New Audio iApp?

[FlamDrag]

There are quite a few differences b/w FCP and FCE. I love FCE and it's a great product for me - I don't often need the extra features of FCP. But there are a lot of features in FCP that are not in FCE.

My point is that Soundtrack, as it stands today, is very basic in what it does. Members of this forum frequently post about "Soundtrack Express" and how wonderful such a program would be. Yet they never venture a guess as to what in the heck it would do! Many of these people I suspect have never used Soundtrack. As far as I'm concerned it IS already an iApp. I'll shout the praises of Soundtrack from the rooftops all day, but I fail to see how it could be any more limited in its feature set.

If any audio iApp came from Apple, my guess is that it would be something along the lines of SoundStudio from FeltTip Software, not something resembling Soundtrack.

But the rumor mentions ~3GB of audio clips? I don't know what to think about that.

 

[walliver]

I'm not familiar with SoundTrack (I don't have $300 to spend right now), but I suspect Apple may be trying to use the ScreenBlast model; i.e., release a free or inexpensive looping application similar to Screenblast ACID, include a starter set of loops, and then make loops available for download on .mac or iTune Music Store.

 

[FlamDrag]

Agreed, the only way that it could be turned into an iApp would be to strip the loops out and have them as add-on purchases later.

However, here's the problem I see with such a model. Unless you are going to sell loops in fairly large packages (that is numbers of loops), it's unwise to allow previews of individual tracks as it would be far too easy to simply record while previewing and import the loop. However, this is not out of the realm of possibility.

I'm not trying to simply shoot down ideas or say that everything is impossible. I would just like to hear how those who think it's possible to make Soundtrack an iApp propose to do it.

Walliver - you seem to at least be familiar with what Soundtrack does. That is a contrast to many who post on the subject.

 

[AlanAudio]

The nature of loops is such that a 30 second preview probably gets you the whole loop, so it's not practical to sell them with things as they currently are.

One obvious way around that problem is to reduce the quality of the preview, but there are other possibilities.

They could either be of low bit-rate, have noise added, have an audible watermark, or maybe, could have some form of DRM so that they can't be used or copied until they have have been unlocked by being paid for.

Of all those possibilities, I would imagine that Apple would most like the DRM model.

 

[VectorWarrior]

I can't really see the point of Apple releasing a cut down version of soundtrack. As others have said compared to other sound programs it has limited capabilites anyway so an even further reduced feature set would be pretty pointless. It wont be usefull to any professional sound people or musicians and consumers aren't exactly going to be switching in their droves because of this either. As a sound designer myself i was hoping that they were going to release a more pro-spec product and that was the impression that i've got from a number of rumours floating round the net at the moment.

 

[aldo]

Wow, this sounds exciting.

I'm thinking that a soundtrack-type app would be best. Just rename it and get rid of FCP integration, reduce the number of tracks and loops and reduce pro-level features.

Also, I was thinking a cool iTunes integration competition here... you make your music with iWrite and you can win a contract to get your music published on the itunes music store with promotion paid for.

They could also sell extra loop 'packs' or something.. but I think an eJay style music composition tool (drag and drop stuff in) would be very popular.

 

[AlanAudio]

Originally posted by VectorWarrior
I can't really see the point of Apple releasing a cut down version of soundtrack. As others have said compared to other sound programs it has limited capabilites ........

But that is exactly the point.

If it is to be an iApp, the people using it may well not have any ability to play a keyboard. Therefore they need the means to create music without any conventional playing skills.

Of the various possibilities, a variant of SoundTrack does seem to be the solution that would allow that type of user to get impressive results.

A skilled musician wouldn't be impressed with that sort of iApp. A skilled VT editor wouldn't be impressed with iMovie either, but that didn't stop it being a popular application.

 

[Audacity Works]

Hey guys, long-time reader, first-time poster...

Someone mentioned the Logic Audio Big Box earlier for $239. It's utterly fantastic for the money, especially since several other stores are selling it for $199.

I'm not quite sure what Apple has up their sleeves, but I'll tell you what they need: WaveBurner Pro for OSX.

WaveBurner Pro was an absolutely brilliant CD authoring app for OS9 made by Emagic. It was absolutlely dead easy to use-- Open the thing up, drag your audio files (.WAV, AIFF, SDII) into a box in the order you want them to appear on the CD, and that's it. The odd-numbered tracks take up the top half of the screen and the even tracks the bottom. If you want two songs to fade into each other, simply drag the latter waveform to the left-- WBPro draws your crossfades for you. If you want a faster fade out, drag the crossfade line accordingly.

