Old 05-17-2012, 08:15 AM   #1
JWMMakerofMusic
Human being with feelings
 
JWMMakerofMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 64
Default AAF Support

Hey everyone. It's been a while. Right, so here is my next question. Does Reaper support the aaf file format yet? If not, what free tools are out there that can translate aaf to edl for smooth import into Reaper for post production work?
__________________
I am JWMMakerofMusic, but you may call me Jim.
JWMMakerofMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 09:16 AM   #2
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,817
Default

No free tools for that, as far as I know.

AATranslator supports import of OMF, which appears to be so horrible in how many variants can be produced and have to be supported individually, that its successor AAF was left by the wayside by the AATranslator developers. Apparently is was even more horrible and complex and even has some licensing trouble.

If you have Protools 9 or higher, you have an AAF importing tool. AATranslator can read and convert Protools sessions, so that's an option. Nuendo and Pyramix can import AAF files too, though I only know of Nuendos export format "XML track archives" being convertable by AATranslator. Perhaps someone else knows more about this.

Editshare's Lightworks, which is free to use can import AAF files as well, though I'm not sure what it can export so you can then get that in to Reaper. That video editing software is in beta right now and about to get a full release on May 28th 2012. You'll have to research what it can do, but it's a free option that may help.
__________________
Using Latch Preview (Video) - Faderport 16 setup for CSI 1.1 , CSI 3.10
Website
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 10:00 AM   #3
nofish
Human being with feelings
 
nofish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: home is where the heart is
Posts: 12,096
Default

Just got the AATranslator newsletter today which says:

Quote:
Just a quick update to let you know that we are making significant progress with adding functions to read FCP-X fcpxml ‘sequence’ files as well as AAF files.
Looking forward to seeing AAF support.
nofish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 10:04 AM   #4
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,817
Default

Interesting. That means a lot of other DAWs will get the ability to import AAF stuff.

Much luck and nerves of steel to that endeavor , gentlemen.
__________________
Using Latch Preview (Video) - Faderport 16 setup for CSI 1.1 , CSI 3.10
Website
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 10:48 AM   #5
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

It's 3:45am here and I only just sent that info out a little while ago - damn that internet - LOL

Yeah we are running out of interesting challenges and thanks to some more digging by Ron Novy he has given me a much less arduous way of nailing this AAF sucker to the ground.

FCP-X has still got lots of testing and some mov challenges but much progress on the AAF front has been made.

I expect a working beta within the week if nothing else (like life) gets in my way ;-)

Strange days indeed....
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 10:55 AM   #6
laser558
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
It's 3:45am here and I only just sent that info out a little while ago - damn that internet - LOL

Yeah we are running out of interesting challenges and thanks to some more digging by Ron Novy he has given me a much less arduous way of nailing this AAF sucker to the ground.

FCP-X has still got lots of testing and some mov challenges but much progress on the AAF front has been made.

I expect a working beta within the week if nothing else (like life) gets in my way ;-)

Strange days indeed....
Look forward to checking that out. Thank you Runaway and everyone at AAT.
laser558 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 06:42 PM   #7
pattste
Human being with feelings
 
pattste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 797
Default

As poorly thought out and implemented as they may be, OMF and AAF are as close as we get to a common format in the industry and are supported by a good number of DAWs. I understand that each vendor has its implementation that may not be 100% compatible with other vendors but clearly they've at least decided to give it a shot. "It's a bad format and it's complicated so let's not go there" doesn't seem to be what most of the major players have concluded.
__________________
My Music
Reaper(x64) 4.72 - Studio One Pro (x64) 2.6.3
i7-3630QM 2.4GHz - 8Gb RAM - 256Gb SSD - RME Babyface - Eve Audio SC204 - Windows 8.1
pattste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 08:22 PM   #8
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pattste View Post
"It's a bad format and it's complicated so let's not go there" doesn't seem to be what most of the major players have concluded.
I suspect that they have concluded that rightly or wrongly they need or should have some sort of (dare I say it) 'industry standard' compatability they can market and are therefore forced to 'have a go' ;-)

That's the only reason we are revisiting AAF - to hopefully boost sales by adding this functionality.

