Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Reveals 2012 Final Cut Pro X Update with Multichannel Audio Editing, RED Support and More

mozumder said:
Also, the pros complaining about FCP X because it disturbed their workflow, well.. F* em. At this point it's their loss. FCP X is a game changer in industry.

They should have learned to be agile, to toss out their existing workflow, rather than to have been permanently reliant on their older workflow. They should have learned the new FCP X while moving away from FCP 7.

There is no room for conservatism & complacency in a market dominated by an extremely agile & responsive Apple.

Also, Premiere sucks.
Click to expand...
Ha. I laugh while editing native RED and everything else that's come my way for the last year or longer without thinking about it.

I prefer Adobe to FCP X, but I won't lower myself to say it sucks or anything. It just doesn't work as well for me as Adobe does. For example, why do "background rendering" operations grind to a halt if I play a timeline? That's not really in the background, is it? FCP X has been much slower for me than Adobe has, but then, I'm editing all my footage natively as soon as I import the file.
 
Icy1007 said:
A quad-core MacBook Pro or iMac is more than enough power for anything FCPX can throw at it.

Mac Pros aren't needed anymore.
Click to expand...

That simply isn't true! The big difference is not in the processor speed, but in the firewire and usb2 out - those components on a mbp just don't supply enough power to keep a chain of firewire drives connected without the occasional oops. I've had drives get dropped sporadically more times than I can remember and it's very annoying. I have had discussions with upper-tiered tech support at Apple who admitted that if you want that kind of stability it's better to go with a Mac Pro or iMac. Also, having only one firewire in is extremely difficult when you have not only a chain of hard drives, but a finicky analog to digital convertor that doesn't want to be on any chain or hub. It wants a direct connection. This is another reason why Mac Pros are extremely useful. Laptops are great, don't get me wrong, for certain things. But they just don't have the stability and extendability that Mac Pros have.
 
mozumder said:
Also, the pros complaining about FCP X because it disturbed their workflow, well.. F* em. At this point it's their loss. FCP X is a game changer in industry.

They should have learned to be agile, to toss out their existing workflow, rather than to have been permanently reliant on their older workflow. They should have learned the new FCP X while moving away from FCP 7.

There is no room for conservatism & complacency in a market dominated by an extremely agile & responsive Apple.

Also, Premiere sucks.
Click to expand...

My guess is that you work alone, if even at all, in the editing business.
 
I never upgraded to "X". So I've not used it. But it seem REALLY odd that onlynow that would add multi track audio editing. What in the world did people do without this feature. Did everyone simply shoot with one open mic and never add sound effects or music? I must be missing something because the editing software would be quite unusable without this.

One idea I had: Why doesn't Apple combine Logic for audio and Final Cut video. Logic is a pretty good audio editor. Then expand Aperture for assets management of both still and video. Then people can buy the parts they need and al this stuff could work together.
 
ChrisA said:
I never upgraded to "X". So I've not used it. But it seem REALLY odd that onlynow that would add multi track audio editing. What in the world did people do without this feature. Did everyone simply shoot with one open mic and never add sound effects or music? I must be missing something because the editing software would be quite unusable without this.
Click to expand...
Indeed you havent used it :) The multi-track they are bringing back is the support of importing multi-track audio. You can the basics with multi-track audio in FCPX by using Connected and/or Compound Clips.

----------
ChrisA said:
One idea I had: Why doesn't Apple combine Logic for audio and Final Cut video. Logic is a pretty good audio editor. Then expand Aperture for assets management of both still and video. Then people can buy the parts they need and al this stuff could work together.
Click to expand...
Do you work for Apple :) According to the Larry Jordan blog, Apple is working on another app to add to the FCPX eco-system...of course Larry's only speculating this so maybe its LogicX.
 
mBox said:
I was at the Supermeet. Apple did not hype it up. It was us to blame for that.
We basically all applauded during the presentation and started patting our own backs that we were on the right team.
But thats where most professionals should know that his business is not team oriented. Its a me me me business.
Apple gave us a different pencil but took away an old one that they could not support anymore.

Suck it up "pros", such is life.
Click to expand...

I agree that people did most of the hype to themselves, and I'm convinced Apple understood that would happen and counted on it. Seriously, Apple introduced FCPX to the world for the FIRST time at the LAFCPUG at NAB 2011, after pushing out any other vendors from that event. NAB! How much more "pro" does it have to be than that?