Bootleg a concert and want to throw in track IDs? Simply open the file in WBPro and drag track ID flags onto the waveform. Want to change the volume of one song? Drag the fade line down. Wanna' shorten the intro or end of a song? Wanna' chop out that annoying guitar solo? Cake. Applying mastering plugins like multiband compression, EQ, and limiting to either individual songs or the entire CD is a snap as well.

Bought WBPro for my sister and she was making mix CDs within five minutes. Jam, Peak, Spark, and iTunes are all clunky amateurish piles of rat feces in comparison when it comes to CD burning.

The sad part is that so few people were aware of WBPro, and it only cost $199. Read more about it here. With luck, we'll know more about upcoming OSX support at the NAMM show (music gear expo) in late January.

Or... If Apple made a "Pro" version of iTunes based on WaveBurner Pro's code and marketed it well (i.e. to Joe Schmo Hipster and not Mr. Recording Engineer), that'd attract legions of customers alone. Its ease-of-use factor is certainly already Apple-like.

As for this new high-end multitrack app nonsense, man, Apple's really barking up the wrong tree if it's true. Rumors claim they want to take on Digidesign's professional TDM ProTools systems (as opposed to their ProTools LE systems), which ain't gonna be a pretty battle. As it stands, ProTools is used on close to 90% of every major-label release (if not as a recorder or mixer, as an editor), and its ubiquity is steadfast, at least for the next five years. Steinberg's Nuendo hasn't made so much as a dent, and Logic, though often used by professionals in conjunction with ProTools, isn't the grand usurper Apple thought it could be. At least not yet.

If Jobs and Co. bundled a free 24-track recording app that included some Emagic plugins and AIFF-to-AAC conversion, it'd be a huge hit. They could offer an inexpensive ($100?) 16-bit USB audio interface with instrument input, proper mic preamp, headphone out, MIDI, and zero-latency monitoring. It'd send a huge message to those thinking of getting into recording but aren't quite sure which platform to pursue. And "iTracks" is actually a pretty cool name.

While we're at it, Apple (or one of their development partners) really needs to make some sort of usable stereo recording peripheral for the iPod. That mono Belkin mic is a joke. Have it attach to the dock connector if necessary-- as long as it's minidisc-quality or better.

 

[JohnGillilan]

Originally posted by Audacity Works
Or... If Apple made a "Pro" version of iTunes based on WaveBurner Pro's code and marketed it well (i.e. to Joe Schmo Hipster and not Mr. Recording Engineer), that'd attract legions of customers alone. Its ease-of-use factor is certainly already Apple-like.

When Steve announced iTunes for Windows back in October, he definitely made a point of knocking MusicMatch and other players that offered a Pro version containing more features. He made it very clear that iTunes was the best, most notably because all of its features are free. (I am assuming you meant that iTunes "Pro" would cost money) (I realize QuickTime Pro shoots this down in a sense, however QT Pro is irrelevant/does not appeal to most Mac users; iTunesPro would appeal to many, however I think it could have a potential backlash among loyal users who have gotten used to the current price of iTunes $0.00)

As for this new high-end multitrack app nonsense, man, Apple's really barking up the wrong tree if it's true. Rumors claim they want to take on Digidesign's professional TDM ProTools systems (as opposed to their ProTools LE systems), which ain't gonna be a pretty battle. As it stands, ProTools is used on close to 90% of every major-label release (if not as a recorder or mixer, as an editor), and its ubiquity is steadfast, at least for the next five years. Steinberg's Nuendo hasn't made so much as a dent, and Logic, though often used by professionals in conjunction with ProTools, isn't the grand usurper Apple thought it could be. At least not yet.

I agree completely. Many people seem to think that Logic is a serious threat to ProTools. At this point in time, it is naive to believe this. Despite FCP's recent successes over Avid's video offerings, Digidesign CONTROLS the pro-audio market when it comes to market share. At the AES convention (Audio Engineering Society) in New York several months ago, Digidesign's booth was not only the busiest, but it took up half the convention hall. Even if Apple realeases a great new "pro" product, users will be reluctant to embrace it (at least in the short run) becuase compatibility is EVERYTHING. If virtually every studio in the world uses ProTools, why would you support something else??

While we're at it, Apple (or one of their development partners) really needs to make some sort of usable stereo recording peripheral for the iPod. That mono Belkin mic is a joke. Have it attach to the dock connector if necessary-- as long as it's minidisc-quality or better.

Damn straight!

 

[FlamDrag]

I'm against any incarnation of iTunes Pro - at least by that moniker.

Marketing is my primary concern with such a product. While it may make sense on paper to say "if you need X, Y or Z, simply upgrade to iTunes Pro." The problem with this model, in that market space, is that others may offer X, Y and Z in a free version. IMHO, this could undermine Apple's strategy.

