Microsound used for National Symphony Orchestra - Page 2

geezer · #21 October 4th, 2007, 12:17 PM

....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 · #22 October 4th, 2007, 01:02 PM

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 · #23 October 4th, 2007, 01:14 PM

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.

clawson · #24 October 4th, 2007, 01:53 PM

Forgive me, Geezer (!) and others if I didn't answer something you had asked years ago. I will re-post a procedure here as soon as I get the chance. The key thing to do is let the importer know that you're working with an IEEE file in a specific format (details escape me at this instant). Then, after you do whatever processing in whatever other program, export in the same format WITH NO HEADER CHANGES! If the headers get changed in any way, Microeditor will reject the file. (I once had to go into a file with a hex editor to make it usable again after I had not been careful in this regard.)

It's a busy week for me and I may not have time for further postings until the weekend.

Anyway, it's great to see so many users here and still active.

Thanks for waking up the list!

Chas.

**admin** · #25 October 4th, 2007, 07:24 PM

Quote:

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 · #26 October 4th, 2007, 08:27 PM

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 · #27 October 4th, 2007, 09:08 PM

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 · #28 October 4th, 2007, 09:59 PM

No Dave... but I am!

geezer · #29 October 5th, 2007, 09:37 AM

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 · #30 October 5th, 2007, 10:19 AM

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 · #31 October 5th, 2007, 10:45 AM

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 · #32 October 5th, 2007, 11:25 AM

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.

Gary Boggess · #33 October 5th, 2007, 12:15 PM

I talked to several of my friends in LA about ASIO before I bought the Emu 0404 PCI card. I wanted to be able to test Cubase, and use the 67 VSTi instruments I collected.

The result has been fantastic. The 1st thing I noticed about the Emu card is that I didn't hear the typical computer hash from its outputs. Sounds like a minor benefit, but I have used other audio cards for long while for Native PC audio programs, and for auditioning/hearing the Directx plugin effects inside the MicroEditor. The Emu card features a nice set of audio specs pasted below. The zero latency ASIO ability is 110% crucial for VSTi synths and instrument plugins if you expect to actually perform music with them.

I still prefer my arsenal of Emu samplers and synth modules over software ones... mainly because I need the vacation from the computer keyboard and the mouse. Having KNOBS in my hands while writing music is just more relaxing. Come to think of it... I hate the dang mouse/keyboard solution.
It's like the MIDI keyboards... we had a piano keyboard, a pitch wheel, a modulation wheel, velocity sensitivity, after touch and pressure sensitive keyboards as far back as 1985. NOTHING has improved or changed much since. Same for computers... there's no affordale interface improvements as yet, although I've found the wireless Logitech series mouse to make mousing very pleasant. And yes... I'm aware of the mixing consoles interfaces from ProTools and numerous others. But they are so proprietary... what's needed is a univeral device that is "user" programmable.

I'm also aware of a touch sensitive panel (or screen) device that's being developed by Apple that will make inroads to classrooms soon. It features the ability to integrate multi tasking for classroom use. And it appears it's likely to branch out into other uses due to the simplicity of it's concepts for the user.

Back to my reality, I've always appeciated the dumb intelligence of the MicroEditor when compared to other programs that have multiple fader graphics and multiple meters. It's been a running joke here to my clients when they notice ME's ONE FADER. I just say "heck.. you can only click on one fader at a time anyway!"

I read the last few posts and I think my contribution to the dialog is more from the typical daily studio engineer/composer/musician and film sound designer experience.

I love technology. But I can't get anything accomplished when:
a) I can't afford better gear/software tools
b) when I can't get support when I need it
c) when I can't rely on my computer systems to keep working day to day
e) when I have to wrestle with some Windows issue 1 to 2 full days a week
f) when I have to become a software programmer in order to deliver
to a specific format.

I can't afford to be entangled in the spec wars and format wars. It's been impossible to avoid the battles and wasted time I spend just keeping WINDOWS XPpro up and working...
so I can keep working
so I can pay the bills
and stay in business.