FWIW A PT session with 2 tracks and 2 clips equals about 12 A4 pages of AAF 'detail'. The same detail in an AES31/ADL (which is an actual 'standard') is about 12 lines and is human readable and can contain far more detail - go figure. LOL
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 09:20 PM   #9
plush2
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 2,110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
FWIW A PT session with 2 tracks and 2 clips equals about 12 A4 pages of AAF 'detail'. The same detail in an AES31/ADL (which is an actual 'standard') is about 12 lines and is human readable and can contain far more detail - go figure. LOL
I want to say to Avid that it may be YOUR program I'm licensing but that is MY data you are encrypting.
plush2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 10:14 PM   #10
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plush2 View Post
I want to say to Avid that it may be YOUR program I'm licensing but that is MY data you are encrypting.
I'm sure they are doing it for your own good - what other reason could there be?

I mean all we are doing is building upon that solid foundation of security and taking it to the next level by allowing you to back it up into some other DAW ;-)
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 08:01 AM   #11
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Well for those who are into this sort of thing we now have a beta version which John is currently testing which does a mighty fine job of converting AAF to Reaper, Nuendo, etal...

And while its not finished it's looking pretty damn good!

Damn if I didn't get my version for free (not counting the pain) even I'd buy a copy - LOL
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2012, 10:38 AM   #12
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Hey go figure AAF comes in a range of flavours and each one is different in it's own way!

There is Sony, Steinberg, PT and AVID variants of each.

Anyway got them covered - until we find another
Sigh.....
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2012, 11:42 AM   #13
JWMMakerofMusic
Human being with feelings
 
JWMMakerofMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 64
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Well for those who are into this sort of thing we now have a beta version which John is currently testing which does a mighty fine job of converting AAF to Reaper, Nuendo, etal...

And while its not finished it's looking pretty damn good!

Damn if I didn't get my version for free (not counting the pain) even I'd buy a copy - LOL
Awesome! This is awesome news. The reason I asked was, soon, Auria app will be released for iPad, and it boasts aaf import/export. I would love a program that can get aaf into Reaper format no sweat for post production work.
__________________
I am JWMMakerofMusic, but you may call me Jim.
JWMMakerofMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2012, 09:25 AM   #14
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Making excellent progress even with the PT produced ones but of course the usual suspect (Avid Media Composer) may as well be written in Hebrew - what is it with these clowns?

Sometimes ya just wanna give these morons a clip under the ear and tell them its not 'arty' or 'clever' its just crap.

Sigh.....

Edit: BTW if someone has a couple of small Avid Media Composer AAFs (2 tracks, 3 or 4 clips and 2 audio file references) they wouldn't mind sharing it would be most helpful.
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2012, 10:55 PM   #15
JWMMakerofMusic
Human being with feelings
 
JWMMakerofMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 64
Default

How much will it cost once completed?
__________________
I am JWMMakerofMusic, but you may call me Jim.
JWMMakerofMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2012, 11:02 PM   #16
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWMMakerofMusic View Post
How much will it cost once completed?
It will form part of the AATranslator functionality and like OMF I expect will be part of the $159 version.
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:00 AM   #17
John Lundsten
Human being with feelings
 
John Lundsten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Making excellent progress even with the PT produced ones but .....

Edit: BTW if someone has a couple of small Avid Media Composer AAFs (2 tracks, 3 or 4 clips and 2 audio file references) they wouldn't mind sharing it would be most helpful.
Testing this is for sure taxing but glutton for punishment that I am more AAF's from Media Composer & from PT10 would be much appreciated.

Ref type please & if MXF is used a single small Media file too.

John L
John Lundsten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 08:32 AM   #18
hopi
Human being with feelings
 
hopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Right Hear
Posts: 15,618
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Making excellent progress even with the PT produced ones but of course the usual suspect (Avid Media Composer) may as well be written in Hebrew - what is it with these clowns?