The flip side is that I don't think that iTunes has to do everything under the sun. Nor do I have any problems with Apple releasing an iTunes-like product with a richer feature set. However, I do think that to avoid confusion, it should be named something else entirely.

Additionally, the name "iTunes Pro" is an oxymoron by Apple's nomenclature standards.

-

In related topics, one large difference b/w FCP and FCE is actually Soundtrack. FCP includes Soundtrack while FCE does not.

-

After much deliberation, I COULD conceive of an iTrack application to pair with iMovie and iDVD.

The differences b/w iTrack and Soundtrack:

1. Only 2 or 4 tracks with which to mix.

2. Included loops are already mixed down into categories. That is to say, there might be two or three "Latin Percussion" loops in iTrack vs. loops for Bongos, Congas, Timbales, Claves etc in Soundtrack.

These loops would come in 5 categories:
- Percussion
- Horns
- Strings
- Keyboards (yes I know they're percussion)
- Voice

3. No pitch control

4. Limited (if any) tempo control.

5. Limited control of track volume...
- Softer
- Louder
- Crescendo
- Decrescendo

6. Exports only to iMovie / iDVD

 

[nuckinfutz]

I agree completely. Many people seem to think that Logic is a serious threat to ProTools. At this point in time, it is naive to believe this. Despite FCP's recent successes over Avid's video offerings, Digidesign CONTROLS the pro-audio market when it comes to market share. At the AES convention (Audio Engineering Society) in New York several months ago, Digidesign's booth was not only the busiest, but it took up half the convention hall. Even if Apple realeases a great new "pro" product, users will be reluctant to embrace it (at least in the short run) becuase compatibility is EVERYTHING. If virtually every studio in the world uses ProTools, why would you support something else??

Money....Money.....Money. Digidesign is but a gnat on Avids butt by comparison. While Digi enjoys ubiquity in the Pro Audio DAW arena the overall market is small and a new paradigm is slowly being developed. The battle lines have been drawn for sometime now. This battle is Native versus DSP based.

Apple most likely knows that if they enterer the Native DAW market it will take years they can hope to make a dent in Digis reign. But it will happen. Moores law is good for at least another 10 years which means computers will be 100x faster in 2014. Software programming is making equal strides.

In the end it comes down to Quality and Price. It took FCP 3 to 4 version before it finally was ready for Pros. This DAW will be no different. By version 3 it should be mature and gaining in marketshare. I don't care who you are if you can accomplish the same work on a cheaper system then that saved money goes right back to your pocket.

You want a Blueprint just look at FCP versus Avid. Apple is cleaning up on the low to mid level systems. FCP/Aja IO/Declink and more products allow you to edit HiDef video for less than $10k. Fast forward to the near future when that same $10 allows you to Record/Edit Hidef, add surround sound and burn HiDef discs. That's the future that Apple sees. A workflow that allows a person to create Audio/Vide that can rival what a Major Studio can do. If you are into these markets your should be besides yourself with glee...this is unprecendented power coming to you at a breakneak pace.

 

[neutrino23]

How about a tie-in with iTMS so you could purchase royalty free music for slide shows, iMovie, FCE, etc.? Now you can use these clips but for the casual author it is daunting to search this stuff out and figure out licensing and such.

If not royalty free music I suspect we'll see Apple see selling more kinds of digital content on-line now that they have figured out how to do it. Also, as they seem to know how to do this content provides may be more willing to cooperate with them.

Carpe diem.

 

[Audacity Works]

Originally posted by FlamDrag I'm against any incarnation of iTunes Pro - at least by that moniker.

Fine, call it something else. WaveBurner Pro 3.0, perhaps?

Soundtrack (like ACID on the PC) is not compositional software. It's a fun yet elegant tool to layer a bunch of loops so kids can mistaken say "Hey, check out the song I wrote!" Layering four loops on top of one another is not writing a song-- It's nothing like utilizing proper compositional software like Logic or Digital Performer. iTracks needs to be laid out like Cool Edit Pro or Deck-- Something really simple. Maybe it could include one or two loop tracks from Soundtrack, but it should first and foremost be a multitrack recorder/editor. If Apple charges anything for it, it better be less than $100, because Logic Audio can be had for $199 with a slew of softsynths and plugins.

Digi's going nowhere. Half of my friends run major studios in LA, and they must run ProTools to stay competitive. I'm all for the little guy (assuming we can agree that Apple'd be the "little guy" in this equation), but when Digidesign enjoys a Microsoft-like monopoly, things ain't gonna change, not for a very long time.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Digi's going nowhere. Half of my friends run major studios in LA, and they must run ProTools to stay competitive. I'm all for the little guy (assuming we can agree that Apple'd be the "little guy" in this equation), but when Digidesign enjoys a Microsoft-like monopoly, things ain't gonna change, not for a very long time.

