Midi Support

If there was more midi support and a better sequencer AA V3.1 would be heaven for me. At present I have to go back and forward between Cubase and AA in my projects.

If there was more midi support and a better sequencer...

...then either the more important parts of Audition would have taken even longer to develop, or they wouldn't have been as well developed. You have to bear in mind that Audition is way behind the competition here - by decades. This is because it is principally audio editing and recording software, and not a music composition tool as such. Neither does it need to be, because it would be competing with a lot of rather good software specifically intended for this task, and at a considerable disadvantage.

I don't know what will happen about this in the future, but you have to be aware of the foregoing - as the developers themselves are. The only thing that I can tell you about this at all is that I'm apparently officially to blame for MIDI being completely hidden from view in normal Audition use! No I don't mind...

I guess that if Audition doesn't add a full and complete MIDI support to compete in the sequencer market, it has no future...
The "audio only" market is really a niche, that probabily will be smaller in the future.
Yes, Audition is the best in this niche, but it's just something too small, especially for a big company like Adobe.

In my opinion, the only way to survive is to offer a complete music production solution.

I guess...

That's the thing, really - you guess. Adobe, on the other hand, do actual research... and they listen to their largest customers - who don't use MIDI at all. And since it's now a matter of public knowledge that they've dropped it, I  guess you'll be off...

ok, let's see what happens...
My impression for the future isn't optimistic as your, but maybe I'm completely wrong...

The "audio only" market is really a niche, that probabily will be smaller in the future.

Personally, I'm a major midi user, but I take issue with your statement that the "audio only" market is a niche one. I've yet to have anyone ask me for any sort of midi in my mobile recording quise.  Which is just as well, since I only use a audio only HD recorder .

Besides which, I agree with SteveG - if you need midi, then Audition is not your best choice of software, there are plenty more capable.  To be fair CEP/AA was only carried kicking and screaming into the midi implementation in the first instance.  Many of us saw no need for it at all (and the fact that it's hidden might be considered a blessing by some of us).

I used to think I needed midi in Audition, but I have found that I am perfectly happy doing midi stuff in Sonar, then rendering everything to wav and doing all the "fun" stuff in Audition!
As far as I am concerned I don't think it will hurt Audition at all to stay "audio only" after all, that's where all the midi ends up anyway, as audio!

I used to think I needed midi in Audition, but I have found that I am perfectly happy doing midi stuff in Sonar, then rendering everything to wav and doing all the "fun" stuff in Audition!
As far as I am concerned I don't think it will hurt Audition at all to stay "audio only" after all, that's where all the midi ends up anyway, as audio!

Taken the words right out of my mouth - except that I use Musicator* & VSampler**, not Sonar.

* very old software but I like it just as it is.
** not quite so old but I like it too.
(I don't recommend either of these to newcomers.)

@all
don't get me wrong, I love Audition 3.01; I record with AA, while I use Cubase SX3 just for MIDI tracks, then import them in Audition to mix everything...

I've just given my impression about the future: I see very difficult for Audition to survive, if it remains "audio only".
But this is just my opinion.

I see very difficult for Audition to survive, if it remains "audio only".

Midi has been around for longer than CEP/AA, but they seem to have survived quite well without it.  In fact, many of the current alternatives started out as midi sequencers and were forced to include audio in order to retain their market.  Seems to me, the boot was well on the other foot .

Midi is really just a stepping stone to an audio file.  Nobody in their right mind would consider a midi file to be the end product, there are simply too many variables involved in playing one.  On that basis alone, it seems better to use a proper midi sequencer for that stage of the operation, than the somewhat limited features provided by Audition.

I never understand the reason why some users want a single 'do everything' application, e.g. a recent discussion about CD writing within AA.  Far better to use individual ones that are optimised for the job in hand than a jack of all trades that's optimised for nothing in particular.

I've just given my impression about the future: I see very difficult for Audition to survive, if it remains "audio only".
But this is just my opinion.

This seems to be a very common misconception. Could you please explain why you think this?

I'm still harping on about how I don't see a significant difference between audio recording and midi virtual instrument recording - for which a sequencer is not required.

Audio - a transducer (mic) converts the acoustic instrument performance to an electrical signal, which is digitised and recorded and later reproduced as audio again. 

Midi - a keyboard (or other device) converts the performance to midi data, which in turn is rendered and digitised by a VSTi plugin, which is recorded and later reproduced as audio again.

Many people like to manipulate the midi data using a sequencer before it is converted to a digital audio signal but that's not essential to the process.  I'd venture that there's far more midi keyboards than pianos around these days - particularly in recordable condition - so why close the door to them by not having the ability to host VSTi effects and record their output?

My impression is that multitrack audio recording and editing was the software solution for music production in the second half of the 90s, and first years of the 2000s.
I remember that in those years, Cool Edit was really very popular, at least in the home recording field.
With the boom of high quality virtual instruments, things really changed.
And the common solution was to integrate MIDI and audio, like all the major sequencers.
Now, I don't know (I mean personally, not in the web) even a single person involved in music that use Audition: a lot use Cubase, Sonar, Logic, Pro Tools and so on...

Ok, I know Audition is firstly about audio editing, but for many people CE/AA was about multitrack recording and mixing too; and now they need MIDI.
In the shop where I bought the boxed version of AA3, they told me it was the first copy ordered/sold (and this in 2010) from the launch.
It's really quite rare to see discussions about Audition in audio/music production forums...

I think that AA even in the music production field has some strenghts: its GUI and workspace (that has no rival, for me), its audio editing tools: mixed with a real MIDI support, it would be really an interesting solution even in the music production field.

Anyway, let's see what happens.

So basically you haven't considered any of the other major uses for audio editing software? Or what Adobe has had something of a reputation with over a long time? The reason that we suspected that they'd bought Syntrillium in the first place? The one in which MIDI has absolutely no part to play whatsoever?

Believe me, Adobe don't need MIDI to sell Audition... you've only considered a very minor demographic here.

Over at KvR there's a longish thread running about Audition which indicates that there's quite a bit of interest in the future of the program amid that midi-centric crowd.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=221143&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=