Microsound used for National Symphony Orchestra

[geezer]

You know very well that I have zero sour grapes about the whole death of Microeditor saga....I was clear about what I thought was needed from the beginning, and got back whatever information I got back....then I went on my way, and have continued to reply to posts here and give information about what I am doing to other users so they can make use of it in the event it would help them....

No anger. No sour grapes. Simple, scientific realism. I waited until the last possible moment to jump ship, really, always hoping that some of my requests would bear fruit. To that end, I made an effort to restate my requests and concerns in a more elegant and direct fashion continually. This particular thread, which currently spans 8 years, clearly documents some of those concerns and requests.

I knew before the start of this thread that Larry's leaving, Motorola's lack of support and honesty- along with the financial issues dogging the company- had all conspired to keep you from the path you had set out so resolutely to follow in the beginning. That path, as I have stated many times, was the gold standard by which I judged all other software/hardware combos.

We are way beyond the need to be worrying about negativity, I think.....You know, I just wrote another magazine article (for Radio Magazine) last April in which I, again, laid out the saga of my own DAW journey and stated again for all to see how incredible the longevity of Microeditor was for me, and how unusual it was in this business.....I was describing the state of the whole DAW business for the radio crowd, and Microeditor was, as always, the pivotal system by which all before and after were measured.

In other words, despite the fact that I no longer use my MicroSound systems, your legacy and legend are intact........Those of us who are so attached to that legacy just need some friendly help in translating our work habits and needs to other systems that are more connected to the current workplace. That is all that is going on here. The memories are still fond. The reality is still what it is.

[clawson]

Hi, all!

I still use Microeditor on a daily basis for NSO and my radio work. I must use other packages as well to have a complete box of tools to accomplish all my goals, but MTU still gets the lion's share of my daily work. (One of the producers at WETA absolutely refuses to use anything else...until all the hardware ultimately dies, anyway.)

Dave writes:
Jim, I don't want to start a word war cause I don't have the time, but you forgot how much time we spent trying to go to the 24-bit wave format. Chas Lawson was the main pusher on that as I recall. He's the initiator of this thread... about National Symphony Orchestra. The 24-bit SF format didn't work on many of the tests we ran. We had part of it, but the rest and interfacing with other gear wouldn't fall in line.


It was the industry, not I particularly, who was pushing for 24-bit. For classical music, 24-bit is the minimum required to handle the music. It's just physics. Without 24-bit, I would have been forced to abandon MTU a long time ago. (However, even MTU at straight 16-bit is still a remarkable sounding system...besting some of the other products found in many big studios today.)

I was able to import/export MTU 24-bit files with other programs pretty handily thanks to Larry having written the format according to IEEE standards. This allows me the editing freedom of MTU bundled with the processing available in other systems. (I have described the steps in one or more of the threads here. It's not hard to do.)

I am not bitter about how things worked out—just disappointed that MTU wasn't able to rule the industry way back when. Other programs are just now catching up to what Dave and company had mastered in the late 80s/early 90s. We can't always get what we want.

Gotta run back to the Kennedy Center now. More later if I can manage it...

Best to all,

Chas.

[Gary Boggess]

What a wonderful collection of posts! Dave Cox and MTU should be proud of their diversity and intelligence of his past users.

MicroSound still produces the 90% of my business.
www.boggessmusicandsound.com

And I have kept crossing fingers that MTU would somehow get inspired, pick up the valuable remnants of MicroSound and develop the next generation DAW... the MicroSound Hal-9000 (tm).

I too have had to jump into other fomats. SoundForge, Wavelab, Cubase, Acid, Vegas Video 6.0 and nearly 40 other audio tools have been installed on my computer for years now. I have an Emu 0404 PCI audio card with ASIO installed right next to Krystal. Collectively, these programs and utilities give me all of the functions & tools I need. Yet... MicroEditor is the absolute pinnacle of what editing mixing sound should be... and so, that's it's job in my facility... which is the most important job as far as music and film sound go.
Many of my clients understand MicroSound to be the most valuable asset to their productions. They know all about ProToys. That's why they're my clients!

[Rich LePage]

I'll echo Gary that Medit is still a very big part of just about everything we do - whether for the intial record or the final master. I've just changed some of the stuff in between-- mostly to use plug ins and/or do things that were either more difficult or just not possible in Medit due to where it left off after the Motorola debacle.

But Medit is my #1 "no problem solution" to many things, even though it means having to do some workarounds at times to keep using it in what we do. The advantages to me seem to far outweigh the downsides for a lot of projects we seem to get.

