library is.. you have a finite number of sounds available

With samplers, that has never been true.  Any number of sounds can be sampled and shared.

With synthesizers, that has never been true.  One is limited only by the amount of time they have to spend tweaking all of the paramaters.  These parameter settings can be shared with others who have the same synthesizer(s).

With sound modules, that could be true.  But newer versions of the professional modules have upgradable rom or swapable rom, where you can download patches off the internet or create you own, load them into your sound module, and off you go with new sounds.

With samplers, that has never been true.  Any number of sounds can be sampled and shared.

At which point you have lost the advantages of MIDI because you are back to sharing (potentially) large data files.  So you could just do the sound effects as audio clips in Audition.  If all parties have the same clips, then they may be able to share the session file as easily as a MIDI file (hmmm - I haven't actually tried this, I don't know if the session file uses absolute or relative references to the audio clips).  OK, I admit I am glossing over things a bit, because in a sampler you can more easily use a sample at different pitches.  But I claim the small file size advantages of the MIDI approach are not necessarily so clear when you are dealing with samples.

At which point you have lost the advantages of MIDI because you are back to sharing (potentially) large data files.

The fact that the MIDI file size is small is one of the lesser reasons that sound designers in the movie and TV business use MIDI.  As stated above, MIDI has other advantages.  And note that I am not claiming that sound designers use MIDI for everything they do.  My point was simply that someone who wanted to compete for sound designer business, at least in LA, would be at a serious disadvantage if they were only using CEP/AA.

As stated above, MIDI has other advantages.

Aaah, yes, you did say that.  I should have reread your 2nd post before replying to your 3rd post.

I should have reread your 2nd post before replying to your 3rd post.

We all fall vicitim to that from time to time.  

Back to the opening question, although you could use Audition to put together a sound effects track you would have to be careful how that was exported.

When we build sound tracks for film we keep all elements seperate till the final dub. That is why dubbing theatres have such rediculous sized consoles - fun though!

You would need to liase with the Dubbing Mixer as to how they wanted the tracks supplied. Quite often they will want them supplied as OMF files such as can be exported by ProTools and some top line music composition software such as Logic. OMF files (pron. Omfi) contain embedded audio information and track information so that the Dubbing Mixer ends up with not only individual audio files but they are in the right place and on the right track - footsteps on one, dialogue on another, atmospheres on several ...etc

Someone mentioned using samplers and midi for film. I must admit that I have never done it that way! Very cumbersome and not very intuitive. Remember. when you are lining up ADR tracks (Additional Dialogue Replacement) or output from the foley stage, there is a need to be intuitive as much as anything else. This means that techniques such as scrubbing to find cue points (especially with old engineers like moi) are very important and MIDI doesn't go there.

There is also the small matter of surround sound. Most TV dramas and film are put together in 5.1 surround (also 7.1 for large theatres and the old fashioned dolby surround for backwards compatability). If you are trying to create an effects track and are playing with atmospheres you need to be able to hear them in the surround - which means outputting individual busses. You need a pro sound card of some type for that. Again, you would never be doing the actual surround mix as you need to have a dolby licence for that. The final Dobly Digital optical track has to be created by Dolby from the 8 track masters - tracks 1 to six surround, tracks 7 and 8 for the stereo. If the master isn't originated by a studio with a licence then Dolby wont do it. TO get a licence your sound suite has to be tested and assesed by Dolby who test the frequency response from each speaker at 85db - theatre standard. They also take into account console position, screen size and positioning of the monitors. If they like your suite (and they turn down most) they will then come and "tune" the suite to meet the exact specifications. This is needed so that you know how your output is going to sound in a Dolby theatre.

Anyway - enough waffle! Should you use audition for film sound tracks? Well, you could do some of the work on there, but it would be far from ideal.


Joss

Just a thought on ProTools

Protools has become very popular due to two main points - in its full incarnation it really is a mighty beast - very high quality and extreemly versatile. The other reason is its association with AVID, the non-linear editor of choice. As the two are very closely integrated it is extreemly easy to move stuff around between the two.

There are other systems out there, however, that are compatible: Failight, Lightworks, etc, and these are used alot. But ProTools is probably the most popular for the studios involved with track laying, Foley, ADR, etc. Remember, it is rare for one sound studio to do all the work. I remember working on Fortress 2 some years ago - a low budget thing but it still needed a lot of work on the sound. About 40% of the dialogue was replaced, we did some in our studio in London, but the rest was done in at least 5 different locations, depending where the actors were. Some of the spot effects were done in Germany, the foley was done in London, then additional stuff in LA and the music was all over the place.

One thing, though, we all supplied our DA88 tapes to match the (then) 10 minute reels in the same format, to the same levels, with the same line up tones of the same length to the same timecode rate, etc. If we hadn't, the dubbing mixers job would have been impossible. Although the technology has changed a bit since then (not that much, suprisingly) the same principles hold true.

And that is where ProTools is useful again - so many studios use it!


Joss