Not to hijack but actually I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever used that AAtranslator program I linked to?
 
I'm skeptical that it can reliably translate project files from DAW to DAW as it claims (at least I THINK that's what it says it does) but if it does it certainly would be a valuable tool to have for exactly this type of situation.
 
Even more useful if they added Sonar files to their list.
 
Cheers.

Beepster
Not to hijack but actually I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever used that AAtranslator program I linked to?
 
I'm skeptical that it can reliably translate project files from DAW to DAW as it claims (at least I THINK that's what it says it does) but if it does it certainly would be a valuable tool to have for exactly this type of situation.
 
Even more useful if they added Sonar files to their list.
 
Cheers.

If I get another project that requests AAFs I will give it a try.  As of now, the client sent OMFs and $199 for the translator is too steep to experiment.  The web site did offer a free test, but I did not have the time to explore how to make it happen.  Thanks so much for your input, you always are jumping in here with good stuff.

I'm always harping on about this.....(Call me a broken record)
 
Better OMF support in Sonar please and dare I say, support AAF.
 
Then I wont have to open Pro Tools ever again.

Jimbo 88
If I get another project that requests AAFs I will give it a try.  As of now, the client sent OMFs and $199 for the translator is too steep to experiment.  The web site did offer a free test, but I did not have the time to explore how to make it happen.  Thanks so much for your input, you always are jumping in here with good stuff.

That'd be cool, man and thanks for the kind words. They mean a lot. :-)
 
I'm actually going to be making a little personal announcement in the next day or so that (hopefully) might be of use/interest to some of our community members and start me on the path of making legitimate use of all my studies and experiments these past few years.
 
Cheers!

Beepster
Not to hijack but actually I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever used that AAtranslator program I linked to?
 
I'm skeptical that it can reliably translate project files from DAW to DAW as it claims (at least I THINK that's what it says it does) but if it does it certainly would be a valuable tool to have for exactly this type of situation.
 
Even more useful if they added Sonar files to their list.
 
Cheers.

Its probably a little old to reply now but I am one of the developers of AAT and yes the product does as advertised, it reliably transfers sessions from one DAW/NLE to another DAW/NLE.
Unfortunately, Sonar is not on our list of supported formats.  There are a number of reasons for that.
Mind you things may have changed since I last looked but some of the reasons include its limited support for import / export formats, contrary to the OMF specification it allows stereo media to be referenced, etc, etc.
I did make a couple of attempts over the years to open a dialogue with management but for one reason or another I think things fell through the cracks. We may revisit that at some point.
 
As to AAF, the reason everyone has problems with AAF is very simple - there is no such thing as a 'standard' AAF.
For me, the [unnecessary] complexity of OMF, AAF and MXF make them a "Use at your own risk format."
Although there are other formats that can be in the same category, these three are the worst.
They are self proclaimed standards that never should have been created.
Although the container format is always a standard, the methods of describing data within the container are not.
They each have multiple ways of describing the same thing and since everyone has a slightly different way of doing things within the containers, they might as well not exist at all.
To call them any kind of standard should be against the law.  OMF is literally a format within a container format.  AAF and MXF are much worse because they are a format within a container within a structured storage format.
Sorry for the rant but just to highlight the absurdity Media Composer AAFs are totally different from AAFs from ProTools and both are created by AVID so what chance does anybody really have?
 
In case you were wondering AAT does read MC AAFs as well as PT AAFs but for all their trouble OMFs and AAFs contain little more than very basic details. If you really want the maximum detail then it is best to use AAT to convert directly from the native session format where possible eg PTX or PTF, etc.
 
If you ever want to run a test conversion then send a dropbox link via the AAT website

SuiteSpot

Beepster
Not to hijack but actually I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever used that AAtranslator program I linked to?
 
I'm skeptical that it can reliably translate project files from DAW to DAW as it claims (at least I THINK that's what it says it does) but if it does it certainly would be a valuable tool to have for exactly this type of situation.
 
Even more useful if they added Sonar files to their list.
 
Cheers.

Its probably a little old to reply now but I am one of the developers of AAT and yes the product does as advertised, it reliably transfers sessions from one DAW/NLE to another DAW/NLE.
Unfortunately, Sonar is not on our list of supported formats.  There are a number of reasons for that.
Mind you things may have changed since I last looked but some of the reasons include its limited support for import / export formats, contrary to the OMF specification it allows stereo media to be referenced, etc, etc.
I did make a couple of attempts over the years to open a dialogue with management but for one reason or another I think things fell through the cracks. We may revisit that at some point.
 
As to AAF, the reason everyone has problems with AAF is very simple - there is no such thing as a 'standard' AAF.
For me, the [unnecessary] complexity of OMF, AAF and MXF make them a "Use at your own risk format."
Although there are other formats that can be in the same category, these three are the worst.
They are self proclaimed standards that never should have been created.
Although the container format is always a standard, the methods of describing data within the container are not.
They each have multiple ways of describing the same thing and since everyone has a slightly different way of doing things within the containers, they might as well not exist at all.
To call them any kind of standard should be against the law.  OMF is literally a format within a container format.  AAF and MXF are much worse because they are a format within a container within a structured storage format.
Sorry for the rant but just to highlight the absurdity Media Composer AAFs are totally different from AAFs from ProTools and both are created by AVID so what chance does anybody really have?
 