Sometimes ya just wanna give these morons a clip under the ear and tell them its not 'arty' or 'clever' its just crap.

Sigh.....

Edit: BTW if someone has a couple of small Avid Media Composer AAFs (2 tracks, 3 or 4 clips and 2 audio file references) they wouldn't mind sharing it would be most helpful.
Amen Mike... let's change their company name to RABID
__________________
...should be fixed for the next build... http://tinyurl.com/cr7o7yl
https://soundcloud.com/hopikiva
hopi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 08:43 AM   #19
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hopi View Post
Amen Mike... let's change their company name to RABID
Not bad but I think if you look up the word AVID it means 'greed' ;-)
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2012, 03:42 PM   #20
zappa
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 432
Default Re. AATranslator

Not wishing to hijack this thread so perhaps better discussed elsewhere, but I have been a supporter of AAT for some while, purchasing a copy a couple of years back and encouraging others to do same - and a few have.

But by way of a small moan, I am really disappointed by the decision to make OMF / PT functionality (and, I presume, AAF too as and when) part of the "Enhanced version" at a significantly higher price point.

Many of the potential users I work with are young, cash-strapped, students and/or in education (teachers preparing resources for example) who are required to use PT on Macs at college but want to use Reaper at home; oftentimes such individuals exchange work from Mac studios through educational gateways in OMF format. Also such resources are made available for educational use in this format.

Furthermore, I think that when I bought my license some while back there was no distinction between these two versions, and I seem to remember there being some kind of commitment with respect to future improvements and upgrades being covered by the license, by way of garnering early support from a growing community.

Perhaps an alternative pricing model should be considered. My least favourite approach is to allow import but not export from these formats in the standard version, prividing one-way support for users on a budget. My preference would be an approach similar to Cockos, where you simply make a distinction in the license between the more amatuer and professional user and price accordingly.

This is not so much an issue of principle. I've been blithely recommending AAT to users who want to import OMF and the like into Reaper, only to be virtually reprimanded over the price. Now being aware of that distinction, I can no longer recommend AAT to a bunch of potential users. It seems counter-productive to me.

edit: Just having read this back, it does sound a little whiny. Please don't take it as such. I know you (Mike et al) are pursuing a worthy endeavour and have put many hours into it, deserve some commercial reward, and are generally very helpful. But my feeling is that in the pursuit of additional funds you're potentially cutting potential sales out with this form of "segmentation", and in doing so reducing possibility for the long game; awareness of Reaper, as well as its userbase and success is generally growing; AAT will do so too, since there will be many migrants and a growing need for its capability, especially as its ability to port between DAWs and the like improves.

z.
__________________
"There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers" - anon.
Please check my Normalisation bugrep and confirm, thanks!

Last edited by zappa; 06-01-2012 at 04:41 PM.
zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2012, 07:28 PM   #21
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Thanks for your input zappa it is appreciated.

Product pricing is always a difficult thing.

I know for a fact that AAT is not treated seriously in some circles because it is so 'cheap' compared to say ProConvert and others in this very small market.
Likewise if we were giving it away for free we would still receive criticism for not including this or that and be expected to do so for free.

So what did we do?

We entered the market at $99 up against ProConvert for $700.
Sure we had very few formats then and certainly no OMF or PT.

We made one sale in 3 months to a prominent person on this forum.

Being involved in the Reaper community we re-thought our pricing and dropped it for a 'short time' to $39 and we got a small 'flood' (well trickle) of buyers.

BTW I even offered a refund of the difference to the original buyer who refused to take that refund but hoped that money would help fund our development!

After a period we adjusted this price back to $59 and there it remains for the 'standard' version.

Now the one mistake to make is to compare Reaper's pricing policy with ours or any other DAW's.

Our resources are smaller and our market is fraction of any DAW's but unlike any other DAW we have never charged for any updated version - with Reaper while it is admirably cheap in a world of expensive DAWs even they charge after a certain number of versions for upgrades.

So if you jumped on board at $39 3 or 4 years back then you are still receiving upgrades for free and you now have access to more conversion formats than any other DAW convertor.

