Pyramix Illegal Wav Files - Page 2

philper · 25th July 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple-q

I have posted before that there are a bunch of apps out there that support it and some are even free (ardour).

If you scroll up you will find them.

Thanks Mr. Q, but my editorial clients aren't likely to take up Ardour or Wavelab etc anytime soon. I mean a practical and utilitarian app, not necessarily free but not a full DAW, something simpler and more utilitarian like those I mentioned.

Philip Perkins

philper · 30th July 2010

I just discovered that Boom Recorder will record R64 polys above 4GB, so now I'd REALLY like to find a utility or app to crack them.

Philip Perkins

kk@jamsync.com · 30th July 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by philper

I just discovered that Boom Recorder will record R64 polys above 4GB, so now I'd REALLY like to find a utility or app to crack them.

Philip Perkins

Curious that it says "never enable this" in prefs:

http://www.vosgames.nl/media/images/...rder/pref2.png

philper · 30th July 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by kk@jamsync.com

Curious that it says "never enable this" in prefs:

http://www.vosgames.nl/media/images/...rder/pref2.png

On his site he warns against enabling the greater than 2GB wav file deal due to compato issues with many DAWs. I haven't found anyone who has used BR to make R64 files yet. I'd love to hear from anyone who has done this.

Philip Perkins

klaukholm · 25th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by kk@jamsync.com

It's not about blame...it's about portability of the format. It's about making it easier for the users to transport data among various setups instead of making it HARDER for the user. Data transport formats shouldn't be user hostile and users shouldn't suffer when attempting to load a simple audio file into a DAW. Project files are a different animal, but this problem with incompatibility of multichannel files has gone on far too long.

I won't even go into the havoc that it is wreaking in the BluRay authoring community. People want to simply use multichannel 48kHz files, but can they with most commercial BluRay authoring packages? NO. While claiming to be "transparent", they, in fact fail because of this very problem, so a lot of the packages really only support stereo.

Again this is not pyramix fault.
The manual is quite clear and it is more a matter of which format a project is exported in. i recently had a problem with xml export that I would have avoided if I had read the manual more carefully.

Frankly, when it comes to handling a huge variety of formats and even different samplerates within a project, pyramix is a leader.

So lets be fair here and complain about general problems of interchange between all leading DAWs rather than complain about Merging.

kk@jamsync.com · 25th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by klaukholm

Again this is not pyramix fault.
The manual is quite clear and it is more a matter of which format a project is exported in. i recently had a problem with xml export that I would have avoided if I had read the manual more carefully.

Frankly, when it comes to handling a huge variety of formats and even different samplerates within a project, pyramix is a leader.

So lets be fair here and complain about general problems of interchange between all leading DAWs rather than complain about Merging.

Perhaps, but to be fair, it's not a market share leader, so that begs the question...why is it *not*? Being a team player counts for a lot in this game.

klaukholm · 25th November 2010

Well, we both have to work with the market leader (PTHD) and I think you would be hard pressed to find a company that is less of a team player.
If they were a team player, we would all have PT import export options in our other DAWs, but they made damn sure that would be impossible (dark matter anyone, or the euphonix 727 interface back in the PT5 days)

Being the market leader does not mean you do everything the optimal way in terms of design.

As a pyramix user, I have many concerns, but them not trying to be interoperative with others is not one of them.
I see no purpose or point in bashing Pyramix because Tony had issues with interoperability.

UnderTow · 25th November 2010

This thread has made me curious. Is Sony Media Wave 64 (W64) compatible with RF64?

W64 seems to be supported by a lot of DAWs and editors so if it is the same format.

List of DAWs/Editors that support W64, RF64 or BWF-WAV64 in no particular order:

Cakewalk Sonar
Steinberg Cubase, Nuendo, Wavelab
Magix Samplitude, Sequoia
Merging Pyramix
Sony Sound Forge
Studio One
Ardour
N-Track
Qtractor
SADiE
Fairlight
And probably many more...

Spot the odd one out. ;-)

Alistair

kk@jamsync.com · 25th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by klaukholm

Well, we both have to work with the market leader (PTHD) and I think you would be hard pressed to find a company that is less of a team player.
If they were a team player, we would all have PT import export options in our other DAWs, but they made damn sure that would be impossible (dark matter anyone, or the euphonix 727 interface back in the PT5 days)

Being the market leader does not mean you do everything the optimal way in terms of design.

As a pyramix user, I have many concerns, but them not trying to be interoperative with others is not one of them.
I see no purpose or point in bashing Pyramix because Tony had issues with interoperability.

They were very late to the game supporting QT files, so that eroded support for them. This is not bashing them; it's a point of fact. I've had their stuff in for review and there are several points I could make, but why bother?