In case you were wondering AAT does read MC AAFs as well as PT AAFs but for all their trouble OMFs and AAFs contain little more than very basic details. If you really want the maximum detail then it is best to use AAT to convert directly from the native session format where possible eg PTX or PTF, etc.
 
If you ever want to run a test conversion then send a dropbox link via the AAT website

Very interesting stuff and thanks for sharing. I personally don't fully understand some of that but it's a good launching point.
 
If AAT does indeed eventually include Sonar I think it would definitely be a boon to Sonar users when dealing with clients and other studios.
 
Cake of course have been gutting old/problematic code and replacing it so it definitely might be worth a second look to see if some of the barriers have been removed or at least minimized. The acquisition by Gibson, a seeming surge in popularity amongst younger users (thanks to initiatives like Steam sales) and the breakneck pace the program seems to be being refined/cleaned up also means it might make sense to start anticipating a broader need/customer base for a program such as AAT. Programming lagerheads aside Sonar has always kind of been the red headed stepchild of the DAW world for various reasons (thus leading third party companies to believe it can be safely ignored... much to the chagrin of die hard Sonarites) but that definitely seems like it could be changing.
 
Anyway I hope a Baker sees this and maybe some cooperation to ease the inclusion of Sonar into the AAT list can happen.
 
Good luck and thanks for the very interesting post.
 
Cheers!

SuiteSpot

Beepster
Not to hijack but actually I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever used that AAtranslator program I linked to?
 
I'm skeptical that it can reliably translate project files from DAW to DAW as it claims (at least I THINK that's what it says it does) but if it does it certainly would be a valuable tool to have for exactly this type of situation.
 
Even more useful if they added Sonar files to their list.
 
Cheers.

Its probably a little old to reply now but I am one of the developers of AAT and yes the product does as advertised, it reliably transfers sessions from one DAW/NLE to another DAW/NLE.
Unfortunately, Sonar is not on our list of supported formats.  There are a number of reasons for that.
Mind you things may have changed since I last looked but some of the reasons include its limited support for import / export formats, contrary to the OMF specification it allows stereo media to be referenced, etc, etc.
I did make a couple of attempts over the years to open a dialogue with management but for one reason or another I think things fell through the cracks. We may revisit that at some point.
 
As to AAF, the reason everyone has problems with AAF is very simple - there is no such thing as a 'standard' AAF.
For me, the [unnecessary] complexity of OMF, AAF and MXF make them a "Use at your own risk format."
Although there are other formats that can be in the same category, these three are the worst.
They are self proclaimed standards that never should have been created.
Although the container format is always a standard, the methods of describing data within the container are not.
They each have multiple ways of describing the same thing and since everyone has a slightly different way of doing things within the containers, they might as well not exist at all.
To call them any kind of standard should be against the law.  OMF is literally a format within a container format.  AAF and MXF are much worse because they are a format within a container within a structured storage format.
Sorry for the rant but just to highlight the absurdity Media Composer AAFs are totally different from AAFs from ProTools and both are created by AVID so what chance does anybody really have?
 
In case you were wondering AAT does read MC AAFs as well as PT AAFs but for all their trouble OMFs and AAFs contain little more than very basic details. If you really want the maximum detail then it is best to use AAT to convert directly from the native session format where possible eg PTX or PTF, etc.
 
If you ever want to run a test conversion then send a dropbox link via the AAT website

SuiteSpot

Beepster
Not to hijack but actually I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever used that AAtranslator program I linked to?
 
I'm skeptical that it can reliably translate project files from DAW to DAW as it claims (at least I THINK that's what it says it does) but if it does it certainly would be a valuable tool to have for exactly this type of situation.
 
Even more useful if they added Sonar files to their list.
 
Cheers.

Its probably a little old to reply now but I am one of the developers of AAT and yes the product does as advertised, it reliably transfers sessions from one DAW/NLE to another DAW/NLE.
Unfortunately, Sonar is not on our list of supported formats.  There are a number of reasons for that.
Mind you things may have changed since I last looked but some of the reasons include its limited support for import / export formats, contrary to the OMF specification it allows stereo media to be referenced, etc, etc.
I did make a couple of attempts over the years to open a dialogue with management but for one reason or another I think things fell through the cracks. We may revisit that at some point.
 
As to AAF, the reason everyone has problems with AAF is very simple - there is no such thing as a 'standard' AAF.
For me, the [unnecessary] complexity of OMF, AAF and MXF make them a "Use at your own risk format."
Although there are other formats that can be in the same category, these three are the worst.
They are self proclaimed standards that never should have been created.
Although the container format is always a standard, the methods of describing data within the container are not.
They each have multiple ways of describing the same thing and since everyone has a slightly different way of doing things within the containers, they might as well not exist at all.
To call them any kind of standard should be against the law.  OMF is literally a format within a container format.  AAF and MXF are much worse because they are a format within a container within a structured storage format.
Sorry for the rant but just to highlight the absurdity Media Composer AAFs are totally different from AAFs from ProTools and both are created by AVID so what chance does anybody really have?
 
In case you were wondering AAT does read MC AAFs as well as PT AAFs but for all their trouble OMFs and AAFs contain little more than very basic details. If you really want the maximum detail then it is best to use AAT to convert directly from the native session format where possible eg PTX or PTF, etc.
 
If you ever want to run a test conversion then send a dropbox link via the AAT website

very useful insight into modern commercial software, thanks for ranting, err, sharing ;-)