I must admit Audacity you have my interest peaked with your fondness for Wave Burner Pro. I had no idea the program was held in high esteem. Apple would do well to update it and even integrate it's core CD burning tech into apps that require CD burning.

Nothing is going to beat ProTools overnight. It's going to take years of software maturation and features. Apple will have to stay up on the task in order to be effective. Ahhhhh this is going to be fun to watch.

 

[FlamDrag]

Audacity - I did not mean to infer that anyone had actually suggest iTunesPro as a name, although my post does read that way. I was merely thinking out loud on the name.

Hopefully, kids who use Soundtrack or any possible variant will say... "Check out this song I looped together." or "made" or "mixed". I don't know enough about the audio industry - hense I'm staying out of the ProTools discussion - to know the proper term.

The name iTrack makes more sense to me as a Soundtrack like application, more than it makes sense as an editing application. However, it wouldn't be terrible if they went with it for editing.

IF Apple debuts an audio iApp, my guess is that it would be Soundtrack-like for the simple ease-of-use factor. Sound editing can be a bit complex for the basic user.

Heck, maybe it will do both. That is, if any application by any name exists.

This is one of the healthier discussions I've read in a long time on this forum.

 

[Wash!!]

may be a crosfade feature for the ipod

I will love if my ipod can crossfade between songs when it plays as it does in itunes that will set up appart and better than any other player up there.

for example this last new year's party I had to use my brother's g4 ibook and itunes to play all the music for the party I set up the crossfade to 12 sec and let play all night it was great but a little cumberson, I would use my 15Gig ipod but it does not has the crossfade as some of the tracks I used were mix with each other. I hope Apple would add this the the ipod.

Cheers

 

[JSRockit]

Originally posted by ExoticFish
soundtrack is just a multitrack, if apple were to come out with an audio app i would think it would be some sort of editor like peak or logic, just limited in ability. (although i'm hoping for a cheaper soundtrack cause i just bought peak le!)

It is not exactly a multitracker...it is a loop sequencer.

 

[Fred Mertz]

New iApp is called Garage Band. Music creation tool. included in $99 upgrade to iLife. New minipod credit card size, 10,000 songs $249. More Later.

 

[Squire]

Originally posted by Fred Mertz
New iApp is called Garage Band. Music creation tool. included in $99 upgrade to iLife. New minipod credit card size, 10,000 songs $249. More Later.

Thanks, Fred. I like the Garage Band thing. I'll take one. As for the new mini iPod, isn't it the 40 GB model that holds 10,000 songs?

Squire

 

[mariner77]

16 bit 44.1 kHz is not enough.

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
I think the new iApp will be iMusic.

This will be a simple app that allows for 4 track 16/44.1k...

It's a good idea for Apple to develop an audio application such as this, but 16 bit / 44.1 kHz audio just won't cut it anymore. My $400 M-Audio FW410 can record at 24 bit / 96 kHz and the only application under $100 that handle this mode is Sound Studio. If Apple wants me to pay for an audio application, it better let record at something higher than 16 bit / 44.1 kHz.

It's shocking to me that Quicktime can only handle 24 bit / 65.535 kHz audio, how can that be???!!!

 

[AlanAudio]

Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is not enough.

Originally posted by mariner77
It's a good idea for Apple to develop an audio application such as this, but 16 bit / 44.1 kHz audio just won't cut it anymore.........

You are putting pro expectations onto a low-end iApp.

The original response specifically mentioned the limited needs of an iApp and 16b / 44K is entirely appropriate for most consumer's needs.

Obvioulsy pro's will have different requirements, but they won't be using an iApp.

 

[JSRockit]

Re: Re: 16 bit 44.1 kHz is not enough.

Originally posted by AlanAudio
You are putting pro expectations onto a low-end iApp.

I agree. I am sure you already have a DAW and don't need an iApp from Apple.

 

[Audacity Works]

Indeed, most pros don't even record at 96k! I'm 24-bit/44.1k right now and see no reason to ever go higher. Higher sampling rates are industry hype IMO.

 

[JSRockit]

Originally posted by Audacity Works
Indeed, most pros don't even record at 96k! I'm 24-bit/44.1k right now and see no reason to ever go higher. Higher sampling rates are industry hype IMO.

That is the rate I use as well...and until we are using something other than CDs and MP3s to distribute our music on, then this is fine. Also, I believe our speakers would have to change to be able to hear 96k...but my understanding of this type of stuff is minimal to none.