People bash PT all the time and PT users either say, "OK that's probably true, Avid sucks at that" or "I have several DAWs in my studio to be compatible with all our clients". The thing is, PT makes a lot of people able to communicate with each other, so it sells. I remember saying to a forum that was mostly Nashville-based in the early 90's that if studios didn't have a PT room within a decade, they'd probably go under on Music Row. That prediction has come to pass (several years ago) but you should have read the howls of rebuke I endured! And every one of the engineers who told me I was stupid and deaf (because, hey, PT sounded awful and didn't have tubes), is now either out of the biz or learned to use PT. That's a fact. They either made the jump or they didn't get work.

I didn't love PT then and I certainly hated the fact that there wasn't a public doc of their multitudinous errors at that point (no knowledge base). I fought long and hard for that, as did several others. But, even with disliking a lot of aspects, it was easy to see they would wind up on top because they were first (along with Opcode, RIP) and they "got it" on several levels. That's the reason third party providers hooked up with them. Sorry, but you don't see that happening with Pyramix and that limits their market share. It's just the truth, not bashing.

I'd say Nuendo is likely PT's greatest market competition partly because they've had so many third party supporters and partly because they beat PT at their own game in some instances. But that's the point, really, you can't make it by having some features that are better than PT's; you have to have third party support and Steinberg just has lots of ancillary stuff that reaches out in all directions, production as well as post.

Supporting a lot of formats is useful if you are a "canopener utility", but if you're a vertical niche-market app, it's hard going. Look at New England Digital.

That said, I made the point earlier in the thread, which you apparently chose to ignore, that I'd like to see "universal formats" actually be universal. They seem to be split into two different specs between Europe and the US, but then, look how long it took to get to "Pin 2 hot".

paulo m · 28th November 2010

I don´t really care about who is the market leader. I choose a tool if it fits my way of working, suits my type of work and that I enjoy working with.

Most common daw´s do pretty much the same things nowadays, despite using diferent ways of achieving that in some cases.

I saw someone here saying that Pyramix was late in suporting Qt. How can that define a worldclass daw? Please...

I use Pyramix for some years now and despite not being a "market leader" I don´t intend to switch to any other daw at the moment.

Ferrari and other fine car manufacturers are not market leaders in terms of world sales, despite they represent some of the world´s finest cars...

Some people just don´t like to follow the hurd.

I started to use Pyramix when I had to take my trusty AMS Audiofile to the shelf. By that time most daws, PT included, were light years behind the Audiofile in terms of precision real time editing, machine control etc. That was then and now is now. And now is Pyramix 7 Masscore!

kk@jamsync.com · 28th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulo m

Some people just don´t like to follow the hurd.

That would be "herd".

The larger the market share, the easier it is to float loans for development and support. As for not supporting QT, it was a very big deal for those of us who manage assets across several media. Being able to use the same file-based video asset for multiple releases sped up production and post production time. Today when artists and films may simultaneously release product for iTunes, broadcast, DVD, websites and even usb keys, file-based video assets and the ability to support them within the DAW rather than syncing various machines online is of maximum importance.

This is my last post on the subject. Until some of these file formats are universally accepted, the user would be well-advised to export to the common formats. Arguing about platforms won't change this.

UnderTow · 28th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by kk@jamsync.com

That would be "herd".

As for not supporting QT, it was a very big deal for those of us who manage assets across several media. Being able to use the same file-based video asset for multiple releases sped up production and post production time. Today when artists and films may simultaneously release product for iTunes, broadcast, DVD, websites and even usb keys, file-based video assets and the ability to support them within the DAW rather than syncing various machines online is of maximum importance.

QT is just one proprietary format by one computer manufacturer so just to clarify, are you saying that Digidesign were the first to add support for harddisk based video file playback in the same timeline as the audio?

Alistair

apple-q · 28th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnderTow

QT is just one proprietary format by one computer manufacturer so just to clarify, are you saying that Digidesign were the first to add support for harddisk based video file playback in the same timeline as the audio?

Alistair

Avid´s AudioVision was a DAW for post with integrated non-linear Video way before PT. You could even edit the video. That was about 15 years ago when AudioFiles and others were still jog/shuttling Beta-Machines or even worse Umatic machines via RS422. ;-)

UnderTow · 28th November 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple-q

Avid´s AudioVision was a DAW for post with integrated non-linear Video way before PT. You could even edit the video. That was about 15 years ago when AudioFiles and others were still jog/shuttling Beta-Machines or even worse Umatic machines via RS422. ;-)

Thanks for the info. I wasn't doing post in the days of AudiVision so I wasn't aware of it.

Alistair

paulo m · 29th November 2010

Quote:

Avid´s AudioVision was a DAW for post with integrated non-linear Video way before PT. You could even edit the video. That was about 15 years ago when AudioFiles and others were still jog/shuttling Beta-Machines or even worse Umatic machines via RS422. ;-)

True, regarding non linear video. But you need to take into consideration that on those times, file based operations were still in it´s infancy in broadcast, so most people had no time to digitize/ingest material for post, hence the need for precise machine control to jog/sync Betas, Digi Betas, DAT machines etc. At least on TV station work, which is my background. At the time of the Audiofiles we were syncing Doremi video units, but most of the time, it was pure tape machine/daw sync/lock in real time.