The hype happened because of what Apple didn't tell people what it couldn't do and what was left out. Who would have ever thought you couldn't migrate a project from FCP7 to FCPX? I saw the videos of the presentation, and definitely Apple made it like like you could, and we all know how tightly scripted presentations are by Apple. Nothing is left to chance.

----------
mbox said:
shhh dont give away trade secrets...dont tell anyone that most post-facilities buy older 2008/2010 mac pro's so they have a 5 year plan...and dont tell anyone that they still run fcp legacy and snow leopard as well as a lion boot drive with fcpx and a boot camp windows 7 running maya 2012 :)
Click to expand...

yup!
 
Last edited:
fredoviola said:
That simply isn't true! The big difference is not in the processor speed, but in the firewire and usb2 out - those components on a mbp just don't supply enough power to keep a chain of firewire drives connected without the occasional oops. I've had drives get dropped sporadically more times than I can remember and it's very annoying. I have had discussions with upper-tiered tech support at Apple who admitted that if you want that kind of stability it's better to go with a Mac Pro or iMac. Also, having only one firewire in is extremely difficult when you have not only a chain of hard drives, but a finicky analog to digital convertor that doesn't want to be on any chain or hub. It wants a direct connection. This is another reason why Mac Pros are extremely useful. Laptops are great, don't get me wrong, for certain things. But they just don't have the stability and extendability that Mac Pros have.
Click to expand...

If you have a Mac Pro and need a ton of storage I would think you'd be looking at a storage area network (SAN) and be using fibre Channel. FW800 is not bad but if you have a bunch of parallel video channels and more then one person working you can justify the SAN.

I think you need more than a 17" monitor for video editing. The 27" screen is a good size. So if you are going with an external monitor the MBP is not so cost effective. iMac is better, Mac Pro is even better because it can do SAN.

All that said, I really don't trust Apple to continue their line of pro software. I think they see the numbers in the consumer electronics market.
 
Wow!!!!!!

Final cut now has dual viewers!!!!

And multiple audio tracks support!!!

Truly groundbreaking, guys. Lol
 
wonderspark said:
They're making some progress on catching up to Adobe, which supported native MXF file editing back in 2009 on CS3. I used CS3 to edit DVCProHD P2 footage natively a couple years ago, myself. I'm still on the older CS5 at the moment, which edits RED natively, supports multichannel WAV files, and has dual viewers. Good to see Apple is still working on the program, at least.
Click to expand...

Not to be a Debbie Downer, but isn't FCP pretty much rarely used these days by pros? I thought about 5-7 years ago, FCP/Apple simply lost out to Adobe as well as the Wintel platforms.

Although I do not do video editing for a career, it's really all about the software. Dump the video from the video recorder onto the computer and use the software for all the edits/effects/etc. But the software does rely on hardcore hardware for a certain audience. If the Mac Pros are/were only updated every 2+ years, that's not very helpful for the diehard video folks out there...hence the move away from Macs and away from FCP to Wintel and non-FCP.

I also remember reading last year the huge percentage of uproar when Apple unveiled some new version of FCP with tons of missing features. I'm sure FCP is decent software to some...but is it truly Pro material like it used to be back in the day?
 
Definitely a precursor to the new MBPros and possibly MacPros...since FCP/FCX is considered a 'pro' tool/software.

Wouldn't be surprised to see them announce something very soon on the Pro line.
 
ericinboston said:
Not to be a Debbie Downer, but isn't FCP pretty much rarely used these days by pros? I thought about 5-7 years ago, FCP/Apple simply lost out to Adobe as well as the Wintel platforms.

Although I do not do video editing for a career, it's really all about the software. Dump the video from the video recorder onto the computer and use the software for all the edits/effects/etc. But the software does rely on hardcore hardware for a certain audience. If the Mac Pros are/were only updated every 2+ years, that's not very helpful for the diehard video folks out there...hence the move away from Macs and away from FCP to Wintel and non-FCP.

I also remember reading last year the huge percentage of uproar when Apple unveiled some new version of FCP with tons of missing features. I'm sure FCP is decent software to some...but is it truly Pro material like it used to be back in the day?
Click to expand...