Sad about the 24 bits of course. That would have made it even more useful and more longevity.

Can also echo Gary's comments about clients and Pro Tools. Many people I work with are amazed by the results we get - and most of my competitors are pretty much all-Digi, all the time. Clients often rave about the quality of our work versus some others, and also how quickly we can often get their stuff done. One of our biggest "selling points" for ages has been often exceeding the client's expectations by a considerable margin and MTU has played a very big role in that for a heck of a long time.

[geezer]

....This is one of those great communication errors that have plagued our interactions with MTU and each other, for whatever reason, during our struggles to integrate the product into our workplace over the last few years.

Medit does not, of course, export 24bit .wav files. When I asked for that specific process to be included, along with the Broadcast Wave timestamp if at all possible (and sent in examples of Broadcast Wave files), I heard nothing back, though Dave may have been working on this independently with others for all I know.

Charles and others have successfully been taking 24bit .sf files and using them in other programs. Charles specifically (anyone else?) has also managed to bring those processed files back into Medit. I do remember his original post describing the process in broad terms (must have been around 2001), but could never find it again when going through the forum. Requests by me on the forum to clarify or restate this process went unanswered......As I was explicitly stating then that this was the key to my being able to continue using Medit, I was always surprised that there was no response.....In the end, I assumed that perhaps this transfer back in was probably not so easy, else why would MTU not give pointers for all to keep its system integrated into the workplace?

So, hear again is the call to both the company and the codgerly old user's group: If you successfully transfer 24bit files out into other programs, then back into Medit, list the steps for all to see here.....Heck, I might even turn my machines back on now and then if this were once and for all made clear to me.

This has always been the key to extended longevity for Medit. Broadcast Wave with integrated time stamp could have added another 10 years beyond what this would do.

[Gary Boggess]

I've tried ME's 24 bit recording... but being that you can export a mix or edit to anything but a .Sf file... I don't see the point if you can't deliver product to a format that's common.

I've tried importing .sf and .sf2 files into Wavelab 4.0 and SoundForge, but no dice. I even tried renaming the .sf to .raw and other .___ ... and still nothing.

With my Emu 0404 I can record up to 24bit at 196K sampling rate... but, I don't. Until I have clients standing there asking for it... I simply default to 16bit @44.1K.

Maybe the new MicroSound Model Hal-9000 will feature all of the bit rates, sampling rates and wave formats!

[Rich LePage]

That HAL9000 thing must give Dave a laugh, I think his original
partner was a guy named.... HAL!

I posted what I could find about 24 bit and Adobe, though I will try playing
some more with making up some MTU 24 bit SFs and taking them into
Adobe and see. If anything meaningful results, I'll post it.

Back to work here repurposing some stuff I did back in Medit in 2001,
in fact some during an aborted session on 9/11 that was in a studio
pretty near the former World Trade Center. Scary to go back to that time indeed.

[admin]

Originally Posted by geezer

You know very well that I have zero sour grapes about the whole death of Microeditor saga....I was clear about what I thought was needed from the beginning, and got back whatever information I got back....then I went on my way, and have continued to reply to posts here and give information about what I am doing to other users so they can make use of it in the event it would help them....

No anger. No sour grapes. Simple, scientific realism. I waited until the last possible moment to jump ship, really, always hoping that some of my requests would bear fruit. To that end, I made an effort to restate my requests and concerns in a more elegant and direct fashion continually. This particular thread, which currently spans 8 years, clearly documents some of those concerns and requests.

Jim, I apologize.

I'm a product developer, not an audio engineer. Sometimes you just left me in the dust and I or Larry or Elliot couldn't understand your requests. What else can I say... I'm sorry...

I'm listening here very carefully. Just today, David Clark, our current SW guru, and I were talking about getting Ricardo to revive DNoise including a graphic editor window for the template. When I look at our web site traffic, it is incredible that DNoise has so many visitors after being dead for so many years.

If there was a way we could revive Microeditor as software only, building on what is now readily available hardware, I'd consider it if we could set a price on it that we didn't loose our shirts. When I try to think about an "editor" for $99 or less, I'm left cold and disinterested. Is there a market we could reach in the $1,000+ range?

What if... we could resurrect Medit as is being described here? Is there enough market for us to garner a share somewhere?

We're seeing the handwriting on the wall for Karaoke CD+Graphics discs. The publishers hate the Karaoke Producers and no one can get digital download rights. It looks like VCD and DVD are going to replace CDG. That's why we've made investments and major advances in vocal removal.

