It’s like having an old friend back. After years of editing with Final Cut Pro and trying my best to really like it, I decided to buy the latest and greatest version of Media Composer 3.0 for the MAC. Voila, one feature film and three shorts later (both offlined using DV) and I love it; absolutely love it like one of my own. I’ve used Avid since Film Composer version 7, so we go back a long way.

No longer do I need to export footage into another application, such as Motion, to do things like fluid Motion, or decent animated masks, or decent motion tracking. No longer do I need to worry about making sure every setting is correct before I start. In FCP ‘easy setup’ should really be called ‘easy-ish setup – but I’d still check anyway’

Here’s the thing. I’m a storyteller not a technician. I know the basics. I don’t want to have to sit down for thirty minutes going through nearly every setting before I even begin. At home FCP is very useable. But in a facility, well it just scares me.

It’s a bit like using some else’s bedroom for a week. On the surface everything looks the same, the bed, the door, the windows, but underneath the bed there could be a nasty surprise waiting to happen.

Sadly, this is a world I may have to return to very shortly. I have a big dilemma afoot, and it is with this decision that I can now see the reason why FCP has grabbed such a large chunk of the market and why Avid, I feel, still has work to be done.

I plan to set up a facility of my own, just a simple affair with room for one suite and a coffee pot. I know it makes complete sense to go with Avid. I really want to. Really, really want to. But two things are stopping me, Blackmagic and AJA.

Most of you will know where this is going. But just hang in there for a second. For clarity here is the difference: BLACKMAGIC EXTREME HD - £590 or AVID MOJO DX (as an upgrade from MC3.0) £5500

Not only can I have a decent HD card in the Blackmagic (I have experience of this card), but I could also throw myself a decent deck and monitor speakers into the mix.

Is there really that much difference in the physical components that warrants such a void in price? I know the MOJO DX comes in a box with a few lights, but please, are we paying for a badge here?

Don’t make me go back, please. Give me a middle ground that isn’t Mojo SDI, that as far as I’m aware, would not even work with my system as it stands and still offers less than the comparatively priced Blackmagic and AJA.

So in my mind I’m thinking the unthinkable. FCP and BLACKMAGIC = more money to spend on other essential bits, including the coffee pot. I’m no longer just an editor; I am also now a facilities manger. I need to get up and running. I need to start making money. The difference in cost for my little start-up is too much to bear.

Once again I’ll have to say goodbye to my dear friend the Avid, and only invite them back for DV/HDV/DVCPRO projects. I know they’re good for that. For now though, I’ll invite back a friend, who isn’t really a good friend but instead just someone who will get the job done, in some way or other, and well, maybe they even take longer than an hour for lunch. Welcome back FCP.

Until then, I will have to start saving up for the Mojo DX, even though inside I will still be angry at such a high cost. I’ll look at it from time to time on the web in the hope that Avid did indeed listen. A desperate hope that they heard my plea for realistic competitive pricing.

If you're looking to start your own business, expect to spend (even borrow) money to get set up so you can make money.  If you're faster on an Avid, you'll save money simply by using Avid.  If you really want to save time, forget the Mojo DX and budget for the Nitris DX--rather then get to the end of an HD program and having to hit render and walking away while it crunches the entire program, render a few effects and hit play while it drops to tape.  The Nitris is blazingly fast.

For decks, rent only when you need them--buy only when the cost is easily justified, otherwise you'll spend thousands for a piece of equipment that sits doing nothing for most of the day.  Before you start your venture, make a business plan that includes the purchase of a Nitris or Mojo DX and figure out how much you'll need to bill to pay your bills and still eat (even if you're eating Ramen).  If you can't swing that, make another plan with FCP and Kona or Blackmagic--make it an honest comparison based on how fast you are on one system versus another, and the anticipated render time of each system.  If you simply cannot cover the cost of an Avid, go with FCP.  Otherwise, apply for a small business loan to get started and pay it off as fast as you can.  Remember, edit suites used to cost millions--now it's 20K and you're ready to cut HD with terrabytes of storage on an 8-core CPU.  A 20K loan isn't that much to start a business, especially if you have work lined up (or client's who love to work with you) and you're billing $100+/hour.