Quote:

That would be "herd".

Indeed, thank you for the correction. Glad you understood it though.

tribeofenki · 25th February 2011

Even Pyramix 7 manual states vaguely that many systems could encounter the 4Gb or the worst 2 Gb limit for the audio. It is a sytem/driver issue. Wonder if someone knows a serious hardware DAW assembler, cute enough to test their PCs about this problem...

huub · 31st March 2011

I'm curious though:
I use PMX for location recording, and usually enable the r64 option.
I have recorded DVDs for dance parties and/or DJ sets that lasted up to 12 hours, one DVD I am 100% sure was mixed in Protools, and I did not receive any complaints..

The multichannel WAVs; yes they are incompatible obviously, but the r64 wavs?

25th November 2010	#38
UnderTow Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: the Netherlands Posts: 3,558	This thread has made me curious. Is Sony Media Wave 64 (W64) compatible with RF64? W64 seems to be supported by a lot of DAWs and editors so if it is the same format. List of DAWs/Editors that support W64, RF64 or BWF-WAV64 in no particular order: Cakewalk Sonar Steinberg Cubase, Nuendo, Wavelab Magix Samplitude, Sequoia Merging Pyramix Sony Sound Forge Studio One Ardour N-Track Qtractor SADiE Fairlight And probably many more... Spot the odd one out. ;-) Alistair __________________ Alistair Johnston - TV & Film Post, Mastering, Sound Design -- "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself -- and you are the easiest person to fool" -- Richard P. Feynman "There's a sucker born every minute" -- P.T. Barnum

28th November 2010	#40
paulo m Gear nut Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Portugal Posts: 107	I don´t really care about who is the market leader. I choose a tool if it fits my way of working, suits my type of work and that I enjoy working with. Most common daw´s do pretty much the same things nowadays, despite using diferent ways of achieving that in some cases. I saw someone here saying that Pyramix was late in suporting Qt. How can that define a worldclass daw? Please... I use Pyramix for some years now and despite not being a "market leader" I don´t intend to switch to any other daw at the moment. Ferrari and other fine car manufacturers are not market leaders in terms of world sales, despite they represent some of the world´s finest cars... Some people just don´t like to follow the hurd. I started to use Pyramix when I had to take my trusty AMS Audiofile to the shelf. By that time most daws, PT included, were light years behind the Audiofile in terms of precision real time editing, machine control etc. That was then and now is now. And now is Pyramix 7 Masscore! __________________ Best regards Paulo

25th February 2011	#46
tribeofenki Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: @$tr@L pL@n3 Posts: 1,511	Even Pyramix 7 manual states vaguely that many systems could encounter the 4Gb or the worst 2 Gb limit for the audio. It is a sytem/driver issue. Wonder if someone knows a serious hardware DAW assembler, cute enough to test their PCs about this problem... __________________ Ishkur Guide to Electronica ૐ Where are all the Goa parties?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
sd2 files to wav files... HELP!	basskater87	So much gear, so little time!	10	3rd November 2009 06:51 PM
help, all my .wav files changed to wma files	maskedman72	Music computers	16	4th June 2009 12:30 PM
*.01 files to wav?	Flying_Dutchman	Music computers	13	26th October 2008 10:17 PM
Converting DP files to .wav files	KenRutkowski	Music computers	5	12th December 2006 06:20 PM
WAV Files...	Messiah	So much gear, so little time!	6	3rd June 2003 06:31 PM

30th July 2010	#32
philper Lives for gear Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: San Francisco area Posts: 2,300	I just discovered that Boom Recorder will record R64 polys above 4GB, so now I'd REALLY like to find a utility or app to crack them. Philip Perkins

25th November 2010	#37
klaukholm Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark Posts: 2,408	Well, we both have to work with the market leader (PTHD) and I think you would be hard pressed to find a company that is less of a team player. If they were a team player, we would all have PT import export options in our other DAWs, but they made damn sure that would be impossible (dark matter anyone, or the euphonix 727 interface back in the PT5 days) Being the market leader does not mean you do everything the optimal way in terms of design. As a pyramix user, I have many concerns, but them not trying to be interoperative with others is not one of them. I see no purpose or point in bashing Pyramix because Tony had issues with interoperability.

31st March 2011	#47
huub Lives for gear Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: amsterdam Posts: 1,127	I'm curious though: I use PMX for location recording, and usually enable the r64 option. I have recorded DVDs for dance parties and/or DJ sets that lasted up to 12 hours, one DVD I am 100% sure was mixed in Protools, and I did not receive any complaints.. The multichannel WAVs; yes they are incompatible obviously, but the r64 wavs?