bralleput Posted June 3, 2014 Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 Nowadays audiopost wants M-files (because in 'sound miner' all metadata is shown on the right track in 'M'(1 'Boom'2 'Harry'3'Sally' etc),in Poly all data/tracks are shown 'overeachother') and since the 644 is able to record M files,I thought it was a good idea to shoot M for my current production.Got a call from editing the 2nd day of shooting that they were unable to use/read the 'M' files without an ALE.....Only recorder that creates an ALE is Cantar (we are talking a 2006 recorder..) and the beta version of Waveagent.What to do?Had many mails to SD support (Mikey pay attention!!),but without any usefull/no reply...my files nowadays are in Poly,but what is the use to have the M option in the 664 ,when Avid can not use them??(nor can FCP..) Regards, David Carmiggelt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted June 3, 2014 Report Share Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) Brall: " I thought it was a good idea to shoot M for my current production " guess you did not do a workflow test..? " without any usefull/no reply. " IOW: they are not doing what you want ?? " but what is the use to have the M option in the 664 ,when Avid can not use them??(nor can FCP..) " maybe that will change... and, oh, yeah: workflow test. Edited June 4, 2014 by studiomprd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Perkins Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 I've done both styles of audio files to Avid, FCP and Premiere post without issues. Your posties need to get their workflow together with you. phil p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Mansvelt Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Ive always thought Monophonic files where more for the music world or for anyone shooting VERY long takes (over 2G in polyphonic format). Never used it it but I'm sure there is a need for it somewhere? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old school Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Just because we can do things with our recorders doesn't mean we should. Anything out of the norm should be cleared with all before the shoot. Norm is BWAV POLY. It can all work but if it is a hassle we all know who gets blamed. Always cover your ass. CrewC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 I see mono files used in workflows where camera audio is primary, and iso's are only pulled from as needed. That way an editor can just pull up the individuals track instead of dropping all the tracks on the timeline. David, can you elaborate on what post said as to why they can't use your tracks? What happened when they import them? Always better to ask what the preferred workflow is ahead of time. There are too many ways to do the same essential thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmgoodin Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Bwf Widget Pro can create an ALE file from your folder full of Mono files. However I wrote the ALE generator many years ago and don't know if it is up to current AVID specs. You can download BWF-Widget Pro Demo and run ti to see if it works for you. It is completely functional for 15 days. It doesn't have to change any files and is non-destructive so it couldn't hurt to try. http://www.bwfwidget.com/html/download.html It is Windows Only and remember to "run as Administrator" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Nowadays audiopost wants M-files (because in 'sound miner' all metadata is shown on the right track in 'M'(1 'Boom'2 'Harry'3'Sally' etc),in Poly all data/tracks are shown 'overeachother') and since the 644 is able to record M files,I thought it was a good idea to shoot M for my current production.Got a call from editing the 2nd day of shooting that they were unable to use/read the 'M' files without an ALE... I would get more information and call the sound editor / post supervisor / re-recording mixer involved and ask them what they specifically want (and get it in writing). As far as I know, the metadata is identical between Mono files and Polyphonic files, and when you import a Polyphonic file into Avid, Final Cut Pro, or Pro Tools, it splits them up into mono files automatically. Metadata is handled differently on different versions of the program, but they refined this fairly well in PT10 and PT11. From the post side, my observation is that Poly files are less messy to deal with just because there's fewer of them. For example, if you do 100 takes a day and have 10-track files, that's 1000 files; if it's Poly, you only have 100 files. Either way, making the ALE is a job for the assistant editor / dailies person, and it takes only minutes to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmfsnd Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Always cover your ass. CrewC End of thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 "End of thread". Ahh rookietime! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Duffy Posted June 4, 2014 Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Avid is aware of their shortcomings (we've told them enough times), and how the industry is moving toward iXML metadata. I'm quietly optimistic that future versions of MC will do better with iXML, which is created by all the recorders in common use by members of this forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Crew:My ass was covered : I recorded Mono files on the CF and Poly on the SD card.No problems, gave post the Polyfiles a day later.As to 'workflow': test was done in Poly (picturepost),but audiopost (they have no problems with M files without ALE..) asked ( end of afternoon before 1st shootingday..) to have a Mono workflow all the way (picturepost and audiopost)..OK.After 1st day Mono turned out not to work for Avid...I'm shooting Poly now,as usual.Still is strange that Avid has problems with Mono.(need an ALE :Avid Log Exchange to 'read' the Monofiles) I agree with Marc that Mono creates so many more files than Poly..Why do you want that?But in SoundMiner Mono seems to be the way to go?! Courtney: I have a Mac (since the Macintosh SE..),so BWF Widget is no option..Sorry. DC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2014 Thanks Tom!The ALE thing gives me the feeling that the sounddepartment is driving a Maserati,and editing is still driving a 2001 Volkswagen golf (both nice cars,but what do you compare..)End of thread Matt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Crew:My ass was covered : I recorded Mono files on the CF and Poly on the SD card.No problems, gave post the Polyfiles a day later.As to 'workflow': test was done in Poly (picturepost),but audiopost (they have no problems with M files without ALE..) asked ( end of afternoon before 1st shootingday..) to have a Mono workflow all the way (picturepost and audiopost)..OK.After 1st day Mono turned out not to work for Avid...I'm shooting Poly now,as usual.Still is strange that Avid has problems with Mono.(need an ALE :Avid Log Exchange to 'read' the Monofiles) I don't think this is true, not since Avid MC 6.5. Which version are they using? Avid has been up to v7 for a year now. There was an issue with v5 where it would only import a maximum of 4 channels, but that was fixed years ago. Check this previous thread from 2011: At the worst, they could use Wave Agent to split the files, and I believe this should retain the metadata. Pro Tools 10 and 11 do a much better job at getting back the track/scene & take info for the final dialogue edit and mix, assuming the client uses Pro Tools in post. Either way, the use of ALE in an assistant editor job, not the sound mixer's job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 bralle: " As to 'workflow': test was done in Poly ...,but audiopost... asked ( ...) to have a Mono workflow all the way " IOW, there was no workflow test of the mono workflow...which should have been done before changing from the tested and approved (poly) workflow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 No way to do a test end of the afternoon before the first day of shooting Mikey...I shot M and P (as I said above....did you read any of that??) so there was no problem at all (AND you can convert P to M or M to P in Waveagent) so workflowwise it wasn't as if there was a total loss of useable audio..My question regards the ALE/version of AVID etc ( no real answers yet,but I think Marc came close), has nothing to do with workflow: P-files work all the time!(for me) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 bralle: " No way to do a test end of the afternoon before the first day of shooting " yes, I read that... in your situation the original workflow test was, pardon me, a waste (you were on the clock?) if they changed to an untested workflow at the last minute... someone doesn't get it, and deserved to have issues with it! (IMO) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Mikey if a posthouse works with a lot of Cantar M files ( with ,as later turned out ,ALE) I figured SD M files would work there as well,and the editor thought so as well ( not knowing about the ALE thing at that moment,it was the assistant who figured it out the next day when the 1st material arrived ) .Turned out SD M files didn't work..Is an AVID (version) thing I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 bralle: " I figured SD M files would work there as well,and the editor thought so as well " that is "assuming", and is not a workflow test... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 'Workflowtest' is not the answer to why SD M files are not accepted in AVID's overhere without ALE ( maybe it's a version issue),so quit making remarks about workflow,when you have no answer at all to why and what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bralleput Posted June 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Mikey there is a difference between 'reading a post and understanding what is the question' and 'answering' just for the sake of 'answering'.That is/you are compulsive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 bralle: "'Workflowtest' is not the answer to why SD M files are not accepted " that statement is correct... but a proper, advance workflow test would have revealed the issue before the shoot began. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 The Senator is right: a real workflow test has to be done before production begins. Even if it's just 20 minutes, you can find out just that fast if it works or if it doesn't. I'm still curious what version of Avid they're running that can't handle Poly files. Also, Soundminer is a sound effects database, not something used for production: http://store.soundminer.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.