Good luck with the new venture!  A close friend of mine just went out on his own and so far--he's loving every second of it.

Michael.

My humble opinion: if you are starting your own studio, choose the gear that you love. You might pay extra for it, and you will enjoy your work more.

And while you're at it, forget the Mojo DX, go Nitris DX. You'll be much more flexible. Or, if you want to settle for offline, get a Mojo (used) or Mojo SDI (new or used), and save some money for now.

My own strategy has always been to invest in the gear I absolutely need, then add stuff whenever you need it. Rent whatever you don't use enough to justify purchase.

The Mojo DX is overpriced... the Nitris DX is worth every damn dime and then some.  Don't even pretend to compare some MXO or Aja card to it.  It's solid, reliable and frankly the best breakout box I've ever worked with.  You get what you pay for IMHO.

Todd Sanderson:

the Nitris DX is worth every damn dime and then some.  Don't even pretend to compare some MXO or Aja card to it.  It's solid, reliable and frankly the best breakout box I've ever worked with.  You get what you pay for IMHO.

I totally agree, my company had a FCP room along with our 2 Avids. Nothing but problems working in FCP. We almost went all FCP due to the issues with the Adrenalines. When the DX line came out, we purchased 2 Nitris DX systems and it has been the most stable box since the Meridians, well worth the extra money.

Todd Sanderson:

The Mojo DX is overpriced... the Nitris DX is worth every damn dime and then some.  Don't even pretend to compare some MXO or Aja card to it.  It's solid, reliable and frankly the best breakout box I've ever worked with.  You get what you pay for IMHO.

So pretty much everyone thinks mojo dx is overpriced, even moderators... And this kind of comments have been on the forums even before avid actually released the boxes, just based on the specs. Sooner or later reseller's are going to offer a real discount, like it always ends up happening for avid products that don't sell.

One important detail is that mojo dx can work on a laptop, nitris can't. You need a laptop express card that comes as an option for almost 500$ more, I guess for 7500$ the mojo could at least come with both cards... But who cares spending 500 more at that point...

Everything is about perception. And the common perception is that Nitris DX is overprices. But i the figures talk another language.

MC Mojo DX costs €7700 incl. MC. Mojo DX costs therefore €5800.
MC Ntris DX costs €11500 incl. MC. Nitris DX costs therefore €9600.

What give you the extra €3800?
One hardware DNxHD codex.
Analog input and output.
Some more Audio i/o.
LTC
and two SDI, one SD and one HD, not a shared one.
(I do not know, but I will not be surprised if Nitris DX and Mojo DX is based on the same motherboard there Nitris has some plug-in cards lead to it with the hardware codec and the analog output).

In a Business You got these options. 3 MC Nitris DX or 1 MC Nitris DX and 3 MC Mojo DX (or 1 MC Nitris DX, 2 MC Mojo DX and ½ ProTools HD). In a small studio You got 1 MC Mojo DX and close to 1 HD professional monitor, for the same price as 1 MC Nitris DX.

In a world there more and more is tapeless and filebased, most of the additional features in Nitris DX is unnecessary. The DNxHD hardware codec is most useful if You use lots of HDCAM, or non-standard HD there You can get uncompressed output form the feeder.

At the end, we have MC Mojo DX with a computer for €13000 or on the other side FCP with Black Magic for €7500. MC with Mojo SDI and a computer will cost €9600 and with the old Mojo (now called Mojo DNA) it will be € 8800. Only You can descide it the extra money, and hopfully more problem free editing, is worth the price.

Post script.