Now to the 'enhanced' version.

We were beseiged by requests for an 'industry standard' conversion (read ProTools) and were not considered a 'professional' product without it.

I can safely say that ANYTHING involving ProTools/Avid/Dodgy has consumed more than a third (and maybe closer to 50%) of our entire resources and time.

In your mind you think you have an idea what I'm saying but you are not even close ;-)

So what to do - someone has to pay for this effort (and continued effort) as I can't absorb it all.

First thought was 'charge everyone $100 and be done with it.
It would still be relatively (and in some circles still too) cheap.
But then why should we bludgeon to death the guy who has no interest in anything PT related?

So we compromised - for $59 you get everything except PT related formats so Joe Average should be a happy camper.

BUT (not the fleshy part at the top of your leg) if you want to play in the PT/OMF camp then you have to help fund this effort.

As to AAF there is a good chance it will be included in the $159 version.
Why?
Because it is exactly the same as OMF except more difficult (how can that be you say - well they have teams of guys making sure it is!)

Now if you go back over any thread where OMF etc is mentioned you will find that I have offered cheaper alternatives so that potential buyers could purchase the $59 version in order to still get their conversion (and usually with more detail converted). For example many is the time I have suggested NOT buying the $159 version for an OMF conversion but rather using say a Track Archive (xml) for Nuendo etc.
In fact I think I remember mentioning rendering tracks to the OP as an alternative to OMF.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
Many of the potential users I work with are young, cash-strapped, students and/or in education (teachers preparing resources for example) who are required to use PT on Macs at college but want to use Reaper at home; oftentimes such individuals exchange work from Mac studios through educational gateways in OMF format. Also such resources are made available for educational use in this format.
Zappa, we are not insensitive to this and in genuine circumstances we have tried to help some where we can but we are certainly not a registered charity either;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
Just having read this back, it does sound a little whiny.
Don't think that at all.
Just like everyone has an opinion there are also 2 sides to every story.
All these things you have mentioned we are certainly aware of and we have grappled with these things but not quite as much as we grapple with anything PT related ;-)

And just for the record IMO OMF is an even greater marketing con than the term 'industry standard' - not to mention AAF.
It is a fact that you get more detail converted using a simple EDL.

Does any of this justify our pricing?

I certainly didn't set out to justify it but rather explain the history behind our decisions.

While it is regretable that you can't recommend the use of AAT I certainly hope that you continue to get good use out of your purchase and the subsequent free upgrades.

Certainly no offense taken.
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2012, 09:50 PM   #22
pattste
Human being with feelings
 
pattste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 797
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
It is a fact that you get more detail converted using a simple EDL.
This is interesting. Can you tell us a bit more about EDL? I understand that it is the Samplitude format and that Reaper can export/import it. Are there different versions of EDL? I was under the impression that a few DAWs called their native format EDL but it wasn't actually the same format as Reaper and Samplitude. Finally, can Pro Tools import and export EDL files?
__________________
My Music
Reaper(x64) 4.72 - Studio One Pro (x64) 2.6.3
i7-3630QM 2.4GHz - 8Gb RAM - 256Gb SSD - RME Babyface - Eve Audio SC204 - Windows 8.1
pattste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2012, 10:49 PM   #23
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

The Samplitude EDL format contains pretty much all you need for most conversions and certainly more than any OMF or AAF and you can read/write it with a text editor.

The AES31 spec went further and defined a format for conversion between daws. It didn't contain everything but formalised the basics that were common across pretty much all daws.

As the holders of the 'industry standard' Avid/Dodgy essentially said 'jam it up your ginger' we have a better format - OMF1.

Well it wasn't too long before that 'better format' became apparently an even 'better format' - OMF2.

Now the spec for OMF is written in an unknown left-handed, backward Hebrew dialect which has been interpreted and implemented in numerous (read different) ways and if that isn't bad enough there are secret 'handshake' components to the OMF which are known only to AVID/Dodgy products.