All I can say is I'm hearing a very solid cadre of users who maybe I need to listen closer to... again.

Am I nuts?

[Gary Boggess]

Hmmmm...

What do I know? Not much... especially about software programming.

I know this: The ease and straight forward creative process that ME allows is incredible. Oh sure, I can think of a hundred improvements. One came up in a discussion the other day, I.E. it would be nice if ME allowed for "GRAPHIC COMBINING" of grouped segments graphically, and not requiring an actual writing them to disk. Just to help keep the screen cleaned up easily in projects that have X amount of segments.

There's many improvements to be considered... but what I know the best is that ME allows for a tremendous freedom while editing and putting things together. To me, that's is the greatest strength a creator in the music and film sound medium could ask for. ME is a superb manipulator of sound materials. And while I've tried several other systems... I can easily say ME is the best system for EDITING and putting things together. It's also a powerful sound mixing device... only lacking in full implementation of VST and DIRECTX plugins operational LIVE during the mixing process.

Frankly, TO me personally, ME's greatest value and strength is in EDITING and MIXING. For mastering and other specialized processes, I honestly don't mind whatsoever doing those things in Wavelab or SoundForge.

The only buggaboo IS that ME won't allow a 24 bit EXPORT to .wav or .aif or other formats.

Too, for those with Andromedian (alien grey) bandwidth for hearing, I suppose ME should be able to record at 196Khz too.

And if using 3rd party hardware is a possibility, then I'd say ME should have a set of drivers that accommodate all or most of the audio cards and external boxes... INCLUDING PROTOYS!

And too, a new ME should be able to carry 512 I/O's without a hiccup.

As far as ME becoming the BEST audio program, I say, stop. We already HAVE tremendous DO EVERYTHING programs. FEATURES ARE NOT WHY I PREFER MICROEDITOR!

It's all about the sheer sensibility and power of ME's editing and mixing interface!! I'd say, an upgrade to ME's formats and integration would be great stuff... but ME should be ALL ABOUT EDITING & MIXING.

If there's ONE thing the other programs lack and seem to be even lame at doing, it's firstly EDITING... and secondly MIXING.

ME's complete departure from being analogous to TAPE & REEL recorders and MIXING CONSOLES is what makes MicroSound a superb... if not the ULTIMATE tool... for assembly and creative stacking, and mixing of music & sound.

I can attest, that the editing capabilities in audio post for film are extremely sensible and powerful RIGHT NOW WITHOUT AN UPGRADING!

Last year, I did audio posting for a 90 minute feature film titled Loren Cass. There was very little "on the set" production sound available, since there was very little dialog. So, I decided to recreate all of the background sounds for the entire film. I also rebuilt (from scratch), ALL of the Foley sound, walking, cloth, and props effects. Each scene features sound recreated FROM SCRATCH!! I produced highly detailed sound effects & design, and I edited the dialog and music and mixed the entire film, all while in sync with a 3/4" Sony U-Matic video deck. The results were a flawless audio soundtrack that will be my calling card for years to come. I was told that many film people in Europe noticed the soundtrack's subtleties and over all quality... and asked about it.

* If revived, MicroEditor should emerge as the premium best & ultimate EDITOR...

* I'd say, GO FOR THE FILMMAKERS' NEXT AUDIO EDITORIAL STANDARD.

* Incorporate the best 7.1 surround encoding and decoding...

* Develop the ultimate film audio post editorial utilities possible.

If this happened, music clients would be automatic.

Film is where the envelope for new tools and TECHNIQUES are being tested and challenged.

Also, incorporating an advance interface for editing TO AVI or MPEG video would be an advantage, since most all of the audio programs that allow you to edit audio TO PICTURE are so tedious and frustrating, that editing to
15 year U-matic tape (the way I do) seems like a trick of genius!

Reliable software DAWS for film are few... and if my ProToy HD3 friends frustrations mean anything... there's ROOM for improvement. WIN over enough of the film editing crowd... and winning music people will be automatic.

I stand by this one concept: WE DO NOT NEED MORE FEATURES than what's already being offered by all the other programs.

WE DO NEED A POWERFUL EDITORIAL DAW... and yes... that would mean things like EDL, and other tools that enable importing from OTHER formats and "popular or standard" protocols in the field.

Anything NEW from ME should not compromise the strengths ME already has... but it should OPEN THE VAULT on being able to INTERFACE and PULL as many FORMATS & EXISTING markets together as is possible.

