9d Problem Systems : Specs

TimTyler wrote on 5/3/2010, 5:39 PM

I wish Sony would contact those of us experiencing new problems with 9d. Maybe create an online poll to help determine why some of us have big issues and some do not. Anything that might help find the conflict or system spec that causes issues.

I have memory problems loading Cineform files in 9d. Here are my specs:

Comments

TheHappyFriar wrote on 5/3/2010, 6:01 PM

if you do a support request there's a much better chance they'll get back to you.

TimTyler wrote on 5/3/2010, 6:44 PM

Sorry - I should have been more specific.

If others who experience similar problems post specs here, we might be able to find a common culprit among the systems.

IAM4UK wrote on 5/3/2010, 7:08 PM

I've been waiting for Sony to address a problem I raised with them in September. They care nothing about the customers.

Is anyone actually using 9d without the problems reported here?

TheHappyFriar wrote on 5/3/2010, 8:09 PM

If others who experience similar problems post specs here, we might be able to find a common culprit among the systems.

Then that's a great idea! :) I'd suggest posting driver & codec versions too.

xberk wrote on 5/3/2010, 9:23 PM

Is anyone actually using 9d without the problems reported here?

Yep. Using V9.0d without issue. AVCHD and SD. Loads as fast or faster than 9.0b -- No crashes. No red frames. Dare I say -- solid? I don't use Cineform or any proxies. I've tried MXF files -- works fine but I'm too lazy to bother when native AVCHD is running well enough for me. Running i5-750 Win7 with 8 gigs of ram.

System spec

ritsmer wrote on 5/3/2010, 11:48 PM

Is anyone actually using 9d without the problems reported here?

Yep. Here Vegas 9.0d works just great.
Do not see any long load times - and it even renders faster than 9.0c.

My raw media is even said to be difficult (AVCHD high profile 264 and up to 25 Mbit interlaced (1920+1440 mixed) AND with MP4 HD progressive AND with multi-megapixel JPG's - all just put directly (no proxies) onto the same timeline) - AND rendered to MPEG-2 m2t and AVCHD MP4...
but Vegas just works and works.
Just like good old 8.0c did - but faster.

Smile every half hour when I save the project into a new .veg because I cannot remember when I had to go back the last time :- )))

Dunno how to post the specs like you do, but have Vegas 9.0d 64 on a Mac Pro 2 x quad Xeons with Win 7 ultimate 64 bit. 8 GB RAM 3 TB internal diskspace on 3 HDDs and 1 SSD.

Software? just Vegas + Quicktime (for the codec) and what comes with Windows 7.
Fancy stuff etc. is banned to other machines here.

Rob Franks wrote on 5/4/2010, 3:10 PM

"Is anyone actually using 9d without the problems reported here?"

Doing avchd to Blu Ray (vegas 9d 32 bit).
No issues at all. Faster preview experienced... better time line handling... I have no complaints.

Used to have long 'non response' periods with 9c which is now gone in d

Brap wrote on 5/4/2010, 4:40 PM

I uninstalled 9d, loaded 9c back in everything back to normal. Vegas 9d is currently junk. Just my opinion.

TeetimeNC wrote on 5/5/2010, 4:07 AM

I'm just a few days into 9d but so far it is working well on my 6GB i7 with Vista 64. I am editing a project that contains high profile AVCHD and SD. I was surprised how smooth preview is, even across crossfades between two AVCHD clips. Big improvement over 9c so far. I do not use Cineform.

/jerry

Steve Mann wrote on 5/5/2010, 9:16 PM

9d works GREAT here. Just like all previous versions in my shop - Vegas just never crashes here.

If you look over the "problem" posts, you'll find the same half-dozen or so people experiencing problems. The majority of users are quite happy with Vegas.

TimTyler wrote on 5/6/2010, 9:42 AM

> 9d works GREAT here

Well then don't waste your time posting in this thread. This is not a thread to defend 9d.

This thread is for people who have 9d problems to share system specs in the hope of finding a common denominator.