BWF Support?

GoldWave general discussions and community help
Post Reply
Gazelle
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:08 pm

BWF Support?

Post by Gazelle »

Hi,

I was wondering if GW supported BWF (Broadcast Wave Format)? If not then I certainly like to suggest that support be written in a future version of GW.

Info:
BWF files are files stored in WAV format, containing additional embedded data beyond basic WAV audio information, such as position markers (bookmarks). Not so expensive products like the Microtrack IIhave this feature. It would greatly assist in editing, for me that is anyway.



Thanks, <'/))))>< :?:

GoldWave Inc.
Site Admin
Posts: 3974
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:43 pm
Location: St. John's, NL
Contact:

Re: BWF Support?

Post by GoldWave Inc. »

There are no plans to support BWF. Other developers are welcome to add support by creating a plug-in for GoldWave using the SDK, which includes a sample Wave plug-in.

Chris

Richard Hess
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17 am
Location: Aurora, Ontario, Canada

Post by Richard Hess »

Hi, Chris,

That's disappointing. Your WAV generator is very clean with no extraneous chunks. I mostly use Samplitude, but am having trouble writing BWAV files that WaveLab can understand. So I bought WaveLab to keep a client happy. I was hoping you folks might at least support the bext metatdata chunk. I'm not up to writing the plugin myself.

Gazelle's use is different from mine and I think the bext chunk doesn't help her. That's the problem with standards, there are so many of them <sigh>.

Cheers,

Richard

DewDude420
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Contact:

Post by DewDude420 »

the problem with the BWF format is there's virturally 0 use for it outside of broadcasting....in the 10 years I've been doing audio editing (and the BWF format has been in existance) I've never needed it.

Looking at the format specifications there's a LOT of chunk data that would have to be parsed and programmed...it's just not worth the effort when only a small percentage of people would need it...and the likelyhood of those people that needing it use goldwave is slim as they usually already have other editors. I mean, I myself keep three different DAW softare packages on my desktop (and laptop) at any one time.

Fact is the features of BWF itself really don't lend itself to Goldwave...it seriously seems like it's the kind of thing for professional media where you might have 15 people working on the same project and need some way of syncing up what happens.

Richard Hess
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17 am
Location: Aurora, Ontario, Canada

Post by Richard Hess »

Hello, DewDude,

I partially agree with you, but the Sound Directions project from Indiana University and Harvard University recommends BWF storage with technical metadata included. Many archives need good, inexpensive DAW software.

I do digitization work and I expect to see more requests for BWF usage to record things like tape playback machine serial number, A-D serial number, etc. They want documentation of the whole chain used to create the file.

You're correct about multiple software package. I use Samplitude mostly (whose BWF support got worse in v10 from v9) and DC6 (not upgrading to DC7, however), and Goldwave for certain automated things, mostly.

Since the Sound Directions project recommends WaveLab from Steinberg (if they don't recommend it, they use it), so in purchasing that I've purchased guaranteed compatibility with my clients who are using WaveLab as long as I sync my version upgrades with the clients'. As far as client satisfaction goes, this will solve the problem. As far as long-term readability is concerned, who knows which is correct. I suspect multiple versions will be readable by permissive readers (that are not strict interpreters of the standard).

Cheers,

Richard

DewDude420
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Contact:

Post by DewDude420 »

Yeah, see, I'd love to keep up with the industry and such...but I can't really get my foot far enough in the door to actually get any work. I've had like, one restoration gig doing some acetate 45's to CD that I got paid for and that wasn't enough for me to start spending all my time keeping up on specs.

For starters, if BWF compatibality varies between applications...then i'd seriously question how much of a standard BWF actually is. Every BWF compatible app should read them the same way...so if you have to sync up your application because upgrades on another persons system renders them incompatible..then seriously, i'd stop supporting it till the powers that control it get together and decide on interoperability. That's the same reason why i stopped supporting monkeys audio and other non-multi-platform formats (like WMA).

Right now on both my laptop and desktop machines i've got Adobe Audition with the ClickFix plugin, Izotope RX, DC7, and Goldwave. The only DirectX plugin I have installed is the Sony NR suite. (I miss the BlueTubes collection I had) Goldwave was the start of my audio editing career and I moved up to Audition...depending on what mood i'm in is what i'll use. For general opening and checking files i'll do it in goldwave...any general restoration/mastering i do with Audition...some of the harder to clean noise I throw through Izotope. DC7 I'm demoing because I've had some "forensic" audio stuff to do, but it's got such a steep learning curve i've yet to fix the file, however I'm convinced it's one of these things I'll never get cleaned up...the noise amount seems to almost mask most of the vocal range and there's this lovely harmonic range that's RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE of what i need to clean up...so i've been suck in all kinds of NR hell lately.

