Yes this is a four year old thread, and there are still some features that "grey" out when you try to use them. I'll try to answer what I can right now. For those trying to cut up a long mix into smaller sections, markers are a great way to do it, but you're leaving out a step. Usually you delete the audio around a marker, then Save As a new session, the marker isn't supposed to cut each track only the master output tracks when you're in the multitrack editor. Use markers, please, but place cut marks on all the tracks, there is a tool for this in the tools palette, where you see the blade tool, there is a variation of the tool to cut all tracks at the chosen point. You can then either delete everything around the slicing and save as, or you can select each clip you sliced and save it as a new clip. It's faster to save a new session, as it will associate with the same full audio files, allowing you to add some handles to it for crossfade or fade\in\out, and it won't take up new space. This is also done in pro tools or almost any other DAW I've ever worked with, though some allow you to set up scene marks and dump each scene to a new mix session. For those who wish to mix and then cut up your markers, you can simply mixdown the session, the markers will go with it. Once done, you can export the markers to a CSV to protect them and move them to other apps by hand. The kicker is that you'll still have to match the timecode formats between apps or prepare to do a lot more math. Sometimes I just drop a live show audio out to a stereo file, then cut it up, naming the markers, then I bring those markers into my multitrack. Sometimes I miss a name for a piece, so I have to add it later. The CSV file feature is awesome for correcting this quickly across the session and stereo mixdown. Whatever your case, you can only split the audio of the markers apart AFTER you have a working mixed file, otherwise it will not work. Audition is for basic stereo or 5.1 WAV file mixing, and while you may be able to set up a multitrack that matches that profile exactly, you will only be able to cut the audio up after you mix it down. One way to ensure this works is to set it up to pour the exact number of inputs to match the output print into right and left respective, panning them full, or into single channels of the 5.1 output mix, then rip them apart into separate files and place them into a new session after you mix it down the first time. Easier to do with 2 inputs at a time, not so easy with 5 or even 6. In other words, your best bet is to cut it up and save as a new session by deleting the excess around each marker by ripple delete. Using a SAVE AS will allow you to keep the original session, and the original audio files, but you will be mixing only a small clip that you can stretch non-destructively. This works so much better. CSV export of markers is like an afterthought. You do it to protect your file data, and to send it to others who will work with it. You'll still have to match your timecode data to their environment. I drop several CSV files for this purpose. I can mix video of different frame rates easily enough by conforming one to another without worrying about sound files not conforming. I can even save mixes of the sound that conform to the different timecodes so mixing them works out okay. I can also provide other editors with the files and they can run their own mix. The CSV drop is just a tool in the box, but the primary capability to chop audio files in a multitrack isn't in any software I've used. Marking an audio file is in some software, and it allows you to process markers from other software, but don't rely on that feature to be cross platform (it won't work from one software set to another). Some people have developed a software for fixing that, but you still have a few bugs holding them back, and timecoding is always an issue when the timecodes don't match. Greying out options that are not functional isn't just an adobe feature. It's built into the OS you're on... ...That's right, this little menu function is part of the menu standard, allowing programmers to include all options for a menu but change the options available for particular modes very easily, with a few flags, without the necessity to rebuild the menu options every time something changes, only the availability of each option. It's easier on processing, memory, and coding. In order to make use of the best code for a particular OS, most programmers working for larger software corporations must submit to certain practices, like making menus static lists, with flags that only alter small bands rather than a whole chunk. This ensures that the software will look like all other software and be easier to understand. While I agree that a popup for each tool is useful, adding popups for non-functional tools can cause confusion. Telling people that an option isn't functional is the same as greying it out. It's a simplistic message, but it says you are in the wrong mode for the function fairly blatantly. They also have a large online wiki setup, where you can check on certain functions. There you will find the mode the function works in. If you don't see it in your current mode shown in the wiki and it isn't in a note on the page, the option is unavailable in your current mode. The how and Why are unimportant at that point. All you need to know is that you need to get to the other mode to make a function work. For pros and for amateurs: Audition is for everybody, just like most of the adobe software. It's designed so seasoned pros can work quickly and efficiently. It's also feature rich so guys who make a little money on it can work efficiently without being completely confused. It's designed so that almost anybody can use it, but the pros will understand it. Where do you fall? IF you make money on it, congrats, you make money on it. That doesn't make you "professional" in the eyes of master artists and technologists. Technically, you are professionally mixing, if you do it for a consistent living, but those who've mastered the program and other programs and understand the how and why of different functions, at least at an academic level, will always be "Pros". Even professionals "in the biz" don't rise to that level, but they use the software, then complain that something doesn't work, even though the function is simply non-functional in that particular editing mode. If you complain that your function doesn't work, but others have it working in the same mode, then there is a problem. If you don't know what mode you're in, you're the problem. Start reading. It's easier to track down a software problem when it can be clearly defined, and nearly impossible when the only info people provide is "Software not working". It's sad but people still believe that the most common problem is a bug in the software. THis is true less than %5 of the time. The rest of the time it's user capability. Sure more features would be nice, but go put in a request, don't call it a bug. THere's a big difference. CSV export didn't come to logic pro until version 9. I don't think Pro tools has it even in their new software release. Always remember to try before you buy, and try out every feature (except save) so you know you can do it, or you know you can't. Choose your software accordingly. IF one fits most of your needs, put in a feature request, and follow it up, please. At that point you enter the academic level, discussing the functions at a higher level; congrats, you've mastered the technical side of your craft, and are a PRO. PRO is not the same as professional, but it means you know what you're doing; at least these days there's a distinction. A PRO Artist has also mastered the application of the technicals to such a degree that their output is artistically sound. An Artist may not have the technical side down, but they can still create the artwork. Think of a musician who cannot read music, but can reproduce and even artistically alter any piece they hear, or even create their own works simply by starting with a few played tones and a feeling description; they are an artist, but not a pro, they can be professional, but have no real mastery of their craft. They are limited to their own connection to a piece, rather than understanding it on any deeper level, and alterations aren't as varied, but conform to patterns they've derived themselves; the how and why escapes them, and they often don't want to know.
... View more