Position ME in the middle of the workforce and make it the SUPERVISORY & UPPER MANAGEMENT amidst the existing DAW forces. Make ME the boss.

HAL... bring me wine and cheese... now!!

[Gary Boggess]

Why not a $1250 - $2500 program?

The Krystal cards were expensive.

IF the new MicroSound HAL9000 could interface with 75% of the PCI and external USB or firewire sound cards... and provide all of the features I mentioned above PLUS provide a true middle ground between the other programs and systems... then it would be worth every dollar.

If a person buys MTU's MicroEditor, they shouldn't have to replace their hardware. If that could be made a well known fact, it would change everything. ME would emerge as a format peacemaker... allowing all manufactures to keep their strongholds... yet through ME, tie everything together. ME isn't trying to REPLACE other formats or programs... but enhance them with what it does best... ASSEMBLE, EDIT & MIX. The other software companies each do something uniquely well... so why not ME?

Why not? The real question is, could ME do all of this using 3rd partly hardware... and maybe IMPROVE or at least maintain a enhancing or positive control over the net sonic quality??

Umm... HAL... I don't like Chablis... I prefer Merlot. Thanks.

[Gary Boggess]

No Dave... but I am!

[geezer]

What should it cost? Is it marketable?

The problem is, in my viewpoint, that Wavelab and Cubase exist. Wavelab, even in the latest (V6) iteration, only costs about $500-$600. Cubase, the "baby brother" to Nuendo (which costs approx. $1,500.), costs about $450-$500, and "LE" versions of Cubase are almost free (as with Apple Logic).

Wavelab= free form editing for stereo up to 8 channel audio with every single capability that Microeditor has, plus all the plug-in availabilty, full time accurate waveform display, better CD mastering with CD text, CD mixed media and DVD-A capability.....Very good sounding. The 64 bit version of Wavelab is the audio engine and interface for the highly respected mastering tool Audio Cube.

Cubase= full multitrack studio capability with all the file management, editing, plug-in, mixing, monitoring etc. capabilities of Nuendo, and only minor reductions in the multimedia functions of Nuendo...though neither has CD burning capabilities. Good sounding, though it suffers from the same stereo buss problems that all the "mixing in the box" programs suffer from (see more about this below), though this doesn't seem to be stopping people from making really good sounding albums totally inside Cubase, and Nuendo is a major film tool these days.

.....There is also Adobe Audition, which sounds quite good and costs possibly half the price of Cubase!....with most of the same capabilities plus CD burning.

-----The stereo buss problem: All the "studio in a box" native multitrack programs seem to suffer from at least a 1 or 2 bit loss at the stereo mixdown buss....This is the real downside to the native multitrack programs (but does not seem to be an issue with Wavelab, as far as I can tell at this point), and probably has something to do with the lack of big accumulators on the output stage, I would guess. In any case, the folks with serious good ears come out of these programs into analogue or digital mixers via the program's multitrack busses in order to achieve the summing to stereo for the final mix......MTU, as a non-native system of elegant design, never had this problem and was way ahead of the curve in this regard compared to the other hardware companies.....Of course, most of the curve has been caught up with at this point by most folks one way or another.

So, the question is: Can MTU come up with a new hardware package with affordable research (I'm actually assuming this is not an option), or can it convert its elegant math that currently uses hardware to a new and competitive native solution? This seems like a tough row to hoe to me, but I have no idea what the company's outlook or programming capabilities are, and I don't know how much of MTU's math/code was dependent on the Motorola hardware......In any case, there is so much out there now that functions either pretty well or really well, does MTU have the resources and resolve to catch up?....Some of this modern functionality is actually a plus, because it means that there is code that is readily available for use (EDL translation, for instance).

Perhaps there is an interim third option that would see an attempt to integrate some of the file sharing solutions so obviously needed while looking down the road to see what impact this would have on a more long range solution......I know the market is really cost-driven these days, even for old farts like me, so you have to carefully consider your game plan, I would think.

-----And as far as Dnoise: Just like with the DirectX interface, I could never get the new version of it to work at all. The original, slow DOS version achieved some brilliant things for me, but took a lifetime to compute and test. The new Windows interface only crashed or produced garbage for me. I don't know why, and stopped asking since I had some pretty good noise removal tools in other software which did not cost a whole lot.

Don't know if any of these ramblings are helpful to you, but those are my thoughts on the subject as of now.

[geezer]

When I stopped off the summit of Medit and contemplated the void of other programs 6 or 7 years ago, I ran smack dab into the whole, knotty issue of both I/O hardware and computer integration.....There is, luckily, some forum, blog and FAQ kind of guidance for this sort of thing, because not a single company offers real support anymore for anything.