But, i've just never used BWF...I can see if you needed to keep track of every minor detail in the chain it could be handy....but i've always just kept txt files with what i needed. Then again, I was also one of those people who never saw the point in a TiVo or iPod till I got one.

Richard Hess
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17 am
Location: Aurora, Ontario, Canada

Post by Richard Hess »

I've stopped using DC6 because I find I can do most everything better in Samplitude (the FFT filter is very powerful and you can see what you're cutting out) and Algorithmix Noise Free Pro.

I've tried Izotope and while it was OK, I didn't think it gave me anything I didn't have but it offers a lot of bang for the buck. Noise Free Pro is quite pricey, but it's still the cleanest sounding de-noiser I've seen, but it has a steep learning curve.

I try to learn a few tools in depth and only add a new tool when I absolutely have to.

As to being variants on the BWF standard, I hope that gets solved. I do what my clients want and try to satisfy them. I had a nice chat with this client and he understands how I've done a good-faith effort and appreciates that I bought WaveLab to better interface with him. WaveLab was the first to offer BWF support which was why it was adopted.

Cheers,

Richard

joe.b
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:13 am

Post by joe.b »

Hi everyone,

There are a couple of BWF-related posts over on this thread:

http://goldwave.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=11465#11465

In particluar, it seems that Goldwave is able to work with the "WAV" part of the BWF files. Presumably it ignores the metadata that is peculiar to the BWF format.

I was able to download two types of BWF file from here:
http://www.sr.se/utveckling/tu/bwf/

The "Linear BWF" file opened and played in Goldwave; the "MPEG BWF" file did not. I presume the metadata in the Linear BWF file was ignored.

joe.b

chris319
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:40 am

Post by chris319 »

I can import BWF files directly from my Fostex FR-2LE compact flash recorder with no problem. I can also save them back to the recorder and delete them as well.

DewDude420
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Contact:

Post by DewDude420 »

I should of mentioned when i saw this.

The reason MPEG BWF's won't open is probably because the format information is stored in the extended BWF header and not in the traditional WAV header where goldwave is looking. You MIGHT be able to force it to open as an layer 3 file IF that's the mpeg format they're using.

But, no, for straight PCM BWF's, goldwave will read and work with the PCM data with no problem...all you're losing are the extended features of BWF (indexing, file splitting, things like that).

audibell
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:27 am
Location: New Orleans

BWF support still useful

Post by audibell »

DewDude420 wrote:the problem with the BWF format is there's virturally 0 use for it outside of broadcasting....in the 10 years I've been doing audio editing (and the BWF format has been in existance) I've never needed it.
(BWF) provides a more robust solution to the long-term issues that confront Record Labels in their efforts to maintain their assets. It is therefore the Committee’s (P&E Wing of Nashville AES) recommendation that all of the audio tracks be “flattened” and migrated to the Broadcast Wave file format with a maximum of 1 channel per BWF file .... A “flattened” file is one segment of digital audio that plays continuously from the start of the track to the end. Open-source file formats (such as the Broadcast Wave file) and enterprise-class storage media (corporate America's hard drives) provide access to the audio files after the proprietary equipment used to create them may no longer be available.
These file formats will readily adapt to any current or future computing infrastructure.
quoted pp6 of P&E Wing Delivery Recommendations 030609.31 revision.pdf, 2003

So, while direct VST GUI support would be very useful, this paid-twice in 10years user of GW would VERY much like to see BWF added to the list of Save As... options even if it's a plug-in. I top & tail 2448 files in GW before SR and Bit reduction in R8brain or elsewhere. Being able to use Voxengos and SIR would be very helpful to work flow on the 2-trk before sending to the Mastering house. I have had disagreeable results with wrappers. Paid plug-ins solution?
WT

GoldWave Inc.
Site Admin
Posts: 3974
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:43 pm
Location: St. John's, NL
Contact:

Re: BWF support still useful

Post by GoldWave Inc. »

Unfortunately it just isn't worth my time to work on it. The GoldWave plug-in SDK is open and free, so anyone with programming knowledge can create a BWF plug-in for GoldWave and sell it.

I have a feeling that 20 years from now no one will even remember what BWF is (or at least less people will care than do now).

Chris

DewDude420
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Contact:

Post by DewDude420 »

BWF) provides a more robust solution to the long-term issues that confront Record Labels in their efforts to maintain their assets. It is therefore the Committee’s (P&E Wing of Nashville AES) recommendation that all of the audio tracks be “flattened” and migrated to the Broadcast Wave file format with a maximum of 1 channel per BWF file
Commitees can recommend what they want, that's fine. 1 channel per BWF file is ludacrious...that makes it impossible to work with in a stereo editor later on. The funny thing about a committee reccommending something is that not everyone will accept it.

We don't need BWF format, anyone that *NEEDS* BWF would be using something much higher level than Goldwave.

No more BWF talk. When ISO starts making BWF reccomendations, then we can talk about it.

Post Reply