Many production houses in recent years before the FCX debacle were moving towards FCP systems since they were cheaper then AVIDs and DS systems. You see a lot of documentaries and indy stuff done on FCP systems and they come in to finish at post houses.
 
H. Flower said:
Wow!!!!!!

Final cut now has dual viewers!!!!

And multiple audio tracks support!!!

Truly groundbreaking, guys. Lol
Click to expand...

The point isn't to be groundbreaking here really. It's a program rewritten from the ground up so features people are used to are being added again as they're able.

This news matters for those who care. No need to be sarcastic and mock.
 
mBox said:
Damn it! who let the one Media100 user in this forum ;)
Click to expand...

I heard rumors Apple is working on a "save as" command, which may be announced at next year's NAB.

Can you imagine how much this new feature could enhance your workflow?
 
Ryth said:
Many production houses in recent years before the FCX debacle were moving towards FCP systems since they were cheaper then AVIDs and DS systems. You see a lot of documentaries and indy stuff done on FCP systems and they come in to finish at post houses.
Click to expand...
I too wondered about this. I teach FCP (past now FCPX) at local college and averaged 30 new users a year for the past 10 years. From that I found half to be using Premiere at a basic level. There was no major push to have Premiere in the college even though it was installed on all the computers.
I was approached 5 years ago to come up with a curriculum but it fell thru when there was not enough students to start the class.
FCP to date is still the widely used NLE for most low budget projects from where I am.
 
handygeek said:
That has always been a risk - it's a risk no matter the hardware choice. But a track record of regular hardware refreshes was established for a long time. Apple's foot-dragging has left many of us less confident. A refresh now would also allay doubts that Apple is still in the pro market.
Click to expand...

It's been discussed over and over. How did Apple foot drag? Did you want a new Mac Pro with the same CPUs as the old one?
 
kylepro88 said:
The point isn't to be groundbreaking here really. It's a program rewritten from the ground up so features people are used to are being added again as they're able.

This news matters for those who care. No need to be sarcastic and mock.
Click to expand...

The dual viewers weren't in the original release because Apple thought them unnecessary, not because they weren't able to include it, much like a lot of the other poor decisions they are now trying to reverse.

I'm mocking the program because while it is frequently defended here as forward-thinking, virtually all of its "new features" in subsequent releases have been decades-old.

Don't you appreciate irony, at least a little?
 
smali said:
No offence but he is right and you are wrong.

See benchmarks -

http://www.barefeats.com/fcpx01.html

MBP is almost as fast as 6 core Mac Pro in most of the benchmarks. Also the iMac even beats the mac pro in half of the benchmarks.

The iMac and MBP cost less than half the price of that mac pro over here.

Mac Pros aren't needed anymore.
Click to expand...

Tell me how you install a RED Rocket PCIE2 card in a Macbook Pro for real time editing from Red cameras?
 
NY Guitarist said:
I think that kind of bandwidth would require TB with optical connectivity right?
Click to expand...
Ive no idea. My experience is that we almost bought a TB enclosure only to find out that it only ran 4x speed. We need it 8x and higher.

----------
chubad said:
Tell me how you install a RED Rocket PCIE2 card in a Macbook Pro for real time editing from Red cameras?
Click to expand...
Its been done using an HBA into a PCI unit but its costly. The one mfg that was doing is working on a TB option now.

----------
H. Flower said:
The dual viewers weren't in the original release because Apple thought them unnecessary, not because they weren't able to include it, much like a lot of the other poor decisions they are now trying to reverse.

I'm mocking the program because while it is frequently defended here as forward-thinking, virtually all of its "new features" in subsequent releases have been decades-old.

Don't you appreciate irony, at least a little?
Click to expand...
Well your words are old here since we've all seen the crap thats been repeated over and over.
We got it, Apple pooched this release.
Moving forward here so that we can revel in the great news ;)
 
brentsg said:
It's been discussed over and over. How did Apple foot drag? Did you want a new Mac Pro with the same CPUs as the old one?
Click to expand...

I'm not so concerned about the CPU speed as I am tech updates: USB 3 and Thunderbolt come directly to mind. And I mentioned in the same thread they could be working more aggressively with Nvidia to get more product parity for GPU offerings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back