Seven years later, I would have to say that I have found a lot out, but do not feel that things are totally predictable and stable all the time. Some cards do seem to sound remarkably better than others, while many qualitative performance aspects seem to be simply a matter of the random combination of different elements in the system.

This phenomenon raises 2 very important issues:

1)Hardware compatabilty with native systems----Simple operational compatabilty is not enough. MTU will have to make sure that I/O cards operate with the right kind of audio integrity.

2)Instability of digital systems in general:

This kind of uncertainty is probably why some people opt for the expensive PT system, and it is certainly why I do not "mix in the box" for my multitrack projects.....Also, while this causes me to miss the reliability and simplicity of the pre-integrated MTU system, I don't think everything I am hearing is simply a result of bad integration.

When I upgraded to my DM2000 console, I started hearing things in the audio that I had never heard before when I made minor changes in installed cards or word clock syncing methodology. After literally months of A-B testing, I was able to prove to my vendor and Yamaha that certain issues existed with the console, which they repaired. Several years down the road, however, I have realized that the introduction of the console with its totally 96k capable audio path and converters was allowing me to hear a much better defined picture of what small amounts of jitter were doing when introduced into this complex, multipath digital audio situation.

Once I heard this, I could not stop hearing it. I have developed, as a result, a whole new set of working methods for I/O between my various pieces of gear, and a whole new set of rules for syncing. I have been told repeatedly that I am nuts about some of these rules, but I can prove, at least in my situation, that they make a difference......

What does this have to do with Microeditor? All I can say is that, when working constantly at high bit rates with converters attached that can convert high sampling rates, there is so much more detail available in the audio that one really has to pay attention to the integrity of syncing and the variations in jitter if one wants the audio to remain stable sonically.....We used to always say "once its digital, its digital", meaning that, if we kept it digital, we wouldn't have to worry about it any more. As far as I can tell, that is simply not true.

One of the implications, in fact, for this revelation is that a system with strong internal clocking and a totally analogue I/O can have some advantages these days!......I wish it was that simple, however. All I know is that I will go through checking multiple I/O and syncing methods at the start of any new multitrack mixing project before settling on which one "sounds best"........Perhaps this is why so many people are actually "mixing in the box"...They are keeping their situation stable by importing files and bypassing the I/O and syncing issues more or less completely....then just working with the same situation over and over......Too many possibilities and too much of a moving target are the real curses of the digital age.

[Rich LePage]

Well, likely your common driver set would be ASIO these days unless something else is gonna supercede that.

In theory that allows a lot of stuff to work with each other, and the good part is that generally the hardware mfg has to write the drivers for their particular box- and (hopefully....) update them as new things like Vista come along. Just look at the big variety of F/wire, USB2, and PCI and other interfaces out there today. Most talk to the software via ASIO drivers though lower end stuff tends to run with "Windows Sound" only. Some can handle both.

One place to get familiar with what's around would be:
www.americanmusical.com
or same guy's other site which is:
www.zzounds.com
They have links to various mfgs there too usually on the product pages. This is same guy who also used to have Victors that I tried years ago to put Dave together with. They sold Victors to Guitar Center but he kept the 2 internet businesses which are very large, he's like the 3rd or 4th largest seller of most things he carries.

The price point for most of the more comprehensive programs around seems to fall anywhere from say $400 up (software only) so there is a lot of room depending on what it does and how you can sell folks on the perception it will do that better than other products. Bundled hardware/software solutions go for more of course, such as Digi -- though after they bought M-Audio and other companies, they now seem to offer something at just about any price point. Their web site has an overview. The logic of that approach for a marketer is obvious, though only a big player with lotsa $ can do that now I think. It's the "oh you want THAT? Sure, just send this much money(and maybe your old unit)" approach.

It's def become a list/street price situation too. Resellers are very big in this stuff, the larger ones include the 2 above plus folks like Sweetwater, Full Compass, BSW, others. And.. of course.. the 20 ton gorilla-- Guitar Center and its various divisions (at the high end, GC Pro). Pricing follows the MI (musical instrument) model often, and buyers expect big discounts off inflated list prices, and resellers expect good margins too. They won't feature (often won't stock either!) anything w/o that -- and they want all sorts of other sales incentives like co-op ad money too. It's not unlike supermarkets who get paid by manufacturers for their shelf space, product placement and promotion - or the car sales business!