Blackmagic broadcastconverter will cost You less than €800. Use it with MC Mojo DX and You got most of the capabilities of MC Nitris DX (mostly no hardware DNxHD codec) for a price of €8500 compare to MC Nitris DX price of €11500.

Also You can use Mojo DX with HP xw4600 or Dell T3400 compare to the mini requierment of Nitris of HP xw8600 or Dell  T5400. You can save another €2000 to €3000 on Mojo with this configuration. And ofcourse, You get less realtime capabilities but maybe You can live with that.

I'm tending to side with the original poster here.  When you compare the BMD hardware to Avid hardware, does it really make sense to spend ten thousand dollars more for comparible i/o? 

MC systems won't do uncompressed 4:4:4 HD.  FCP+BMD will.  You need Avid DS for 4:4:4.  BMD Multibridge even does 2K.  BMD does effects acceleration, Nitris DX doesn't.  Or does it?  Avid's own web site contradicts itself on that subject.

So, I may have to render a little more with FCP.  How much rendering would I need to do to eat up ten thousand dollars of downtime?  And let's face it, once you've color corrected in MC, if you want bullet-proof smooth playback to tape, you should render your whole sequence there too.  So, tell me again how FCP pales in this regard.  On an 8-core MacPro, rendering is so fast, I barely have time to refill my coffee.  How is that a downside?

Avid clearly excels in shared environments with multiple users.  But, for one person shops or home edit suites, the frightening reports of working with FCP seem overwrought.  FCP even does many things better than MC, like practically everything about audio, for example, and the things you can do while the sequence is playing.

I've been trying to justify buying a Nitris DX for my home suite, but I'm having doubts.  I'm trying to see how the Nitris DX is worth four times a Multibridge Pro. 

As far as working what I'm comfortable with... the more I use FCP, the better I get at it, and the more I get used to it's quirks.  In less than ten thousand bucks worth of billing time, I'll be as proficient on FCP as I am on Avids.  I have not found FCP to be unstable.  I don't consider the matte, tracking, paint or keying tools selling points in Avid or FCP.  I do all that in After Effects, which does all those far better, easier and faster, and FCP doesn't freak out when you try to run AE simultaneously.  Color correction on MC is weak, and having Color with FCP is a mighty strong selling point in it's favor.

The Mojo DX should be $1000, and the Nitris DX should be no more than $5000.  If BMD can make a comparible box available for $3000, how do you who've chosen Avid justify that?

 I hate this writings "Avid lower Your price or I buy a cheaper solution".

But I must change some of your statements.

1. FCP + BMD multibridge will cost $11 000 and MC with Mojo will cost $17 000, i difference of $6 000, not tens of tousands.

2. MC can handle uncompressed HD and SD. Uncompressed is the easiest thing to do for an NLE, and requiers not much computer power. But You have to add at least $5 000 for harddisks which can deliver more than one stream uncompressed HD.

3. Dom Q. explaines what Mojo DX and NItris DX does in this thread. As I understand BMD's web site, they only does down converiting, no raster changes. Avid will therefore have more real time effects with mixed sequenzes. (I agree Avid is not very clear on this thing).

4. BMD takes $1500 for a box which can do less than Mojo DX and You think Avid will sell it cheaper?

5. I agree, it would be nice if Avid could deliver one cheap i/o solotion for HD editing, which does not do anything more than input and output uncompressed video.

But if You can not justyfi an investment in Avid MC, You can not. But I do not understand why you are using FCP then You use After Effects in most of Your work. I would prefere Premiere Pro in this situation. The close and nice connections between AE and APP is the best in the business.

1.  Where do you get those numbers that FCP+BMD is $11,000?  Not by a long shot.  The BMD Multibridge Eclipse, which is very similar to the Nitris DX, is $2800.  Let's take the software and MacPro out of the equation.  That's in your favor, because the software for MC is 2x the cost of FCS.

2. MC cannot do uncompressed 10-bit HD RGB 4:4:4.  Only the Avid DS can do that.  And the much cheaper AJA and BMD interfaces can do it.  The BMDs can even do 2K.

