View Single Post
  #9  
Old October 1st, 2007, 11:17 PM
Gary Boggess Gary Boggess is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: North Tampa, Florida
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by geezer View Post
Well, I'm glad things are working for you, but shortly after I posted on this thread above, I started another one that indicated some limitations I was having with Microsound when I wanted to work entirely in 24 bit......You know, I assume, that when you "save as .wav" in Microsound, you are saving as 16 bit, because that is all there was in .wav when the code was written.

I am happy that you are able to use the Direct X software in MTU, because I paid for it and could never get it to work, and received no support for it, despite my long time as a cheeleader and beta tester.

I will say that I was satisfied with all my projects that involved a final, straight 16bit master....The problem arose when I began comparing all my available methods of converting from 24bit to 16, and when I began examining all the available ways to export and import 24 bit files from MTU and back into MTU. The company also never responded to my interest in defining the files in such a way as to use the Broadcast Wave standard for import and export.

Before I began what became a very long and involved comparison of different file dithering methods and different software editing packages, I held MTUs non-dithering math as the pinnacle of converting 24 bits to 16 bit files for CD....and, indeed, it held up really well through a lot of the research process as the standard to which I compared everything else.......In the end, however, I found other methodology (using some very specific dithering inside of very specific software) to be superior in maintaining the depth, color and stereo soundstage of the original 24bit files.

Since I could not use the DirectX function in Microsound and could not readily import and export files to other software, I also felt I had to find new software, if that were indeed possible. I did find some things that were suitable and usable for some parts of my business, but which definitely did not sound as good, at least in their early iteration.....I ended up finding one product (and I'm sure there are plenty of others out there now) which did sound as good, if not better, and which ultimately wound up being even faster to use and more flexible: Wavelab. Once I figured out how to use it, the interface was remarkably similar in some ways to MTU's (even uses some of the same hot keys), and easier to organize.

..As a result, I have a couple of MTU systems (one including the 4 channel converters and I/O, if needed) that have been sitting on the shelf unused for several years. They are available for sale for any dedicated users.....These converters are all only 16bit, though........There are plenty of good quality 24bit converters out there now that should interface fine with the Krystal, but mine are available, too...

direct contact: mudsmith@earthlink.net
Good post! I have Wavelab 4.0, and I agree... it's pretty good... and you've made me look at it again because, I'm wondering... hmmm... you know... I never used it for ANYTHING except importing CD tracks!! !!!!!

What I like THE MOST about ME (MicroEditor) ... is the editorial inferface. Especially when used in the process of film audio post. But it's also a fantastic editor for music. I've tried other systems at other studios and I'm always eager to come home to MicroSound's sheer editorial PEACE and safety. I know I don't feel that way because I'm just used to it. I feel that way because it's just a great way to edit sound... any sound. I see all the bells and whistles on the other systems. But to me, editing and mixing is what ME does best. The effects are best done elsewhere... as I myself, rely on SoundForge for at least 50% of my vocal and special processing when I need to get specific. And for mastering... SoundForge is 100% the workhorse of choice.

Yes... I've found some of the options on MicroSound to be somewhat an obstacle course as compared to other programs. I will admit that I have found the entire 24bit deal a bit frustrating. I tried a few projects that way and as far as I'm concerned... it just isn't worth the trouble it causes. None of my clients want anything in 24 bit. When working on film... I worked 44.1 @16 bit. Why? Because while I'm importing hundreds of sound effects off of Sound Ideas and other libraries I can IMPORT right off the CD discs (via WAVELAB) into a folder, and import into MicroEditor without having to dither/convert Jack **it!

And as far as music. I've made my remarks at the Academy I often speak at. The labels can hardly sell a CD anymore. More and more music is selling to I-pods or free with all the online piracy schemes. So why bother with 24 bit... and then have to worry about dithering errors and degrading conversions to MP3's? I don't.

Firstly, my clientel moan and cry about every charge I write them... and they DO NOT want to pay the $25 I charge to BACKUP their projects to DVD's now. If I were burning 24bit, I have to add another $25 to cover my time burning twice the data... and then there's the time dithering to 16bit so they can have a couple copies to play for their girlfriends. Baloney!! I'm in agreement with Dave Cox... it's like "writing checks our ears can't cash." Yeah... I know... 24bit is better... cleaner... and it's HD. But the consumer will NEVER hear it! I have a $95,000 acoustically designed control room, with mirror image walls, floating walls and RTA flat response... and guess what?... the end user will never hear what I'm producing at 16bit 44.1Khz either!!!!

I'm happy with 16bit @44.1. It's more than 98% of the musicians I've ever worked with need, want or appreciate... and I'm talking about people who 15 years ago, didn't know what Dolby B or C or HXpro was when I asked which they preferred. I'd always get a big BLANK STARE that said... err what hugh?????

I don't mean to devalue your use and desire to work with 24bit. I'm just telling my experience with all this. I have a hard enough time keeping it profitable and efficient without adding my preferences for something that's NOT going to be appreciated anyway. And to cap it off, I'd rather invest time into the quality of the "material" and its artisic values... than worry about dithering squat. The probelm isn't the sound... it's the lack of good song writing, good concepts, decent budgets and musicianship or (in film) a dang script worth burning film on it. We're all recording clean crisp decent tracks... and for the most part... the reason why most of our productions stink is because of the talent and the writers. The other degrading factor I've been wrestling with in the last couple years is the idea that directors and musicians want the world for $69.95. And I'm not about to become the Earl Shieb of recording.

As for the FOUR channel I/O... I think I'd be interested and rather soon.... so if you want to pop me a asking price, MIDIandSFX@aol.com I'll give it thought. I have Krystal cards, so I'd need to know all was compatible. I just bought two MTU d/a converters off of Ebay for $9.95 each.

Yes... we've all encountered disappointments with MicroSound... and in the end... I still say... it's the best editorial tool I've seen... and at least for me, it has been extremely reliable. I only wish I could say the same for MicroSoft Windows XP Pro. The worst thing about all of it is Bill Gates.

www.boggessmusicandsound.com
__________________
G. Boggess

Last edited by Gary Boggess; October 1st, 2007 at 11:38 PM.
Reply With Quote