Only the very high end still works a little differently. A few companies like Apogee, Empirical Labs, Massenburg, John La Grou and others can counter the "box-sell" model but even there I think they have to do same types of things at times. John would obviously know more about that. But in that world, it's always hardware or hardware/software-- it's what makes 'em different. And they usually have networks of reps who add a layer of cost to the equation, though often can provide some value if they are good.

So to be software only and to be able to run on a variety of platforms, you would likely have to fall into the lower price point area - again maybe around $400 street price. And upgrades to signif new versions for much less.
With Audition, I think the Adobe Direct price for the full version is $349 plus shipping, but Amazon and others sell it for a bit less with free shipping. The upgrade price (for users of ANY previous version) is $99. They also make a more basic product called Sound Booth, which is something completely different, and that sells direct for $199, again avail through many resellers.
Most of course also do the "educational software" thing too - that's become pretty established now.

Another thing to look at for what you mention about de-noise might be to develop it as a plug in or something that can run in other hosts. Direct X is still used, but seems not the more preferred format these days, it's moved more to VST, VSTi for "virtual instruments" and something called AU (audio unit) that I have not messed with. A few companies go a different road, like Universal Audio with their proprietary format that will only run on their own DSP boards, which they make as PCI and PCIe, also in some outboard configurations. www.uaudio.com. It will run however on many hosts, and I think currently under VST only, though older versions also ran Direct X.
It even runs on some hosts they don't officially support, like earlier versions of Adobe Audition (I've run it under version 1.5 which they don't support)

But they sell their stuff through the same MI channel discussed above, in a variety of bundles (hardware/software). The difference there is once you are in their world, you will most likely deal with them direct for upgrades and additional software purchases. Every new software upgrade (all free) gives you one-time 14 day demos of new plug ins they develop-which you can then buy if you like 'em. They also offer incentives to returning customers-- once registered as an owner, you get many offers for deals and promotions run directly by them. I just installed a new version that's Vista compliant (but on XP) and in my account went a $50 off your next purchase voucher. It just runs the plugs I'm authorized for unless I choose to buy (or demo) more.

One thing that is expected (or at least hoped for) as you move up the price point ladder is comprehensive support. Some can be pay for support, but companies like Univ. Audio offer a lot of support for free. Adobe offers installation support only for free, and a variety of paid support options.

Waves offers free support and upgrades for 1 year, after that you must buy their update plan which is priced by what you have, often about $200 a year or so. They won't much talk to you unless you're covered under the update plan. And though they've become better on Windows things, they still come at things from more the Mac world, like Digi does as well. And they use the Ilok key, which can be a whole other can of worms- you have to get its drivers from Ilok (Pace), but Waves doesn't follow the full Ilok authorizing scheme, they use their own but on that key.

Izotope offers mostly free support, and is very friendly about authorizations for their stuff- I suppose unless you abuse the privilege!
You can authorize any of their products to either a hard drive or a USB flash drive which you can then use on any system as its "dongle". Upgrades so far have been free. (www.izotope.com) I've used their Ozone quite a lot, it seems well-integrated, but it definitely uses a lot of CPU resources. Also their stuff will run as demo unauthorized for a while, after that it will still run with no key inserted but will add some noise every so often and gently remind you to authorize it. Waves won't run at all without its authorizer inserted, and might crash your host too.

I hope you will consider redevelopment, I for one would be interested. I'd echo a lot of Jim's thoughts however as being necessities for any editing and mixing plaform these days. Hope all this is helpful to you.

Rich

[geezer]

Isn't AU somehow related to Core Audio (the Mac protocol)? I'm really not up to speed on Macs.

rich's info is right on....Waves is an interesting model. They do definitely provide direct support (I have been on the phone with guys from Israel more than once, but after a day delay with e-mail contact), but it does cost you. Because their plug-ins are so darn good, people are willing to pay. I probably have way over $2k invested in them, if you include the update contracts (plus I have one of their cards for my DM2000).....The Ilok thing is a pain, but so is the USB dongle, which everyone is going to now....Pretty crazy to have thousands tied up in a $30 piece of plastic hanging off the back of your computer.

So, there are models that have people paying big bucks....but even I searched around for an endorsement or educational deal before I got Nuendo 3 (worked out an endorsement deal through a musician friend who was already in the pipeline)....It still cost $850......Even Waves, however, has lots of bundles that cost around $400. That does seem to be the price where everyone is interested if they think the quality is there.

ASIO is the only game in town for quality interface with multichannel capacity on the card.