32bit float (16.8)/(.24) import PROBLEM

[donrey]

I have not been successful at importing 32 bit float files. 32 bit float (16.8) is the Adobe standard, I would think PT 7.1 would be able to import it. Is protools able to import 32 bit float files?

This is the error I receive when importing 32bit (16.8):

Could not complete the Import Audio command because Assertion in "\code\riptide_Gershwin_III\AlturaPorts\NewFileLib s\Ff\Audio\Processing\FF_AuLine 150

[Craig F]

Pro Tools dose not see 32 bit files as a valid audio file.

You will ether need to have the files re-exported or use a file converting program to get them to a format that Pro Tools will see.

[donrey]

So there is no way to import a 32 bit float file directly into PT? There's no download that allows PT to recognize these files? If this is the case, I think this functionality should be added. Every other program I have recognizes this file type, including my quintessential media player.

Would it be a good idea to import into Wavelab or soundforge and then export as a 24 bit file? Would I loose any quality? Are there other better file converters out there?

[jeff markham]

hi,
there are no downloads to enable 32bit float reading. whenever i
get one of these, i use soundforge to convert it to 24bit ... and then
i load it into PT. soundforge will use tri-dither and i've never noticed
any difference in the sound quality myself.
jeff

[donrey]

Does soundforge automatically use the dither feature or do you use the batch converter process to dither? What's the appropriate way?

[jeff markham]

my understanding is it does it either way (batch or File->Save As....).

jeff

[nikki-k]

Hi!
Pro Tools HD/TDM is 48 bit fixed (for all intents and purposes...)
Therefore, it would not benefit from using 32-bit files. The only *real* benefit some see in this is to have the *original* file already in the format the app is running (currently, 32-bit float).

With all that in mind...PT simply does not need the feature..unless you want to use another app instead...comrade... just kidding!

[donrey]

The only *real* benefit some see in this is to have the *original* file already in the format the app is running (currently, 32-bit float).

I don't follow. If I am exporting files at 32bit float shouldn't that make a difference in the quality? then when importing to PT they should sound better than if I exported to 16 bit, I would think.

With all that in mind...PT simply does not need the feature..unless you want to use another app instead...comrade... just kidding!

I wouldn't trade TDM for anything. Couldn't even if I wanted to, I wouldn't get all the money I spent on this damn system back

[nikki-k]

32-bit files benefit solely within the app. Since TDM is 48-bit fixed (and 24-bit as well- read the TDM MIxer whit epaper for more in depth info), 24-bit files would be the highest bit rate for any real world benefit.

There is a way to resolve, but it costs (unfortunately, and something I do NOT agree with): Digitranslator, and using AAF/OMF as an export from the other app, then import into PT.

As was mentioned, alternately, and for whole files, simply batch convert does the job. I cannot see how anything *tangible* would be lost in a convert from 32-bit to 24-bit.

As for import into PT: 24-bit or 16-bit will importfine. Which is better? Excellent question, and one with more than one answer. I prefer to work in 24-bit. Plenty of extra headroom, and it makes me feel more confident and happy, psychologically. That translates into better piece of mind, and thus one less thing to worry about.

Coming from 32-bit files, I would suggest 24-bit all the way. I work with Nuendo 3.2 occassionally, and I use 24-bit. I tried 32-bit, and heard no benefit. My ears, my time, my conclusion. YMMV, of course...and hopefully it does. Individuality is law one IMO.

[jeff markham]

i agree with nikki-k .. i've used 32bit float wav files and i honestly
couldn't hear any difference between that and the 24 bit equivalent. and
probably with good reason. telling the difference between the ~190db of
dynamic range vs ~240db of dynamic range is likely going to be difficult to
detect for the typical program material which we work with. typical music
does not have anywhere near this dynamic range swing .... so you'll likely
not hear it.

in theory, you would only tell the difference if the tracks were massively
saturated and perhaps not even then. you're in the ear damage zone.

jeff