Au needs way better tutorials

[Anthony380268567qpx]

I'm in college and taking a digital media class which is required for my program.  In this course we get a pretty decent intro to the different apps in the cloud.  Part of the learning is that we go through the official Adobe tutorials for the corresponding apps we're learning (Photoshop, Ai, Au etc.)

I noticed that most adobe apps have a tutorials panel (attached image is an example one of the tutorial panels in photoshop) that pops up and accompanies you through step-by-step instructions on how to perform a process.  This panel also shows points of interest and explains rationale.  This was actually pretty helpful in learning and completing assignments.  

Then i got to the Au module in the learning.  I was given a list of tutorials i need to take and immediately upon starting them i noticed that tutorial panel is not there.  Rather, the tutorials consist of a bunch of very very short videos that demo a very short process but does nothing to explain rationale or how to actually do things step-by-step which is definitely bad for the learning process.  I do have the Au textbook (2nd Edition) but is pretty extensive and doesn't really show me what i need to find easily.  

To make matters worse, i tried to chat a specialist with Adobe on this and all they did to help was keep giving me the same link over and over again which just led to the same very poorly planned tutorial, nor were they able to at least help me with finding what i need in the textbook.  This leads me to believe they don't really have anything to help.  So this thread will hopefully find itself on the desk of some Adobe developers so they can develop a better tutorial for Au.  I'm really happy with the tutorials of the other apps, but Au is just, to be frank, hot garbage.  

[SteveG_AudioMasters_]

This is a U2U forum - not something that regularly lands on a developer's desk, I'm afraid. And anyway, it's not up to the developers to create tutorials and manuals; that's the job of a specialist and they are expensive. Which is why, many years ago, Adobe pretty much gave up on creating anything other than basic Audition tutorials - and what you are seeing is, in fact, the result of programmers and developers writing tutorials. They are excellent at their jobs, but tutorial writing isn't one of them. So be careful what you wish for, I'd say...

[Anthony380268567qpx]

I get what you're saying, however, Adobe is one of the worlds most well-known names in digital creation and their other apps have this feature.  So saying that "programmers don't make tutorials" (i'm paraphrasing here obviously) seems like its a moot point. Are you saying that Adobe just doesn't have the budget to add that single feature to this particular tutorial?  

Look i didn't even want to bring this up in a forum, this was the medium that Adobe customer service provided when i made a complaint. I wanted to leave feedback so Adobe can make that feature for this app just like the other Adobe apps that have this feature, not discuss the duties of programmers and developers.  

[Anthony380268567qpx]

I understand your rationale here, however, I'm also a former IT professional for Apple. Having thorough educational apparatus for one product but not another seems half-assed when its coming from one of the worlds leading developers of software like this. Adobe is a household name and they can't teach their own customers how to use their products?

[SteveG_AudioMasters_]

Okay, let me explain a little more... Adobe has teams that are well able to write tutorials about visually-based stuff because that's what they've always been - a visually-based company. And those teams are cost-effective because they can work across multiple products. With Audition, it's the other way around. There is one audio development team, that now has to service multiple products - and they don't write manuals. And last time they called in an outsider to create one, it cost a fortune, and personally I don't think a very good job was made of it. Attempts were made to create a loose-leaf manual, and that fizzled out too. There have been books written by outsiders as well - I had the extreme misfortune of having to edit one of them, and jam-packed full of mistakes it was. (no names, no packdrill).

The other thing (and you probably won't like this much) is that Audition has always been regarded as a 'professional' product, and as such tutorials weren't really regarded as being that neccesary - pros are supposed to know what they are doing, that sort of thing. The idea is that you do a course (as you are), you're taught the basics of audio and what sort of tools there are to use, and how to use them, and then you'll find all the basic stuff in any pro product you pick up. This is still true to an extent, but it does require your college tutors to actually do a bit of work themselves, rather than just sending you off to find a tutorial...

[Anthony380268567qpx]

So your response is to criticize college professors rather than critique and address with higher-ups on Adobe's own ability (financial or otherwise) to provide its customers, student or not, with proper educational tools on how to use their software?  Then you go ahead and say that "its for professionals" to a student who is actually trying to learn how to be a professional?  Something tells me ProTools or even CuBase programmers would give me a more professional response.  

[SteveG_AudioMasters_]

I think you've rather misinterpreted what I actually said, because nowhere did I say that I actually agreed with the perception that it should only be regarded as 'professional' software - it wasn't me that suggested this in the first place. That view came more from Syntrillium staffers than anything else. They published a user guide back then, but there were no step-by-step tutorials. And they didn't write the guide, either - they got David Miles Huber to author it, and that must have cost a fortune.

I used to run radio audio courses, which included Audition instruction. I did not refer people away to tutorials, because back then there were very few of them, and they weren't very good. The idea behind this approach is very simple, and applies across many fields - you teach people the concepts in a generic form, and then they can adapt them to whatever software they come across, generally without any difficulty. And that is what your college tutors should still be doing - it's good, sound educational practice. So I make no apologies for that, I'm afraid.