Yet another dumb 4:2:2 question.

farss wrote on 2/13/2005, 5:08 AM
It's late downunder so please excuse me if this is really dumb.
I'm just playing around with the Sony 4:2:2 codec and I just remember having to eat humble pie over DB and audio. DigiBeta records audio at 24 bits with lots of channels to boot.
Ah yes, but I can only send DV25 out to DB which means only 16/48 audio, but wait, from memory I can restripe just the audio on a DB deck, hm, OK. So I can't get better than 8 bit 4:2:0 video to the deck, but how about 24/48K audio down a AES/BU pipe with TC?
So let me see, send out MTC, convert to LTC for the deck to jam to and ....
This has possibilites or does it? DB decks can take a surround mix right?
Networks like surround sound down here, networks like programs on DB, so OK we can only give them 4:2:0 for now, can we perhaps at least juice things up in the audio department?
Bob.

Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 2/13/2005, 8:19 AM
Will they take the DB with 6 channels on it? We've never delivered a master with the surround embedded, we deliver on DA88 and then the post house marries them, so I don't know how they're delivering. But yeah, you can MTC to SMPTE out and have the deck lock to it. We've got a Timeline Lynx that does this for us, but any MIDI to SMPTE device should work.
farss wrote on 2/14/2005, 8:35 PM
Did a little investigation on this myself. Seems 5.1 is recorded to DB decks using only two channels via AES. Don't have anymore detail as yet but my mate did say it drives the 'normal' station meters WAY onto the red. Guess that's why I;ve seen some rather expensive 5.1 metering gear for broadcast 5.1.
Bob.
musman wrote on 2/14/2005, 10:46 PM
I understand and admire your attempts to take Vegas to the next level with digibeta and your loyalty to Vegas in trying to find a way to make it all work. I know Spot thinks differently, but I believe that Vegas's integration into this and other formats deemed "professional" will help Vegas to be wider adopted in any number of way. This is the direction I'd like to Vegas moving rather than more After Effects-esque features.
Good luck to, I hope you get a workable solution from Vegas!
Spot|DSE wrote on 2/14/2005, 10:54 PM
Why would you think I'd feel differently? Ummm.....I'm the one who introduced the SD Connect to the forum, and to several broadcasters. FWIW, we've got one in each room here. Having Digibeta, XDCam, BetaSX, and HDCam access is only good for Vegas. Where I DO disagree, is that Vegas doesn't need to be encumbered by very old HAL programming, because processors, RAIDs, MOBO's, RAM etc are all getting faster. But in terms of accessing outside formats, I'm totally in agreement.
farss wrote on 2/15/2005, 12:52 AM
Not that I have the first clue as to what HAL is (unless you mean that nice PC from 2001?) but of course Hardware Acceleration is really Hardware encumberance. Only two days ago my Macolite mate was still smarting over the money he wasted on some Matrox whiz bang board for his Mac only to find out when he bought a new Mac FCP ran faster without the thing and Matrox have no intention of upgrading their drivers anyway.
In anycase having shelled out a lot of dollars for a souped up PC, Vegas performance isn't the issue here, this things fast enough to maybe squirt uncompressed HD down a HD SDI pipe, if it isn't it sure can be made to do it.

What's so damn frustarting is the "It's only for DV25" mindset. Yet I can render out to uncompressed HD at a reasonable speed, I CAN do things with Vegas like MultiRoll that $1M Avid systems can't without major additional expense. The guys that use this stuff are blown away by Vegas, not just the video guys but even the audio guys. There's very serious sales potential with this product and with the Sony name behind it anyone in the broadcast world will listen but something, for some reason, seems to keep holding it back from not just going mainstream but beyond.

Bob.
Spot|DSE wrote on 2/15/2005, 12:56 AM
Sorry...:-) HAL=Hardware Application Layer.
musman wrote on 2/15/2005, 1:28 AM
Sorry, Spot. I was just refering to our previous discussions about 10 bit, matchback, and that sort of thing. I think in general I'd like to see Sony spending money making sure Vegas can handle the same input and output as FCP, talking better to other programs (for offline, etc) and that kind of thing rather than more after effects like functions. Vegas is very stacked in that regard and though I think Bezier curves is a great addition, I wouldn't go much further than that.