mixing audio in Logic vs FCP

[Josh Bass]

So I'm working on another animated short film, and I'm wondering if there are significant benefits to mixing/polishing the audio in Apple Logic vs. FCP (I know you can export the FCP audio tracks in the timeline as an OMF that Logic can read, so you keep your timing,etc. intact).

I won't be doing anything real fancy with the sound. . basic EQ, compression, panning. Now, I realize FCP has all these tools, but I was told by someone that they're "rough" compared to something like Logic/Protools. I'm not sure exactly what is meant by that, i.e. are the actual algorithms used in FCP to do compression, EQ, etc. not as good as Logic's, or does he mean the precision of the controls in Logic are superior to what's in FCP? For instance, a compressor has a threshold, ratio, attack, release, knee, and makeup gain (maybe I'm forgetting something). So is there a reason to do this in Logic vs. FCP? An eq will have frequencey, q, level, etc. Won't FCP and Logic both have these?

I would RATHER do it in FCP simply because it's easier to do everything in the fewest number of programs as possible, but wondering if the audio will ultimately suffer for it.

Can anyone provide insight? Thanks.

[Jon Braeley]

Do you have Final Cut Studio? Then you should be using Soundtrack Pro to edit and mix your FCP audio - it is superb for this. I edit in surround sound all in Soundtrack Pro.
I also have Logic and in my opinion it is the wrong tool for editing and mixing soundtracks. It is also a pain to use with a difficult interface.

[Josh Bass]

I do have the FCS2 suite, yes. Logic I bought mainly for mixing/recording music but thought it might do for soundtrack mixing as well.

But what I mean is, why, in this case, STP over FCP if I'm just doing the basic stuff? Do the tools work better?

[Rick Reineke]

I'm on a PC, but I often receive OMF audio post files from FCP users and discuss issues with the editors (and clients) and subsequently peruse the FCP manual. FCP has very basic audio controls and plug-ins.. or processing.. Which may be a good thing if a video editor's audio skills are limited as well. High performance tools in the hands of the unskilled can be counterproductive. It depends on what one wants and if he or she has the skills to attain it.

FWIW: I find importing OMF files from FCP work fine with Nuendo, PTs, Sonar and Vegas (w/EDL convertion).. and that's good! All of the above can have the option to display the picture on a dedicated monitor, which is important IMO. I have '0' experience with STP, though import/extport should be real easy... I would think.

[Josh Bass]

I'm just wondering if there's something specifically inferior (either the quality of the algorithms/processing or the number of controls) with the EQ, compressor, etc. in FCP compared to STP/Logic.

[John Conly]

I think the control/interface you have in Logic makes it a better choice if your comfortable using it - and the control over mastering (if your doing it in real time etc is awesome) I just don't like the interface of FCP audio, couldn't comment on the actual quality of the backends - both being apple should be pretty similar but maybe Logic has better algorithms.. all the best!

[Josh Bass]

One thing that's kind of a bummer is that FCP and logic work almost in opposite ways when it comes to how audio FX/filters are applied. . .FCP ONLY does it at the clip level, where as Logic ONLY works at the track level. So I have to apply an EQ/compressor to an audio track in logic, and put only those clips I want to have said compressor/EQ on that track, where in FCP I apply that compressor/EQ directly to the clips themselves, regardless of what track they're on.