[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] BWF RF64
Eric -
The current Grammy Foundation methodology standard for preservation can be
found here:
http://www.grammy.com/GRAMMY_Foundation/Grants/08_forms/2008_A-P_Methodology
_R3.pdf
It was revised in May 2007, calls for uncompressed Broadcast Wave files as
the ideal methodology.
The methodology has been updated yearly for a while, and is based on IASA
TC-03 and TC-04. The above PDF was revised in May 2007. It would be
interesting to see what the IASA standards say about BWF > 4GB.
--
Parker Dinkins
MasterDigital Corporation
Audio Restoration + CD Mastering
http://masterdigital.com
on 9/5/07 12:37 PM US/Central, Eric Jacobs at EricJ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
> Thank you for that excellent Grammy reference (dated
> May 27th, 2003).
>
> The precise wording can be found at the bottom of page 6:
>
> http://www.grammy.com/PDFs/Recording_Academy/Producers_And_Engineers/Deliver
> yRecs.pdf
>
> and reads:
>
> "2 It is unclear at this time whether the specification of
> the Broadcast Wave File format can be amended to explicitly
> include multi-channel (for numbers of channels > 2) files
> in time for release of this document. Also, BWF files with
> more channels are more likely to exceed the FAT32 maximum
> file size of 2gbytes. When the BWF Standard is so amended
> it is understood that this document will be updated to
> include multichannel content in BWF files."
>
>
> Although this document is over 4 years old and was written
> when MBWF (RF64) was still in the specification stage, now
> that MBWF is well defined and even supported by a few vendors
> (most notably Steinberg with Nuendo, Cubase and Wavelab), I
> still have to agree with John and the folks at the Grammy
> Foundation that it is still too soon to support MBWF as an
> archival format. My own recent experiments bear out what
> others have noted in this thread: MBWF support and
> compatibility are still poor among vendors.
>
> Practically speaking, MBWF is a great intermediate solution
> for production work with large files, but it's not supported
> widely enough to be used as an archival format.