file size limitations in Audition

[FredbobJackson]

A couple of behaviors that I consider odd are making me wonder
about Adobe Audition's limitations when dealing with larger
files:

I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit. When I
open it, it's like the .pk file isn't even present. It has to
read in the whole .wav, which takes 4-5 minutes. My options are
set properly to tell it to always look for the .pk file, that has
been set since I installed the thing, months ago.

Another "feature" I've noticed is that some operations (like
Noise Reduction) don't work for large blocks of data, eg, 90 or
100 minutes. The operation has to be done on smaller blocks of
the file. This isn't a severe inconvenience, but it still raises
the "Is this bogus software?" flag.

Anyone know of other limitations this piece of code has when
attempting to deal with larger files? Are there system-related
options that can be tweaked to allow Audition to perform better
when working with larger files?

fred

[Arny Krueger]

"FredbobJackson" > wrote in message
om

> A couple of behaviors that I consider odd are making me wonder
> about Adobe Audition's limitations when dealing with larger
> files:

> I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit. When I
> open it, it's like the .pk file isn't even present. It has to
> read in the whole .wav, which takes 4-5 minutes. My options are
> set properly to tell it to always look for the .pk file, that has
> been set since I installed the thing, months ago.

Sounds like someplace along the way you picked one of the 5 other 32 bit
file formats that isn't the *native* one.

The *native* one is labelled "default" in the options dialog of the save as
menu.

One symptom of this is when the .pk file and the .wav file have different
dates and times for their last update.

[Arny Krueger]

"FredbobJackson" > wrote in message
om

> A couple of behaviors that I consider odd are making me wonder
> about Adobe Audition's limitations when dealing with larger
> files:

> I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit. When I
> open it, it's like the .pk file isn't even present. It has to
> read in the whole .wav, which takes 4-5 minutes. My options are
> set properly to tell it to always look for the .pk file, that has
> been set since I installed the thing, months ago.

Sounds like someplace along the way you picked one of the 5 other 32 bit
file formats that isn't the *native* one.

The *native* one is labelled "default" in the options dialog of the save as
menu.

One symptom of this is when the .pk file and the .wav file have different
dates and times for their last update.

[Carey Carlan]

(FredbobJackson) wrote in
om:

> I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit. When I
> open it, it's like the .pk file isn't even present. It has to
> read in the whole .wav, which takes 4-5 minutes. My options are
> set properly to tell it to always look for the .pk file, that has
> been set since I installed the thing, months ago.

I had that problem in Cool Edit, but never in Audition.

> Another "feature" I've noticed is that some operations (like
> Noise Reduction) don't work for large blocks of data, eg, 90 or
> 100 minutes. The operation has to be done on smaller blocks of
> the file. This isn't a severe inconvenience, but it still raises
> the "Is this bogus software?" flag.

I performed NR on a 93 minute file this week. Works fine.

Could you be limited on disk space? Audition is disk intensive and can
have many times the file size wrapped up in temporary storage if you have
lots of "undo" ability turned on.

[Carey Carlan]

(FredbobJackson) wrote in
om:

> I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit. When I
> open it, it's like the .pk file isn't even present. It has to
> read in the whole .wav, which takes 4-5 minutes. My options are
> set properly to tell it to always look for the .pk file, that has
> been set since I installed the thing, months ago.

I had that problem in Cool Edit, but never in Audition.

> Another "feature" I've noticed is that some operations (like
> Noise Reduction) don't work for large blocks of data, eg, 90 or
> 100 minutes. The operation has to be done on smaller blocks of
> the file. This isn't a severe inconvenience, but it still raises
> the "Is this bogus software?" flag.

I performed NR on a 93 minute file this week. Works fine.

Could you be limited on disk space? Audition is disk intensive and can
have many times the file size wrapped up in temporary storage if you have
lots of "undo" ability turned on.

[Marc Wielage]

On Aug 13, 2004, FredbobJackson > commented:

> I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit.
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

32-BIT? Whoa! What's your source material? What kind of A/D convertor do
you have that can handle 32-bit? I'm not convinced going over 24-bit is
going to yield any real-world benefits. How much dynamic range do you really
need?





> Another "feature" I've noticed is that some operations (like
> Noise Reduction) don't work for large blocks of data, eg, 90 or
> 100 minutes. The operation has to be done on smaller blocks of
> the file. This isn't a severe inconvenience, but it still raises
> the "Is this bogus software?" flag.
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

Are you trying to noise-reduce multiple songs at one time, or are you dealing
with one kind of material that has the same problem throughout the entire
file? If it's the former, I find that different settings are mandatory, and
have to be constantly tweaked for different songs, or even within different
segments of the songs.

I suspect this is tied to the relatively-large file size of 32-bit material.
I bet if you tried the NR with 24-bit or 16-bit files, it would handle it
with no problem.


--MFW
[remove the extra M above for email]

[Thomas Bishop]

"Marc Wielage" > wrote in message
> 32-BIT? Whoa! What's your source material? What kind of A/D convertor
do
> you have that can handle 32-bit? I'm not convinced going over 24-bit is
> going to yield any real-world benefits. How much dynamic range do you
really
> need?

It's 32-bit float. There's no true 24 bit.

[Arny Krueger]

"Marc Wielage" > wrote in message


> On Aug 13, 2004, FredbobJackson > commented:

>> I'm currently working on a 60-minute file, 44.1, 32-bit.
>> --------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

> 32-BIT? Whoa! What's your source material?

Something that we want to mix with overkill precision.

>What kind of A/D convertor do you have that can handle 32-bit?

None, but it seems too good to constrain with 16 bit operation, which is the
next lowest resolution that is available.

>I'm not convinced going over 24-bit is going to yield any real-world
>benefits.

In Audition/CE, active recording and editing files come in 3 strengths: 8
and 16 bit fixed point, and 32 bit floating point.

> How much dynamic range do you really need?

Given that scaling, filtering, and other processing follows, we would like
to have more than enough than would be required for simple recording and
playback.

BTW this weekend I recorded a live performance with 12 tracks, 32 bits, and
44.1 KHz with Audition 1.0. It just worked.