[grivel]

>Thing about Open TL is that no other manufacturers support it either- which in essence means it is >the same as a >closed format.

More DAW manufacturers support it than any other ADL file exchange: Pyramix, Nuendo 2, WaveFrame7, Logic Audio ... probably more. The first 3 being geared towards post. They are hardly dead, and OpenTL is used everyday Mr. Mayes.

>1- You may be from Europe

Correct. I have no clue how you guessed that.

>2- You perhaps work in the post sound world there.

Yes

>Fact of matter is, that Digi has encrypted the sessions to stop the advancement of cross platform compatability. >thereby trying to create a monopoly on the audio industry.

You are exactly right Henchman. You hit the nail on the head.

>I am also somewhat sure that it was done to hinder the sessions to be hacked easily.

Hacked? I don't think people are lining up spending all their time to hack into pro tools sessions. Instead of hacking it, why not just buy an MBOX? Seems to me like less time/money and labor.

>It surprises me that Tascam did not incorporate it into the MX2424.

Why? It suprises you that Digi wants to attempt to monopolise the california dubber market? For your info Mayes, the MX-2424 was supposed to be the MMR-24. Digi would not give the ProTools read/write capability to TimeLine, as this would limit it's plug and play use in Hollywood as a dubber. The MX got pushed into the music market. Only now after all this time, are they beginning to be used more in the large california post facilities. Some have them installed, but they don't appear in the numbers the the MM dubbers do. Another factor was the faulty first generation boards that appeard when they first came out, because they were rushed out of manufacturing to meet demand. This gossip spread around Hollywood, and well, once the gossip spreads, thats it. That original problem by the way was solved as they were all recalled and replaced. Now the machine is as reliable as the MM dubbers - hence they are used all over for Live Recording application - a VERY demanding job for reliability. As well as playback for LIVE, also very demanding.

>I think the contention of monopolistic business practices is a bit dramatic, And I do not recall other vendors >openning the doors for their respective file formats to be readable by others

Well, that's why other DAWs have things like OpenTL. To easily exchange between other systems. It works. People use it.

>The encryption serves one purpose. And that is to create a closed sytem, to prevent crossplatform compatability. >Same reason for not having any kind of crossplatform conversion available, like AES31.

YES

>Which I guarantee Digi will stop supoporting in the Near future. Thus leaving absolutely no way to be cross >platform compatible.

Disagree. Digi has no interest in eliminating the old format, as this poses problems for many Pro Tools projets that are archived in the old 5.0 format. This would mean that customers can't retreive their data. I don't see how that would benefit digi.

>If in fact they were truly interested in a monopoly, they would be fighting tooth and nail to keep >OMF alive

They don't need to fight to keep it alive. It will stay alive. OMF has become imprinted in peoples brains, and it's common practice to use.

>since most people just hacked compatibility fro PT 4 sessions - like Akai and Timeline

False here Charles. TimeLine did not HACK into PT4. Legal agreements were put in place and Digi allowed the MMR / MMP to do it, one of the reasons because they [digi] know that the DAW was not reliable enough for 'ONLINE' dubbing [more specifically REPRODUCER] all day long. It [ProTools]was too flaky.

Now that ProTools is a little better and works most of the time, and that companies can rely on it and put up with the little quirks as reproducer, you won't be seeing a box like the MMR made ever again [a plug & play dubber with full front transport controls, buttons, everything that can work like a tape recorder - ie. a Pro Tools recorder and player but a device that doesn't need to be controlled by a computer terminal.] One of the things too is the price...the MMR was so expensive that it was out of project studio reach, so this is OK to digi. And finally the company that made it is gone, that's the main reason really. If they were still around, Hollywood right now would be using the MMR-48.

Just as the new CineFile dubber is going to be VERY high priced. I notice it has Pro Tools read - I don't know about write. This is OK because the price is so high, again out of MID level reach. It's nice to know that a new dubber is coming out. Too bad for the blank face though and no front controls.