I like to keep things affordable, simple, practical, predictable and reliable as is possible. I've watched too many studios open and close while trying to BUY what MIX Magazine's selling them.

As I read the posts above, I can't say I've encountered the "sync" problems mentioned... nor have I ventured out to much beyond the daily sessions recorded at 44.1Khz @16bit. And the reason isn't non-interest in 24bit... it's just that my clients aren't asking for it... and to steer them around the studio CLOCK and run up studio time/costs for something they're not asking for is not useful. I'm always glad to hand them their well recorded, edited and mixed audio on two CDr's and get paid with a smile.

Which... come to think of it... just burning CDs has been a source of fear.
It works. It doesn't. It works. It doesn't. It works. It doesn't.

I have spend hours trouble shooting issues with burning CDs.
NOTE:
MicroCD needs to keep updating the drivers for the DVD/CDr burners. I bought a new Plextor DVDR PX716A and MicroCD doesn't see it. So I've have to turn to my Roxio 9 program (now owned by Sonic Solutions).

I've reported that my overall experience with MicroSound is still, a positive one. Even amidst all fo the changes in the industry. Yes, I wish my MicroSync card worked in my faster 2.8GB computer... and there's a plethora of things I wished were better... but it still gives me almost everything that is critical to producing music and film audio. Although I wrestle daily with ME's SLOW WAVEFORM GRAPHIC/DRAW SPEED. Why is it soooooooooo sloooooow?

When you keep getting asked "how did you do that?" often enough, then you have to credit the tools as much as the user. And my customers have spent many session hours here, comparing what happens here to what happened at the some other (ProToy) studios. And the ones who happen to understand the differences, are now MicroSound advocates.

************************************************
EMU 0404 Digital Audio System Features:

24-bit, 96kHz converters that deliver an amazing 111dB (A/D) and 116dB (D/A) signal to noise ratio and dynamic range
Flexible connectivity with 1/4" analog I/O, optical and coaxial S/PDIF I/O, and MIDI I/O for seamless integration with your entire studio
E-DSP 32-bit multi-effects processor offers you over 16 simultaneous hardware-accelerated studio-grade effects with no CPU overhead - plug-in architecture allows you to add new effects as needed
32 Channels of zero latency Hardware Mixing/ Monitoring with super-flexible virtual patchbay - no external mixer needed
Full compatibility with most popular audio/sequencer applications with ultra-low latency WDM, DirectSound and ASIO 2.0 drivers
Powerful software studio package
Two 1/4" analog inputs
Optical 24-bit/96kHz S/PDIF I/O (switchable to AES/EBU)
Coaxial 24-bit/96kHz S/PDIF I/O (switchable to AES/EBU)
MIDI In/Out
E-DSP Hardware-accelerated effects, mixing and monitoring

Rich LePage · #34 October 5th, 2007, 12:46 PM

Yeah, I think AU may be Mac only, and Macs are something I know very little about other than simple things like getting web mail with Safari when at outside total-Mac studios(sometimes not so simple!). I just seem to see all the newer stuff (Audition too) stating it will run VST, VSTi and AU plugs, with some saying Direct X too, but less these days than a while back.

The better thing about Izotope and their letting you use a USB flash drive as opposed to Ilok is that it's much easier (and less costly though $15 versus $40 is no issue) -- and when the piece of plastic breaks or is lost, at least you can re-authorize another w/o big hassles. Funny though, they DO use Iloks for the Digi versions of their software (which run in the Digi RTAS format). But not for VST- though that was not at all initially clear from their web site. I wound up authorizing their stuff both ways, though I almost never use the RTAS since that's Pro Tools only and I will only go there if there's no other way. They use the Pace version of Ilok authorizing, not the way Waves does- but again only for the RTAS versions. Once you buy, you can authorize all flavors, free.

With the Ilok, Pace wants you to buy... Ilok "insurance". But because Waves doesn't fully use the Ilok scheme, that may not be all that cool to have anyway. Won't help you if your Waves Update Plan has expired either!