Well pretty soon someone in marketing said 'hang on other daws are implementing this OMF2 - obviously we didn't make it hard enough' so they came up with an even 'better format' - one which I'm sure they thought no-one could understand - AAF.
AAF is just the same crap but on steroids.

So rather than a freely available easy to use spec (AES31) the world had to pay for the priveledge of a 'better format' eg Digitranslator etc.

Am I boring you yet - my eyes are starting glaze over ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pattste View Post
Can you tell us a bit more about EDL? I understand that it is the Samplitude format and that Reaper can export/import it.
Yes that is correct - although as I recall there were some issues with Reaper's implementatoin of the track envelopes but I would have to hunt through my stuff to confirm that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pattste View Post
Are there different versions of EDL? I was under the impression that a few DAWs called their native format EDL but it wasn't actually the same format as Reaper and Samplitude. Finally, can Pro Tools import and export EDL files?
The Samplitude EDL is its own format but you are correct in that there are different versions of that Sam EDL and there are a heap of formats called EDL some of which are text and some binary (eg SAW, CMX3000, etc)

I have received EDLs from PT users which have come in handy when sorting out some PT issues but I have no idea how they were produced and I certainly have no way of saving, exporting or importing them in PT.
That and where elephants go to die remains a mystery to me.
I'm pretty sure that knowing PT you don't get that for free ;-)

Does this help?
__________________
AATranslator

Last edited by Runaway; 06-01-2012 at 10:51 PM. Reason: Inabilty to spell
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2012, 09:05 PM   #24
plush2
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 2,110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
I have received EDLs from PT users which have come in handy when sorting out some PT issues but I have no idea how they were produced and I certainly have no way of saving, exporting or importing them in PT.
That and where elephants go to die remains a mystery to me.
I'm pretty sure that knowing PT you don't get that for free ;-)
Does this help?
I'm pretty sure this 'EDL' came from a (big surprise) HD only feature called 'Export session info as text'. There is no way to import this info into PT but it can be a useful export tool if trying to make sense of some output files from the program.

Regarding the price of AAT as a conversion tool, why is it that Avid/Pro Tools doesn't receive pressure to provide a truly open layout format from institutions that use it (at a discount) and promote it to their students? The problem does not originate with AAT. I would add that this has always been an expensive proposition largely because of the ridiculous nature of these few, ironically popular formats. As a fellow teacher I understand the dilemma. Perhaps an educational discount for an entire classroom worth of licenses could be worked out? That said, I don't think for a minute that AAT is overpriced though.
plush2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2012, 05:52 PM   #25
zappa
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Thanks for your input zappa it is appreciated.
Product pricing is always a difficult thing.
Thanks Runaway. I'm really glad that my post was read in the way that I intended ie. as constructive feedback rather than general moaning. I'll try to keep the following brief as I don't want to hijack a thread with another useful discussion going on; perhaps if we're going to talk some more about this we should do it elsewhere

Software development has been my main income for the last 25 or so years, and for the last 10 years I've been self employed, so I do understand where you're coming from re. pricing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Now the one mistake to make is to compare Reaper's pricing policy with ours or any other DAW's.
Our resources are smaller and our market is fraction of any DAW's but unlike any other DAW we have never charged for any updated version - with Reaper while it is admirably cheap in a world of expensive DAWs even they charge after a certain number of versions for upgrades.
So if you jumped on board at $39 3 or 4 years back then you are still receiving upgrades for free and you now have access to more conversion formats than any other DAW convertor.

Now to the 'enhanced' version.

