How to load a pro tools session for tweaking - Page 2

DupleMeter · #16 12-11-2023, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

Yes, AAF, thank you for the correction. I did mention it to the OP. See post #3. Again, it's an Avid/Digidesign protocol.

Just for clarification. AAF, and its predecessor OMF, are not Avid protocols. They were developed by the Advanced Media Workflow Association. Avid adopted them along with most other DAW and NLE developers.

Joseph Hanna · #17 12-12-2023, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

Just for clarification. AAF, and its predecessor OMF, are not Avid protocols. They were developed by the Advanced Media Workflow Association. Avid adopted them along with most other DAW and NLE developers.

For the record, however, when I worked at Digidesign, we were all told that OMFI was a Digidesign proprietary protocol. All of us were under that impression. There again, a lot of strange stuff came from what was then a very bizarre management team. Hearing this, I suspect Avid bought the rights to call it their own, and it got passed to the employees as such.

I'm unaware as to who was involved with the development of AAF. I just assumed it would have been Avid.

Mobilemike · #18 12-12-2023, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

For the record, however, when I worked at Digidesign, we were all told that OMFI was a Digidesign proprietary protocol. All of us were under that impression. There again, a lot of strange stuff came from what was then a very bizarre management team. Hearing this, I suspect Avid bought the rights to call it their own, and it got passed to the employees as such.

I'm unaware as to who was involved with the development of AAF. I just assumed it would have been Avid.

That’s fascinating!

My understanding is that OMF was developed by Avid, based on a container format developed by Apple, long before Avid bought Digidesign and they merged. In the early days of Pro Tools I remember you had to purchase a separate license for Digitranslator to be able to import and export OMF’s to Pro Tools, I assumed because of licensing fees to Avid. It was only after Avid bought DIGI that it became fully integrated in Pro Tools.

KevWind · #19 12-12-2023, 09:11 AM

Very interesting info

I wonder though if as Mike mentioned in the OP's case in practical terms, that getting a few months PT Artist or PT Studio subscription might be the most straight forward ??

DupleMeter · #20 12-12-2023, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevWind

Very interesting info

I wonder though if as Mike mentioned in the OP's case in practical terms, that getting a few months PT Artist or PT Studio subscription might be the most straight forward ??

He could also get a free demo of ultimate before spending a cent to see if he could open the session as is & just be sure it suits him.

I think the demo is a full 30 days.

DupleMeter · #21 12-12-2023, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

For the record, however, when I worked at Digidesign, we were all told that OMFI was a Digidesign proprietary protocol. All of us were under that impression. There again, a lot of strange stuff came from what was then a very bizarre management team. Hearing this, I suspect Avid bought the rights to call it their own, and it got passed to the employees as such.

I'm unaware as to who was involved with the development of AAF. I just assumed it would have been Avid.

They could have very well bought the rights to OMF or they may have absorbed the original development team & with that the code base & rights.

What the DAW world needs is an open format that exceeds AAF. Something that would retain edits, routing & plugins. As it is AAF has to render all FX to transfer them because it can’t pass along plugins. I think that it’s Steinberg who has been trying to push their new universal format, but adoption has been non existent. If Avid & Apple were to work together on a universal session format it would have a fighting chance, since together they represent the majority of DAW users right now.

KevWind · #22 12-13-2023, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

He could also get a free demo of ultimate before spending a cent to see if he could open the session as is & just be sure it suits him.

I think the demo is a full 30 days.

Good point

Gordon Currie · #23 12-13-2023, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

Just for clarification. AAF, and its predecessor OMF, are not Avid protocols. They were developed by the Advanced Media Workflow Association. Avid adopted them along with most other DAW and NLE developers.

Not how I remember it with OMF.

Avid published all papers on OMF back in the early 90s. This was before Avid bought Digidesign (1995).

There were AES papers with Avid authorship in 1994.

The Advanced Media Workflow Association didn't even exist until 2000.
So they couldn't have written a spec that appeared in 1994.

I remember OMF being a hot mess in many ways. No wonder it was superseded by better protocols.

DupleMeter · #24 12-13-2023, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon Currie

Not how I remember it with OMF.

Avid published all papers on OMF back in the early 90s. This was before Avid bought Digidesign (1995).

There were AES papers with Avid authorship in 1994.

The Advanced Media Workflow Association didn't even exist until 2000.
So they couldn't have written a spec that appeared in 1994.

I remember OMF being a hot mess in many ways. No wonder it was superseded by better protocols.

You may be right about OMF - I only have very vague memories of it. And yes, a hot mess only begins to describe it. It's even less standardized than AAF, which is a very loose standard, at best.

LiveMusic · #25 12-18-2023, 09:03 AM

OP here. I finally got everything. Wanted to ask... at a point along the way, the mix engineer said to me, "I could just upload all of the remaining sessions from here; I have already opened them and saved them as .cwb sessions (Cakewalk Sonar)." He is a Sonar pro. So, he uploads them to dropbox. I then downloaded a few and I could not get them to work. I finally saw that these were named as .wav and I contacted him and he thought I somehow renamed them but I didn't do that, all I did was click the download button on Dropbox and downloaded. How it became .wav is a mystery and is the question. He then told me to rename as .cwb and try that, which worked. Any idea how this rename to .wav extension occurred? Or do you think he made this mistake somehow? (I have no idea, but he has recently been ill, maybe he made a mistake.) I ask so that I can figure out how not to have this happen again!