Jump to content

TC stamped mp3 transcription files


Bob Marts
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 5 months later...

Reviving an older topic...

Just recorded an MP3 with stamped TC via 552 (not on a track.. per production request to not hear the annoying noise...) and after the fact have come to realize that there is no way to play the MP3 back with a timecode window to display the code...

Rang Sound Devices and they did not know of any app in existence that can accomplish this. 

Anyone have a work-around that doesn't involve me re-recording in real-time.

ps.. why is there not a simple piece of software that can do this?  Seems like an obvious one. 

Thanks,

DH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this has been touched in previous threads but it would be great if Wave Agent could convert one track from BWAVs into timecode stamped MP3's. Just like BWF Widget Pro can do, (still waiting for the mac version.......) That would save me recording "triple system" as I did last week, and still having to rely on "that annoying noise" for the MP3's timecode.

I understand they'd need to pay to include MP3 encoding in their software, but if they were to pass that cost on to us users, I'd be happy to pay it if it was around the $10 mark. This is what Digidesign did with Protools, which is why I'm suggesting it could be around $10. I can't use Protools to convert the BWAVs to MP3s because it doesn't put tc stamps in the MP3's metadata. But I know transcription places are happy with Sound Devices MP3's, so Wave Agent would be the perfect program for that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this has been touched in previous threads but it would be great if Wave Agent could convert one track from BWAVs into timecode stamped MP3's. Just like BWF Widget Pro can do, (still waiting for the mac version.......) That would save me recording "triple system" as I did last week, and still having to rely on "that annoying noise" for the MP3's timecode.

I understand they'd need to pay to include MP3 encoding in their software, but if they were to pass that cost on to us users, I'd be happy to pay it if it was around the $10 mark. This is what Digidesign did with Protools, which is why I'm suggesting it could be around $10. I can't use Protools to convert the BWAVs to MP3s because it doesn't put tc stamps in the MP3's metadata. But I know transcription places are happy with Sound Devices MP3's, so Wave Agent would be the perfect program for that.

It does not seem possible to persuade Sound Devices to update Wave Agent with a number of improvements which would make it excellent. I for one would be happy to pay a decent amount (within the realms of comparable software) and would love to see the paradigm shift from value added free software to a paid for professional utility. It's very frustrating because Wave agent is very close to being the toolbox we all need, but I guess there just aren't enough of us to pay the wages of a good programmer and also turn a profit for Sound Devices for the motivation.

Although Wave Agent offers some very useful utilities (for free) there are some very annoying things about it - font handling on the Mac truncates file names in sound reports so I have to use the Windows version, for this one reason (infuriating). The track advance when playing can only be done if play is stopped (infuriating). The formatting of pdf sound reports just need to be that bit more flexible (infuriating). etc. etc.

But it's been like that for years at a time before the next update..... It's just so damn close to being a professional piece of software and I'd much rather pay for it to be that, rather than have something free but with obvious flaws and omissions.

Anyone else agree or have any ideas how we could get Sound Devices to give it higher priority - I'm guessing financial profit is probably the only answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" (still waiting for the mac version.......) "

not going to happen!

" Anyone else agree or have any ideas how we could get Sound Devices to give it higher priority - "

SD is a primarily hardware company, and apparently do not wish to be, or become, a software company

note: in this case, the firmware that drives the hardware is not considered a software package, as would be something hardware (and not even necessarily platform) agnostic, such as Photoshop, Cakewalk, Nuendo, or even BWF widget Pro

Edited by studiomprd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi there, does anyone know of transcribing software that plays TC stamped MP3s while displaying the timecodes? I can't seem to find one... Thanks for your help!

I should say I'm looking for a mac program that allows me to do this. Any help would be much appreciated! Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should say I'm looking for a mac program that allows me to do this. Any help would be much appreciated! Thanks.

Will Final Cut, or maybe Quicktime do it? I've never had a need to do this personally, but I know somebody that used to log in FCP because there was some easy way to do notes or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably not the best way to do it. But... I just imported a TC Stamped Mp3 into FCP6. Double click to open it in the viewer. Move the CTI to the head of the file. In the "Modify" menu go to Timecode. Change the source TC to the numbers stamped on the file. Now when you play the file, the TC ticks off in the wee window at the top right of the viewer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wave Agent came out of a need because no developer wanted to make a simple, Mac OS and Windows audio playback and metadata viewing tool. We too would love to see a great tool for managing WAV files, something along the lines of Lightroom for audio.

History - as a still photographer, I use Lightroom to view and manage images and perform light editing. Matt, Paul, and I wanted something along the lines of Lightroom for audio, but we didn't have a 15 person software development team like Adobe has. I approached a few software developers in our market and they at first were interested, but then didn't have interest in both Mac OS and Windows development. I guess they saw it as a massive effort with little return.

We chose to develop a tool on our own, because we needed one. At first we thought about offering it as a commercial piece of paid software. From an economic standpoint, there was no way that selling it would pay for its development, given the specialized market we are in and the limitations the first 1.0 had. We decided to develop it and make it a "feature" of all our recorders. It is a great troubleshooting tool for both the production sound mixer and post. It has saved us countless hours in tech support. We briefly thought about locking it to our hardware, but there was no reason to do that other than to be pricks. We weren't losing anything by making it widely available, plus we get your email address when you request it so we can let you know about cool, upcoming SD stuff.

Wave Agent has evolved and now offers more 788T control. That makes it more valuable to 788T customers but does little for users of other recorders. We continue to address Wave Agent and know its limitations. I don't see it being the be-all end-all Lightroom equivalent for audio. That will need to be done by a development team that can concentrate solely on it without distraction of developing other products.

Regarding the Senator's comment, yes, we are a hardware company, though every product (less accessories) that we have introduced since 2001 has a significant amount of software to enable it, some more than others (only the HX-3, MM-1, and MP-1 are exclusively hardware). You have to have great software to have great hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Jon for your extensive and thoughtful comments regarding the history of Wave Agent software. These sorts of posts provide for us all, not only valuable information about the product, but insight into the company, it's philosophy and approach to the industry professionals it serves. I have seen far too many sound people here on JWSOUND who really do not seem to grasp the challenges and difficulties that confronts all of the wonderful companies that produce the gear we use every day. Your post, besides letting us know something specific about Wave Agent, helps educate others as to the complexity of our relatively small market.

I love Wave Agent, I appreciate that it is not tied to specific hardware and that it works beautifully on the Mac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We briefly thought about locking it to our hardware, but there was no reason to do that other than to be pricks.

Thanks for not being pricks.

I've been peripherally involved in some software development. Man, what a pain. And I have friends at most of the usual-suspect companies who cut code and decide what features to add...and therefore what features not to add...to the applications they develop and sell. They constantly (if indirectly) talk about opportunity cost: time spent building one feature is time not spent building another feature. Anyway, Jon goes into this with more eloquence and authority than me.

But you know, my programming and product management friends all say that they REALLY pay attention to feature requests submitted through official channels (and they use those channels not to throw up a wall, but mainly to keep stuff organized and accessible to all their colleagues). Also, they don't just look for requests with the most votes. Ease of implementation, importance of market sliver needing that feature, and just flat-out coolness all play a part. So here are the feature-request forms for three of the big fish at least peripherally in our (or our clients') space:

Adobe feature request page (best-bet apps are probably Audition or Premiere...the folks on those teams talk to each other)

https://www.adobe.co...m?name=wishform

Avid/Digi Pro Tools feature request page:

http://protools.ideascale.com/

Apple Final Cut Pro feedback page:

http://www.apple.com...inalcutpro.html

Poke around Google and you'll probably find a similar form or email address for many of our favorite (and even least-favorite) companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...