MTU.Community


Go Back   MTU.Community > Microeditor Software > Microeditor Help - Versions 5.0-5.5

Microeditor Help - Versions 5.0-5.5 Discussions for Microeditor versions that use Krystal DSP Engine audio card

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 12th, 2000, 10:47 AM
geezer geezer is offline
Frequent Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Martinsburg, WV
Posts: 181
Question

---Making full use of 5.3 and direct-X requires a separate sound card, which of course implies some interactivity with other current audio programs, which implies use of current computer technology. I still have a very functional Pentium 166 in my MTU-configured rig, but I obviously have to upgrade to deal with the world as it now is and MicroEditor as it has become....I also have MicroSync (ISA, right?).

I'm getting ready to spend money to upgrade my computer audio rigs. I think I, along with everyone else, need some heavy direction and advice on upgrading from MTU. We need information on any implications for using new processors, motherboards, SCSI or no, etc. We know from this site that SoundBlaster is problematic. Are there cards that are not problems? We need to know more about interactivity issues of all sorts, and all plans for interactivity.

MTU has, before now, existed in a world alone. This is obviously not now possible in the current professional audio environment and involves a philosophical shift for the company. I need help understanding the new philosophy and the technical implications. Some additional, pertinant particular questions:

-How does MTU specifically plan to implement multi-track support?

-Will MTU support time-stamping of files (Broadcast.wav)?

-Will MTU consider implementing Open-TL, the new Tascam EDL format that I believe will take over the market shortly, wildly surpassing OMF?

-How is MTU aiming at the "software only" issue that has been talked about in the past (i.e., use other folks hardware for I/O?

-With no plans to implement new hardware, can we achieve wordclock lock via master video sync (a la AArdsync)?

-----That should do for a starter.

Geezer
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old November 13th, 2000, 09:35 AM
admin admin is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Posts: 10,515
MTU Workstation Directions - See other Threads

Many of the questions in this post deserve their own Threads. These are being added very quickly. Please review the Forum for them.

Adding Microsoft's infamous Direct-X support into Microeditor was THE most expensive upgrade MTU has ever incurred. This 17-month investment will not be paid off for years. In the future, each fuction investment we make will be selected by surveys, including what price clients are willing to pay. It is very simple; if the development cannot be reimbursed, we will not make the investment. There is very little profit available in DAWs today. Each new function must pay for itself.

[li]Software Only Microeditor - The current estimate from Larry, Microeditor's architect, is it will be a 1,000 man-hour investment to just remove Microeditor from Krystal, without any new functions or new architecture. The cost for this will exceed $80,000 to do it within 12 months. We can now build only 270 more Krystal boards. Thus, we can't take 4 years to do this. Our current thinking is to develop a Krystal 100MHz card without on-board I/O. Adding Direct-X to Microeditor now delivers the edited segment or project audio stream back over the PCI-bus into the computer. The stream can then be processed and sent to the hard drive, audio output, etc. This would be a safer direction for us currently. No decisions are yet made, and a major engineering review meeting has yet to happen on this topic.

[li]Wordclock Lock - Currently. If there are boxes available (AArdsync?) that take Wordclock and provide a Video House sync signal, and you have a Microsound I/O Module and Microsync, it should be a valid solution. When we address using other I/O, we will include Wordclock sync in the analysis. What is available that is stable, can be expected to be around for some time so we don't loose our investment, and accurately performs the job are some of our decision criteria. We would rather support an integrated hardware I/O Wordclock solution, than to support multiple vendors products to build up a solution.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2009 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
The contents of this forum are copyrighted by Micro Technology Unlimited, 2000-2008. Use of any material from these Forums is prohibited without written agreement from MTU.