I too have been on phone sometimes for an hour or more with Waves from Israel after an email delay. They were good at what they did, and def. knew their stuff, which is worth paying for. Right now I just have their Platinum and Vocal bundles, each on its own Ilok (because the Vocal one has some of same plugs as the Platinum plus others). But still their authorizing etc "guides" are not as intuitive as they could/should be, maybe because of the layer of Ilok stuff. But then I feel the identical way about anything from Digi. Maybe it's that I just don't have a Mac mindset ...

Recently I learned that you can buy the Waves update plan from dealers, too. If pricing for that follows what the plug in pricing diff. is, it could be a substantial discount. Pricing from a dealer upgrading Gold to Platinum wound up being a LOT less than direct from Waves when I requested a quote after an "upgrade" notice appeared in my account. And it all still went though Waves web site. I simply picked up a box at dealer, but once installed, it all went through Waves.

With Univ Audio, I'm not clear yet on moving the board(s) to another machine, though they advise you can. I'm also not sure how that works with their external box, which lets you use with a laptop or move between machines. But they have good phone and web support, and very good install guides, even videos on their site for setting up.

For Gary- try the Golden Hawk/Micro CD thing I posted a while back for what you need in terms of support for newer burners. My late model Plextors run that way. But.. as I posted recently, you might not get anywhere with Golden Hawk- though they had a new version as recent as spring 2007, when I just tried to renew for updates last week they seem to have recently gone out of business- the order wasn't processed and they haven't answered emails. Phone calls wound up with "yeah,this used to be their number, but this is a medical office"... If you do actually get them, let me know how you did it! (you can still at least get the demo version free on their site). But you can use Micro CD to make the image and then use their program CDRWIN to burn from the cue file that MicroCD creates (which was always the G/Hawk code).

I too have long been frustrated by keyboard/mouse only. The tablets help some, so does sometimes using a cheap controller like the Behringer I wrote about, though there are downsides to that too. I use the stuff every day, so always looking for a better way. I also spent years as a keyboard player so I come at it from that standpoint too, as well as years of tape and razor blades for that matter! I think all of us come from the same mindset you mention - to survive in this business you have to have that approach, really.

Gary Boggess · #35 October 14th, 2007, 01:29 PM

Hi all,

I woke of this morning... and was recapping recent thoughts I posted about the MicroSound...

I was up late removing Norton Antivirus completely from my computer. A friend told me to use AVG FREE... and so now have it installed. It's been said... that Norton Anti-Virus IS a virus... and that impacting thought, along with thoughts we've all shared about WHAT IF MicroSound could be redesigned. And I had some crazy thoughts... (not unusual for me).

I know this is way OUT THERE... but so what, here it is:

MicroSound IS NOT BROKEN. It's the best editorial tool anyone could ask for. The other programs are also nice, WaveLab, ProTools, SoundForge and several of the others. My pondering question is: WHY RE-INVENT what already exists? Are improvements needed in MicroEditor? YES... but not a complete RE-DESIGN.

MicroSound has weaknesses... and so do the others... but, EDITING and MIXING sound is the MOST VALUABLE part of producing music or audio posting, sound effects design and etc. FOR FILM production. And MicroSound already provides VERY POWERFUL editing and mixing tools.

So what "could" be done? I'm thinking crazy maybe... but with the VST and DirectX technologies... and perhaps some I don't know of... why couldn't a NEWER version of MicroEditor be designed to IMPORT key segements software like ProTools, WaveLab or others? As if MicroEditor was hub editor that used the resources of OTHER programs. As if MicroEditor was THE HOST program to all of the others!! So if someone had ProTools, MicroEditor would pull in the audio files, allow for an EDIT and MIX... and then either SAVE as a MicroEditor project or SAVED back to the imported ProTools project. ProTools would function as the IMPORTED software/format/resource... and of course MicroEditor would be thus LINKED to ProTools hardware. If MicroEditor was a HOST... it would use whatever HARDWARE the software it HOSTED uses. I know this sounds RIDICULOUS. I am not a software designer. But may the THOUGHT may spark an idea. But my point is that MICROSOUND doesn't necessarily NEED to re-invent itself when there's SO MANY USEFUL programs already. Maybe there's a way to KEEP MicroEditor intact AS THE TOOL IT ALREADY EXCELS AT BEING... (with changes of course).

