LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  March 2005

ARSCLIST March 2005

Subject:

Re: .wav file content information

From:

dave nolan <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:27:57 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (222 lines)

On 3/15/05 12:00 AM, "Automatic digest processor" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> There are 15 messages totalling 1039 lines in this issue.
>
Hello all -

I just wanted to chime in and ask if anyone had any specific software
packages that provided a decent GUI (graphical user interface) for entering
BWF metadata?

After a bit of Googling last week, I was able to find a Mac-based program
called Metacorder (designed for the film industry) that seems to have
something close to what I'm looking for - stores metadata in BEXT and IXML
formats - the url is:

http://www.gallery.co.uk/metacorder/intro.html

Anyone have any recommendations for similar packages, either Mac or PC?  Not
so worried about price at this point, just wondering what had been developed
so far to let us input the metadata easily, and to define unique in-house
chunks for the originating institution?

And similarly, are folks using anything in particular to access the metadata
and put it automatically into a database program, preferably Access or
FileMaker?

Thanks -

dave nolan
nyc


> Date:    Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:54:14 -0500
> From:    "Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: .wav file content information
>
> As usual, Scott and John make some very persuasive points.
>
> But, there is a huge leap from putting metadata in the BWF file to running a
> database. Let's name the database: it's a digital asset management system or
> media asset management system. Buzzword software that delivers less than it
> promises in many iterations, sadly. I'd love to hear good responses about MAM
> software.
>
> In reality, I think there are three levels (perhaps more)
> (1) Essence (to use the SMPTE term) and metadata in one file.
>    This is the BWF as well as the MXF and AAF approach. This was, to me
>    one of the big paradigm shifts when migrating from dBase III to Microsoft
>    Access. Separate files vs. all-in-one.
> (2) Essence and metadata in one folder
>    This is perhaps the easiest to deal with, but doesn't scale
>    all that well
> (3) Essence in a file system, indexed by a MAM system. The MAM system
>    holds all the metadata while it merely points to the essence. Typically,
>    the essence file names become totally NON human readable.
>
> (1) and (2) can be managed by mere mortals. (3) requires an IT department.
>
> But BWF begs the question. Do you insert the album jacket scans at 450 dpi in
> the file? What happens when there are multiple audio threads? Can you put 24
> tracks in one BWF? I'm not sure. If nothing else, you'll run out of space.
>
> Some of the BWF specs seem to limit it to 48ks/s. What about higher
> resolution.
> It's possible, but what about interchange?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
> --
>
> Richard L. Hess
> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/
>
>
> Quoting Scott Phillips <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> One would think that the LAST thing anyone would want to do is resave a
>> complete audio archive file simply to add new text data. Why chance any
>> alteration or corruption of the original audio file ? This is
>> particularly true since the 'new' file won't byte for byte match the
>> original, how would one reasonably (I.E. quickly) verify the new file
>> against the original ? I would agree with John, a 'loose coupling'
>> allows for a proper revision history to be kept as well without any risk
>> to the most irreplaceable part of all... the audio. The adding of an ID
>> number when the file is first generated solves that.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Spencer
>>
>> Regarding the usage of MYSQL or other database applications, remember
>> that the relative size of the metadata "stack" will be MUCH smaller than
>> the resultant audio files.  We prefer to link the metadata record with a
>> unique ID in the BWF header that we also record in the metadata
>> database.  By "loosely coupling" the two, you can add/ make changes to
>> the individual metadata record without having to load the audio file
>> itself.
>>
>> I would be more concerned that the metadata that I was collecting was
>> structured in a manner that would allow for it to move into other
>> database environments without re-keying the information.
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:57:32 -0600
> From:    Scott Phillips <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: .wav file content information
>
> Has anyone had experience with any of the few really good software
> packages that are available for recording studio management? The best
> ones are very good at managing everything from inventory to tape
> libraries, including track sheets, track notes, even console and
> outboard gear setup and management. All the gory details of sample
> rates, noise reduction, etc. are a natural part of that. I'm not
> suggesting that anyone use the packages for managing very large audio
> archives, just that there may be some real lessons to be learned (for
> that matter, also learned not to use) by examining how people have
> already tried to solve this in the commercial world.
>
> I agree with Richard about option #3 personally, but it seems to me that
> it is the only way, nasty as it is, that has real long-term legs to it.
> What we really need is a program (s) that seamlessly link databases with
> the audio file / text / visual (whatever type), and doesn't require a
> database expert to operate. I can't see how that is really possible any
> other way, what with changing digital standards. While I live in fear of
> the deadly 'single database file', it at least, if planned properly,
> could be arranged so that as ASCII information it could be imported to
> any reasonable future database. Further, until everyone everywhere
> agrees to exactly what would be included in META information without
> exception, there could be no way of conforming older files to the
> 'standard' without opening and changing every file. Better to make the
> file and handle it as little as humanly possible. Databases can do
> global changes rather more easily.
>
> I know, I know, IT .... Nasty stuff just keeps getting in the way ! ...
> :>)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard L. Hess
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 9:54 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] .wav file content information
>
> As usual, Scott and John make some very persuasive points.
>
> But, there is a huge leap from putting metadata in the BWF file to
> running a database. Let's name the database: it's a digital asset
> management system or media asset management system. Buzzword software
> that delivers less than it promises in many iterations, sadly. I'd love
> to hear good responses about MAM software.
>
> In reality, I think there are three levels (perhaps more)
> (1) Essence (to use the SMPTE term) and metadata in one file.
>    This is the BWF as well as the MXF and AAF approach. This was, to
> me
>    one of the big paradigm shifts when migrating from dBase III to
> Microsoft
>    Access. Separate files vs. all-in-one.
> (2) Essence and metadata in one folder
>    This is perhaps the easiest to deal with, but doesn't scale
>    all that well
> (3) Essence in a file system, indexed by a MAM system. The MAM system
>    holds all the metadata while it merely points to the essence.
> Typically,
>    the essence file names become totally NON human readable.
>
> (1) and (2) can be managed by mere mortals. (3) requires an IT
> department.
>
> But BWF begs the question. Do you insert the album jacket scans at 450
> dpi in the file? What happens when there are multiple audio threads? Can
> you put 24 tracks in one BWF? I'm not sure. If nothing else, you'll run
> out of space.
>
> Some of the BWF specs seem to limit it to 48ks/s. What about higher
> resolution.
> It's possible, but what about interchange?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
> --
>
> Richard L. Hess
> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/
>
>
> Quoting Scott Phillips <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> One would think that the LAST thing anyone would want to do is resave=20
>> a complete audio archive file simply to add new text data. Why chance=20
>> any alteration or corruption of the original audio file ? This is=20
>> particularly true since the 'new' file won't byte for byte match the=20
>> original, how would one reasonably (I.E. quickly) verify the new file=20
>> against the original ? I would agree with John, a 'loose coupling'
>> allows for a proper revision history to be kept as well without any=20
>> risk to the most irreplaceable part of all... the audio. The adding of
>
>> an ID number when the file is first generated solves that.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List=20
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Spencer
>>
>> Regarding the usage of MYSQL or other database applications, remember=20
>> that the relative size of the metadata "stack" will be MUCH smaller=20
>> than the resultant audio files.  We prefer to link the metadata record
>
>> with a unique ID in the BWF header that we also record in the metadata
>
>> database.  By "loosely coupling" the two, you can add/ make changes to
>
>> the individual metadata record without having to load the audio file=20
>> itself.
>>
>> I would be more concerned that the metadata that I was collecting was=20
>> structured in a manner that would allow for it to move into other=20
>> database environments without re-keying the information.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager