BWF support in 4.0

[Eric]

Hi Bob,
Are you planning to add direct BWF support in SAW in version 4?
Thanks,
Eric

[Bob L]

That is not high on the list at this time... who knows what will actually end up in there though.

Bob L

[tomasino]

Yea, that would be so groovy (baby)!

Not that SawStudio needs it at all, :cool:

(here comes the spin)
but it would be one more diff. removed from the list with ProTools.
Plus there's the MetaData hook!

(now from the special interest group)
In my day job I have to jump through major hoops to generate BWF files at all supported sample rates and bit depths. Don't have a PT rig so I'm using a few different apps. to get there. The windows apps. completely suck. The Mac version of one of the apps. is only OK - at best.

Db Power amp only supports 16Bit PCM and the compressed variety.

As far as I know, there are no other windows apps. out there that support and/or handle BWF well. You know if Bob did it, it would rock. N' maybe another way to expose a few more folks to SawStudio

Any licensing issues I wonder? :( naaaaghhh, can't be. It's become an basic protocol/file format in places like Europe - no?
Catching on more and more here in the U.S..

Ya know, the more I think about it the metadata angle is a real strong point. Broadcasters seem to really like it.

"I gotchyer BWF right here" - straight outta SawStudio.

[Eric]

Thanks Bob. I get tracks on CD that are timestamped BWF's. It would be great to just open them in SAW.

[MMP]

Seeming all of the new location audio recorders basically record to BWF for timecode now, I think it is extremely important that SS supports the placement of audio on the timeline from this timestamping.

SS has always been a great audio for video program, and I think BWF support is critical to the post production market. It would also make for easy transfer between editing systems, as many DAWs can export timestamped BWF from their MT regions.

Also, BWF is now the standard for most media library databasing programs like Soundminer...which was just released for XP. The keyword management is all done in the BWF metadata. This is how I am presently searching my sound effects library (200,000 records and growing).

The other issue related to Soundminer and other databasing programs is that they use a paste buffer for easy transfer to the editing programs, and SAW doesn't presently support moving audio this way. It would be great for me (at least) if this could be made to work without sacrificing performance.

Regards,

MM

[Mark Stebbeds]

As far as I know, there are no other windows apps. out there that support and/or handle BWF well. You know if Bob did it, it would rock. N' maybe another way to expose a few more folks to SawStudio



Sonar, Soundscape, Nuendo, Cubase, Adobe Audition, Vegas, Pro Tools all support BWF on the Windows platform. On the contrary, SS is one of the only apps that does not support BWF.

Like others, I hope BWF it is included in a future update. And how about OMF, to take compatablity to the next level? Import track data as well, and save mucho time.

Mark

[tomasino]

Sonar, Soundscape, Nuendo, Cubase, Adobe Audition, Vegas, Pro Tools all support BWF on the Windows platform. On the contrary, SS is one of the only apps that does not support BWF.
Mark

Hey, thanks for the list.

I've been using Adobe Audition a bit to analyze interleaved surround sound files - but v1.5 - which doesn't have the BWF support. Looks like 'v2.0 Premier' does.

Thanks again.

[Sean McCoy]

Also, BWF is now the standard for most media library databasing programs like Soundminer...which was just released for XP. The keyword management is all done in the BWF metadata. This is how I am presently searching my sound effects library (200,000 records and growing).MM
As an aside, Michael, have you abandoned Basehead in favor of Soundminer? I used the Soundminer ripper for Mac to transfer my library, but have thus far been happy with Basehead (in about its 10th year of beta) for PC. If you've switched, I'd be interested in your reasoning and experience with Soundminer vs. Basehead.

[MMP]

Hello Sean,

I am presently evaluating SoundminerXP (I bought a license), and I am learning it. It is a 1.00 release version, and it is still a little buggy. I am still using Basehead day to day, but Soundminer has some interesting features...like varispeed on preview & 24 bit support that I like. It also has more intelligent search functions, where it will look for common synonyms for what is typed in. I am a little concerned that metadata I used Injector to create (in Basehead) is not being read correctly in Soundminer, and I haven't had any downtime to really chase things down. Also, the program doesn't presently release the audio driver in the background...though, I have asked them to change this & they said they would look into it.

I have been a little disappointed in the slow progress that Basehead has been making, though it is working O.K. day to day. For instance, I have been asking for directory creation capability when setting the receiving folder for two years, but they haven't put it in....I really find having to leave the program to create a folder a pain. The lack of support for 24 bit files (especially, the lockup if you click on one to audition) is really annoying, especially as I don't know the bit depth of my FX files from their filenames.

I think Soundminer will be the better program once they have had time to get the kinks out of the new XP version.

Regards,

MM

[Dingo]

If you can open BWF files in SAW, and all their edits are where they're supposed to be, it makes it easy to show a pro tools user how much better SAW sounds. :D

[Bob L]

Consolidating tracks from Pro Tools is a very simple and effective way of bringing data into SS also... to continue to work on or to simply present an A/B comparison of the sound. :)

Bob L

[Dingo]

True, but if SAW supports BWF, all I have to do is bring in the regions from a CD and bang, on the timeline in the correct order, most recent region on top. No bouncing, no converting right? It also seems like there are a LOT of apps that are will be supporting this feature in the future. It seems like it would be advantageous to be slightly ahead of the curve here. It's a really useful feature that (as far as I know) would be relatively simple to implement that would have good marketing value. "with version 4's support of BWF it's even easier to upgrade from pro tools, nuendo, cubase etc to SAW studio without losing the work you've already done!" :D

[Bob L]

Just BWF support does not help a typical Pro Tools session with dozens of takes and overdubs and fade files... etc... there is no way to know which regions are the final selected takes just by reading BWF files... there is a lot more to the puzzle...

Track consolidation in PT will guarrentee that the resulting wav files are the composite of the currently selected takes on each track... and bringing them into SS is a single click option from the Library View in SS.

Bob L

[Dingo]

How about other apps?

[Mark Stebbeds]

How about other apps?

BWF spec simply adds time stamp addresses to regions/soundifiles. You have to place them on tracks individually and tell the software to "locate to timestamp", one at a time. BWF doesn't help you identify a bass drum from a vocal, or a keeper from an outtake.

It's a handy tool if you've moved a region around and you want to "return to orginal timestamp", or to import a few files into another app.

Bob's suggestion of consolidating regions is a much faster and better organinzed way of bring an entire session into SS from another app.

OMF support, on the other hand, will import an entire sesson and put regions on tracks where they belong. Many popular DAW apps support both.

Mark

[Eric]

I'm not concerned about Pro Tools, I would just like to have the waves open on the timeline where they belong. I tried Rail's app, but I don't think I did it correctly, because the waves all started at the begining of the timeline.
I also don't care about importing EDL data, I just want the files to line up.
I wouldn't have to have any other apps if SAW could do this.

[Mark Stebbeds]

I'm not concerned about Pro Tools, I would just like to have the waves open on the timeline where they belong. I tried Rail's app, but I don't think I did it correctly, because the waves all started at the begining of the timeline.
I also don't care about importing EDL data, I just want the files to line up.
I wouldn't have to have any other apps if SAW could do this.

If you have Rail's app, then your are all set, if BWF is all you need. If it's not working correctly, shoot Rail an email. It's been a while, but it worked perfectly for me.

Mark

[Eric]

Thanks Mark. I'm probably not doing something right. I'll send him an email.

[Bob L]

And... the CuiBono EDL Convert program will read OMF and also PT 5.0 sessions and properly convert themj to SAWStudio edls... if you need to do this a lot... then its a simple and seet deal.

Even PT makes you pay for the ability to export and Import an OMF... I don't think it comes for free as a standard part of the app... unless things have changed.

Bob L