Or... could MicroEditor have a component via VST or DIRECTX... to be IMPORTED into programs like ProTools or others to FUNCTION as a ALTERNATE editorial tool WITHIN HOST programs?

In any case... one thing is certain... MicroEditor must be able to use 3rd party HARDWARE... and IF that could be accomplished, maybe some of the ideas above could spark development along this line of thinking. (And no... I'm not suggesting being Baker Acted).

MicroEditor is already the best tool for CREATIVE audio production... and it is because of the CONCEPTS and PHILOSOPHIES that produced its design. MicroEditor is what, 15 +/- years old... but conceptually... it's 15 years ahead of the other programs in the simplistic POWER it gives the user for BUILDING and CREATING/MANIPULATING sound elements. Can't you see the headlines in Mix Magazine: "MTU Debuts ULTIMATE HOST DAW!" Imagine how powerful it would be if MicroEditor could become the CENTRAL HOST software to all of the others!!!! Every time THEY upgraded their software, MicroEditor would automatically be improved! Micro Editor becomes the TROJAN HORSE of all editors!!! Crazy huh?

My software-code-dumb 2 cents... or maybe it's the coffee this morning?

Rich LePage · #36 October 14th, 2007, 03:02 PM

I agree with your logic, but it sounds very un-trivial in terms of what I think might be required to do the things you mentioned. Dave would know much more about that however. To move projects to/from the Digi world for instance might be daunting, I'd suspect difficult in some other "worlds" too.

But as a concept, yeah, that would be terrific-- though you'd be limited to 4 hardware outs in the MTU world, I think.

About your Norton thing: Finally those folks have a tool you can download (Norton Removal Tool). You can search for it at the Symantec site. It helps. However, it doesn't always remove everything though it claims that it will. After having huge problems with some Norton stuff a few years back and getting endless junk from what they call "support" (nearly all of which did not apply to the problems I'd run into), I really gave up on anything Norton, except Ghost (v9 for XP and now v12 for Vista) and Partition Magic which they bought.

As a rule except when no other possible way, I won't let the audio machines go on-line. With your networked approach, I wonder if you do the same thing? I often don't even set up Internet access on 'em.

But for general use on other machines, I've found the ZoneAlarm free firewall works well, and Spysweeper with anti-virus seems to do a good job too, though it adds some overhead for sure. I also use V-Com's Fix-It Utilities which has a different type of virus and spyware scanning in it, though I mostly use it for fixing problems and cleaning up the registry etc. And Ghost, of course. Fix-it and Ghost have really saved me a few times when stuff got real weird on some systems.

Hope it helps you.

Gary Boggess · #37 October 14th, 2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich LePage

I agree with your logic, but it sounds very un-trivial in terms of what I think might be required to do the things you mentioned. Dave would know much more about that however. To move projects to/from the Digi world for instance might be daunting, I'd suspect difficult in some other "worlds" too.

But as a concept, yeah, that would be terrific-- though you'd be limited to 4 hardware outs in the MTU world, I think.

About your Norton thing: Finally those folks have a tool you can download (Norton Removal Tool).

I would imagine what I proposed to be very challenging if not nearly crazy to consider. But I just had to get the thought out here. I would also agree that IF anything is developed further, it's imperative to be able to record IN and OUT at least 16 or more channels... and using 3rd party hardware would be the best options for doing it... both from a COST and MANUFACTURING position.

As for Norton... I say bye bye & good riddens to useless schmuckware!!!

geezer · #38 October 14th, 2007, 04:56 PM

....Yeah my wife's computer got a really, really bad virus from connecting to the Norton site!....AVG free seems to function a whole lot better, frankly.