3. It remains to be seen what the Nitris DX can do.  I've been trying to get a straight answer on that, and failing miserably.  I'd love to see a comparison between the real-time capabilities of DX and BMD systems.

4. The BMD Multibridge Pro ($1300) does FAR MORE i/o than the Mojo DX ($7500).  It has full analog and SDI and HD-SDI I/O + support for RT Extreme effects in FCP.

5.  No disagreement on the point that Avid should be cheaper.  However, I've used PP, and it pales to both MC and FCP, IMO.  I use it for building DVDs, because it's great for that, and works swell with Encore.  Yes, PP has nice integration with AE, but PP is such an inferior NLE, I can't imagine using it on large projects.  With Automatic Duck, the integration between MC and FCP with AE is good enough.  It's even better with FCP than it is with MC.  After you render from AE, if you use the same output file name, your changes automatically show up in your FCP sequence.  In Avid, you have to Batch Import your renders to get them to show up on your Sequences.  And as I've been discussing with BlkDog in another thread, AE and FCP can share i/o and monitoring hardware more reliably than Avids and AE can.

 3. You may read the sources. Media Composer support uncompressed 10bit HD.

Thanks for your wise words Butcher and Job ter Burg.

I guess it boils down to this; I really want to use Avid. I have used others, such as Lightworks, Premiere, Final Cut Pro and really the Avid is friendlier to me, regardless of technical capabilities.

I just feel that Avid maybe missing a trick here. Smaller production companies (including mine) are increasingly setting up their own in-house facilities because it's so much cheaper to do so now,  and gives a level of control that they we never had when farming edits out to facilities. But when it comes to buying a suite, the costs and technical capabilities of and Avid system compared to a 'fully-loaded' FCP set-up are well and truly stacked against Avid.

I think this 'lower end' market is potentially crucial to Avid. It's where new blood will develop their talents. It's where the stability and reliability of Avid can really shine. This is where they should be slowly building a solid base of users, and they can only do this with great hardware competitively priced.

So, the heart or the pocket?

I'll let you know.

K.

The thing that Avid is really missing, more than anything is, even if you assume that their hardware is superior (NOT), it only works with Avid software! The other solutions work with other software not just Final Cut!
Furthermore Avid only advantage happens if you capture from tape and use the DNXhd codec. It doesn't help much at all if you aren't using the DNXHD codec. The world is moving away from that work flow. Computers and Graphics prcessors are getting faster. File based formats are taking over. What does Avid do for you there unless you transcode? All we need is a good quality monitoring solution at a decent price. Avid doesn't offer it.

brainburst:

It doesn't help much at all if you aren't using the DNXHD codec. The world is moving away from that work flow.

Then why did Apple create/release ProRes?  Capturing and working in DNxHD removes much of the overhead required for HD editing, but doesn't (significantly) sacrifice quality.  The Olympics, last I heard, were produced in DNxHD120.  You think they could produce what they did, at the speed they had to produce it, if they weren't all working in a lightweight, visually beautiful codec that cuts like a hot knife through butter?

Avid's hardware (NitrisDX) is better than any hardware I've seen for FCP, and the fact that it works only for Avid is hardly a drawback, in my opinion.  If something goes wrong with it, I call Avid and it's their problem.  If something goes wrong with your Kona card, they may point to Apple. Call Apple, they point to Kona.  Who's problem is it really?  Well, have fun fighting to figure it out.  With Avid, you get an ingest to output solution that is guaranteed to work, and if it doesn't they take responsibility because it's all their hardware/software.  That's peace of mind, and even in a small shop (especially in a small shop!) downtime costs real money.  I'd rather have one vendor to contact concerning my bread and butter machine than 2 or 3 or 4.

However, for shops that are all file-based, a good HD monitoring solution would be great, for a reasonable price.

Michael.