If it's the VOB files, try renaming them to MPG. VOB is a subset of MPEG. If you have more than one VOB file from the same title, concatenate them into one file first.

Grazie, things are usually not so simple... but I took the time to try find the problem since Sony seems to have done most of the legwork for me.

It's not the vob files.

Removed vob files= no change, 7 minutes to open
Removed avi files= opened in 30 seconds

There are 9 avi files in my project. I then began removing them one by one. Then I found the exact type of avi files that were causing the hang.

6 of my avis were of this type: 720x400 25fps Xvid MPEG 4 codec progressive with a 48khz stereo AC-3 audio stream.

If I only put one of these type files in VP8c, the veg opens in about 15 seconds.
If I only put one of these type files in VP9d, the veg opens in about 1 minute.

Likewise, even importing the files into VP8 and VP9 behave differently. VP8 imports the file immediately. VP9 temporarily hangs for at least 30 seconds and then imports.

Erik

A 720x400 25fps Xvid MPEG 4 progressive video with 48khz stereo AC-3 audio is about as non-standard an AVI as one could possibly have.

I'm sorry but Vegas shouldn't be required to deal with every oddball thing that gets thrown at it. If you want to use oddball formats then you should fully expect some oddball behavior from Vegas and it may not be consistent from one version to the next.

I'm more than inclined to agree with John.

However, is this a typo:

"If I only put one of these type files in VP9d"

- are you still comparing to d and not the new "e"?

Grazie

Grazie wrote; So, and to counter those saying/thinking I had a local issue - it most definitely was not.

Hmmm, I kinda understand your argument, but let us think:

IF you did have the issue
AND I did not have it,
AND it had nothing to do with some local issue on your machine
THEN my machine must be one that is special - meaning that my machine had and still has a local issue that makes the load-times fast...

Sorry, Grazie, couldn't resist :- ) - will buy you a beer when/if you come to CPH. Just mail me.

On a ceartain project here the load time was 57 seconds with 9.0d - now it is 1-3 seconds faster.
A great feature in 9.0e is, however, that it starts in about 6 (SIX!) seconds here (from clicking its icon on the desktop and until it is opened and I can click i.e. the File menu).
Probably a local issue here too - on my 2 1/2 years old machine - but never the less great for such a big program.

"If you want to use oddball formats then you should fully expect some oddball behavior from Vegas and it may not be consistent from one version to the next. "

If you leave a door open without a sign and users walk through it don't blame the user and their expectations.

I've been caught out by this more than once myself. My test team have called me to account many times over this as they do their regression testing.
In one very recent case I could not for the life of me figure out how a user had managed to enter invalid values. It took someone from support using rdp watching what they did to figure out the backdoor that they'd used. I've since shut and bolted the door and yesterday someone else from the helpdesk team is fielding calls from users complaining that the "feature" they've been using for years is broken.

Bob.

"I'm sorry but Vegas shouldn't be required to deal with every oddball thing that gets thrown at it."


I guess we all can't be as professional as you John. Sorry, to have wasted your precious time.

Erik, it's not a case of not being "as professional as you John".
It's the fact that most of us have gotten used to Vegas being able to handle almost anything that gets dropped on the timeline.
When it doesn't users start complaining that Vegas doesn't work properly which is totally incorrect as Xvid and Divx aren't even on the list of supported formats..
It's been my experience that if I give it proper video (i.e. no oddball formats), it works like it's supposed to.
I deal with students who bring in footage shot on all kinds of recording devices ranging from miniDV camcorders to digital still cameras and cell phones.
As long as I run it through a converter of some kind (Super© works great for me) to change it to something Vegas recognizes, I don't have a problem.

Mike

Mike,

My only point is that the same clip works flawlessly in 8c. If it didn't work there then at least it would be consistent. In light of the already acknowledged issues that Sony has listed that are specifically related to slow load times in 9d, I feel pretty certain that my "oddball" avi is not the problem but is an issue that so far Sony hasn't found yet.

Also, the fact that simply replacing the dll file also immediately fixes the problem is another important reason to believe my argument is quite logical. To take the other side and claim the problem is because it is oddball is clearly illogical in light of the facts.

Frankly, JC is little too unfriendly in general in my opinion (very quick to be rude to people he doesn't know) and that's what rubbed me the wrong way with his condescending post.

Erik

Was the sluggish timeline issues resolved? I see no mention of this.

Hats off to SONY. Installed 9e 32bit no prob.

I think I'm ready to try their 64bit 9e on my 64bit machine and I have one question:

Do these versions (32bit and 64bit) exist side by side - not sharing any program resources? If I uninstall one later will the one left be affected?

@reberclark: I have both the 32 bit version (for plug-in compatibility) and the 64 bit version (for speed and more memory) installed.

They work flawlessly on my machine.

Remember to install the version, that you want to be associated with the .veg files, as the last one (as Windows for some reason associates to the last installed version - and it seems that nobody can persuade Windows to associate to the other version).

AFAIK they do not share anything - but I could not imagine why I should unstall one of them here.

<<"My only point is that the same clip works flawlessly in 8c.">>

If the format is not listed as supported by Vegas it means Sony has not coded for or tested for those formats and provides no support for problems associated with those formats.

It is immaterial whether it works in one version or not. If it is not listed by Sony as supported format you are on your own!

ritsmer - good point about the file associations, I had not considered that.

Perhaps before installing the 64bit I should rename all 32bit project vegfiles with 32 in the filename (for my own reference) or put them in their own folder.

I rarely click on a veg file outside of Vegas anyway.

My overriding concern is when uninstalling the 32bit version in the future, will that affect my 64bit install?

Thanks for all info.

@ John Cline,

Yes, That was before I saw that you could just directly update. Now, I'm in some deep pit of activation @$#%%$#. I can't even activate 9d anymore.

J

Update: SCS just emailed me and fixed it. They said that I had run out of activations. The funny thing is that I've never had V9 installed on anything but this one computer (no hardware changes either) and I haven't even taken advantage of the 2nd activation option.

@reberclark: here Vegas just opens any .veg file - no matter which version (32 bit or 64 bit) you saved it from.
No need to rename or keep track of version.

Here I just use the 64 bit version 99 percent of the time.

Hmmm - just as another data point, I just installed 9.0e over top of 9.0b and contrary to the comments from others, it did ask for my registration again and did go out to the registration server to register it again. "b" had been on this machine for some time and was registered no problem. Did not un-install or anything (and it asked during the install if it should install over the older version).

[edit] - even more interesting, it broke the registration for version 8 that I also had installed (and registered quite a while ago ) and I had to re-register that with it's key as well.

mikey

"Frankly, JC is little too unfriendly in general in my opinion (very quick to be rude to people he doesn't know) and that's what rubbed me the wrong way with his condescending post."

In the future I will make sure to completely sugar-coat all my responses. (Well, maybe not.)

Just common courtesy will be fine.

If you think "JC" (the John Cline version) is "rude" or "abrasive", you have led a pretty sheltered life - try some of the open forums out there. There are lots of "people" that simply seem to exist to see how insulting they can be (and the answer is VERY). While I find John's answers somewhat direct, I have also found them very useful and generally correct. (even if installing the update over the existing 9.0b install did make me re-activate not only 9 but version 8 as well (9.0e also managed to break the 8.0 registration for some reason)) :-)

mikey

"you have led a pretty sheltered life "

No, not at all. No need to lower our standards of civility simply because some or even many choose to be insulting.

Erik

"Hopefully, as time passes, so will most of these "legacy" members."

Dudwzr, do I take that message to mean that you are you hoping that some of the legacy members, like myself, should die?