This thing about running in other programs or other programs running in MTU might not be as far out as you think......I bit the bullet this week and actually went ahead and started to learn a video editing program. Even though I own Adobe Premier, I decided to start with a simplified, cheaper version of Sony's Vegas + DVD that's called Sony Movie Studio (Platinum) plus DVD Architect...To make a long story short, the program asks you what audio editor you want to use inside of it, and sends you out to the program and brings the files back in relatively seamlessly. This thing only cost $125. at Best Buy, and its high-end brother only cost something like $500-$600.....It doesn't seem to have any problem communicating with other programs or doing file conversions and keeping them synced.

So maybe it's not that far out of an idea.

On the other hand, Wavelab does do virtually everything MTU does right now....Is there really a point?.....That's really what the discussion should be about:

A)What are the qualities and working methods that exist in MTU that can not be duplicated or even improved upon in Wavelab? B)Can MTU really be exported/rewritten to work in the native environment?

.....I am very curious what answers others out there would have to these questions.

Gary Boggess · #39 October 14th, 2007, 05:43 PM

[quote=geezer;66800]

This thing about running in other programs or other programs running in MTU might not be as far out as you think......I bit the bullet this week and actually went ahead and started to learn a video editing program. Even though I own Adobe Premier, I decided to start with a simplified, cheaper version of Sony's Vegas + DVD that's called Sony Movie Studio (Platinum) plus DVD Architect...To make a long story short, the program asks you what audio editor you want. So maybe it's not that far out of an idea.

On the other hand, Wavelab does do virtually everything MTU does right now....Is there really a point?.....That's really what the discussion should be about:QUOTE]

I also am using Sony Movie Studio (Platinum) and am planning to buy the FULL Vegas Video ASAP. I'm producing short video and DVD projects... and use it to produce DVD DEMOS of my sound effects design works for feature film. And you're right... it does allow you to SEND audio out to a preferred audio editor, and then automatically saves the processed file into VEGAS and even IN PLACE! It's amazing. But you know, I thought it only worked with SoundForge so I wasn't too amazed, but you're right, it lets you CHOOSE others if you want to!

SO... DAVE... maybe this is a BIG hint of some options!!??

Frankly, I don't have ANY BIG issues with MicroEditor, but the EXPORT/IMPORT format limitations, the lack of real time VST & Directx, the lack of multichannel I/O, and there's a handful of utilities for keeping organized. Too, I'd like to see a ONE EASY step to CLICK, and all the segments would automatically EXPORT to a .aif, .wav, .sf, OR other... and automatically RE-IMPORT into place, named and intact as they were as ME segments. THAT WOULD SAVE SO MUCH TROUBLE AND TIME DOING IT MANUALLY. <<< As I said in a previous post, I've adopted a daily protecol of saving/exporting to WAV and then IMPORTING and replacing default .sf files.

#1) Doing so protects against deleating permanantly, and allows me to process the files with SoundForge and Wavelab. Once they're WAV files, I can do what I will with them, and when I re-open the MicroEditor project, they automaticaly import PROCESSED!. It's admitedly a work around, but it's really not too much bother compared to the benefits.

#2) It also protects against hitting the BUFFERED .SF2 FILE SIZE LIMITATION OF 2GB!!!

Why raise MicroEditor from the dead? Because we want to.

Rich LePage · #40 October 14th, 2007, 10:38 PM

This all sounds very interesting to me - and I hope it might lead somewhere positive!! Looks like a def. maybe... but hoping so anyhow.

Did not know that about Vegas, many eons ago I beta'd an early Sound Forge version but have not kept up with it since Sony took over etc. I'll give it a demo too when I get a chance, along with Wavelab.

Demo schedule at the moment is kinda full but will get to it. Messing with a mastering EQ program called Har-Bal right now, but just started and there's a learning curve to it, so too early to tell much. After that there is a new Izotope demo I want to try for de-noising and restoration.

Def. one of the downsides of being a real small biz like most of us are!
(Endless Windows and Norton stuff etc being just a few of the others...)

Keep the dialog going in any case-- I think the input is great, and hearing about other programs and how they could potentially work with Medit is invaluable, I think really for all of us.

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