We were beseiged by requests for an 'industry standard' conversion (read ProTools) and were not considered a 'professional' product without it.
I can safely say that ANYTHING involving ProTools/Avid/Dodgy has consumed more than a third (and maybe closer to 50%) of our entire resources and time.
In your mind you think you have an idea what I'm saying but you are not even close ;-)
So what to do - someone has to pay for this effort (and continued effort) as I can't absorb it all.
First thought was 'charge everyone $100 and be done with it.
It would still be relatively (and in some circles still too) cheap.
But then why should we bludgeon to death the guy who has no interest in anything PT related?
So we compromised - for $59 you get everything except PT related formats so Joe Average should be a happy camper.
BUT (not the fleshy part at the top of your leg) if you want to play in the PT/OMF camp then you have to help fund this effort.
As to AAF there is a good chance it will be included in the $159 version.
Why?
Because it is exactly the same as OMF except more difficult (how can that be you say - well they have teams of guys making sure it is!)
I understand and respect the points you've made here. Mine was simply that, while these realities exist for you, you're cutting out potential customers and therefore potential income. It feels counter-productive in the sense that, for example $59 in the hand is worth more than a no-sale at $159?

While of course the differences you point out between yourself and an organisation like Cockos are fair, truthfully I fail to see how you would be disadvantaged in adopting a model like theirs. Why? "Joe Average" in your example would pay $59 for the full functions of AAT, and industry professionals would pay the pro price. Pro users in your example would still be compelled to pay the full price. Everyone's a winner, and ultimately you earn more, since those users excluded from AAT price-wise would be included, oftentimes simply because they would need just an occasional OMF->Reaper or PT->Reaper facility.

I guess it's only fair to point out the one issue with my thinking, that being whether such licensing can be fairly enforced, a situation that I'm sure Cockos are cognisant of. Though ultimately, if it leads to more sales/income, does that really matter?

Oh, and regarding your point about Avid/PT/dodgy I'm right on board, file formats and all. M$ were playing the same kinds of games with the OLE compound document formats in the 90s and again with their so-called "Open XML" Office 2007 formats. I find these kind of corporations quite odious and cynical in their general approach to product development, fake education/qualifications and all. Quite a cash cow, while the software itself leaves plenty (+more) to be desired

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Now if you go back over any thread where OMF etc is mentioned you will find that I have offered cheaper alternatives so that potential buyers could purchase the $59 version in order to still get their conversion (and usually with more detail converted). For example many is the time I have suggested NOT buying the $159 version for an OMF conversion but rather using say a Track Archive (xml) for Nuendo etc.
In fact I think I remember mentioning rendering tracks to the OP as an alternative to OMF.
...
Zappa, we are not insensitive to this and in genuine circumstances we have tried to help some where we can but we are certainly not a registered charity either;-)
Regarding your first point, I'm not unaware of this, as I spend a little more time than I should reading through these forums, even though I'm not posting all the time and when I do seem to be /ignored much of the time

Regarding the second, that's good to know, though as a general point people don't like to be forward in asking. For many, "the price is the price", which "rules that out I guess".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
...
And just for the record IMO OMF is an even greater marketing con than the term 'industry standard' - not to mention AAF.
It is a fact that you get more detail converted using a simple EDL.
I hear you. And I'm more aware of such realities than you might think

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
While it is regretable that you can't recommend the use of AAT I certainly hope that you continue to get good use out of your purchase and the subsequent free upgrades.

Certainly no offense taken.
Maybe I haven't been entirely clear. I didn't say this out of disappointment or some kind of cheap threat to withdraw support. What I meant by "I can't recommend..." is that I was recommending AAT fully in the knowledge of people's lack of funds without being aware that what they needed was going to cost them $159 not $59.

So it's a case of "my bad", because these guys were phoning me back with "wtf I thought you said this thing was affordable! that's way outta my budget man!". Though I respect your efforts and fully support what you're doing, if I know that if someone's had to save for six months to scrape a controller, laptop and audio interface for $250, I can be pretty sure that $159 is out of their budget so they can import a friend's college-produced PT or hired-for-the-day studio-produced OMF into Reaper.

Regardless of how "pro" Reaper is (or is perceived as), it's getting a lot of attention from students / start-up producers on a budget, simply because they hear good things about it and can afford it. Most of these guys are interested in getting stuff in to Reaper and not the other way round. Though not fully in agreement I recognise your misgivings about restructured pricing, so maybe it'd be worth considering some kind of stripped back "import only into Reaper" facility for OMF/PT/AAF in the standard version? Apart from anything else, it's quite a effective way to promote the use of Reaper whilst encouraging migration away from Avid/PT/dodgy and the corporate BS.

Thanks for engaging in this little discussion. Once again, I'm mindful of hijacking this thread. If you feel there's value in continuing this or you'd like to throw this out for some more ideas/opinions (free market research ), you might start a thread and link over to these posts.

Always happy to talk, and pleased to meet you - Seb aka zappa
__________________
"There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers" - anon.
Please check my Normalisation bugrep and confirm, thanks!

Last edited by zappa; 06-03-2012 at 05:59 PM.
zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2012, 08:59 PM   #26
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
perhaps if we're going to talk some more about this we should do it elsewhere
Feel free to email me via the aatranslator web site

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
It feels counter-productive in the sense that, for example $59 in the hand is worth more than a no-sale at $159?
On the surface you would think (like I did) that one follows the other but unfortunately that is not the case. Sure you can sell anything if you drop the price low enough but I'm sure you will find that there are plenty of Reaper users who are still using the 'trial' version on a permanent basis.

Our problem is that we are in a market that is a 'poofteenth' of that of any single DAW's market so our potential for sales is finite. Apart from that while we love sales we also pride ourselves on support and our support time is taken up significantly more with PT/OMF (and no doubt soon AAF) related issues. So I am more than happy to not have a sale just for the sake of $59 only to have that potential additional support burden.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
While of course the differences you point out between yourself and an organisation like Cockos are fair, truthfully I fail to see how you would be disadvantaged in adopting a model like theirs. Why? "Joe Average" in your example would pay $59 for the full functions of AAT, and industry professionals would pay the pro price. Pro users in your example would still be compelled to pay the full price. Everyone's a winner, and ultimately you earn more, since those users excluded from AAT price-wise would be included, oftentimes simply because they would need just an occasional OMF->Reaper or PT->Reaper facility.
In an ideal world sure but in my experience it just doesn't happen. I have quite a few donationware applications out there under various guises some of which have thousands of downloads and you would be surprised how very few people actually donate even though they still expect support - but that's life.

We even get users of various 'cracked' versions of AAT wanting support!

Am I bitter and twisted?
Sure but nothing to do with software - LOL

Now as to the 'odd conversion' I have in the past made it clear that we are happy to do 'one off' conversions for people and only ask that they make a donation - they can choose the amount.
What's more if they end up spending say $59 in 'one off' conversions then we will give them a 'standard' licence (or spend $159 you get the full licence).

We think that that is more than generous.

We have also supported discounts for Reaper related schools and individuals - mind you we get a bit wary having been burnt a few times with the 'gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today' routine ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
So it's a case of "my bad", because these guys were phoning me back with "wtf I thought you said this thing was affordable! that's way outta my budget man!". Though I respect your efforts and fully support what you're doing, if I know that if someone's had to save for six months to scrape a controller, laptop and audio interface for $250, I can be pretty sure that $159 is out of their budget so they can import a friend's college-produced PT or hired-for-the-day studio-produced OMF into Reaper.
Fully understand but to be honest their situation is the same as the BMW dealer don't care that I can't afford one. ;-)

Well actually we do care and I would suggest that the college approach us for some sort of bulk deal or the students take advantage of our 'one off' deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
Though not fully in agreement I recognise your misgivings about restructured pricing, so maybe it'd be worth considering some kind of stripped back "import only into Reaper" facility for OMF/PT/AAF in the standard version? Apart from anything else, it's quite a effective way to promote the use of Reaper whilst encouraging migration away from Avid/PT/dodgy and the corporate BS.
Now that is an interesting point but surely it isn't my obligation to promote the use of Reaper (though we do) through our pricing/functionality structure?
I would think that perhaps Cockos should be kicking the can for us to do that ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappa View Post
Thanks for engaging in this little discussion
I always enjoy a logical and informed discussion and I'm pleased to meet you as well.

I'm a bit pressed for time so its a case of E&OE

Michael

As I said feel free to contact me via email
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.