Trying to get some development done on Adobe audition 3.0...

[jway01]

[Mod note: Given a thread of its own]

Everybody has the ``free'' CS2 formerly downloadable copy with its' endemic serial number - or as you said can easily find it online - and a few people have or can find the 3.01 or 3.11 to lay on top of that, but whether you copy the whole program you downloaded including its' serial number and unique installer that works with that specific serial number - it still gives strange error messages inbetween.

Sometimes files won't load,

sometimes you can't save,

sometimes you can only save to a low-res format

sometimes the save has an automated voice talking over it

etc etc etc.

Thousands of low-budget radio stations are still using it the same as they are using the Loopology to make their spot beds - I heard one the other day on a brand new spot and had to shake my head.

The other thing even major-label production houses are doing - with the resurgence of matrix quadraphonc enthusiasts coming out of the woodwork - is the fact that the only music editing software around that can both DECODE a matrix quadraphonic or 5.1 program from a 2-channel source as well as ENCODE is the AA 3.0.

Everything else you have to do it yourself.

1 Make your main stereo mix.

2 Monitor the channel reverse mix to make sure the center channel is exactly in the center.

3 Monitor your ``organic'' (matrix retrieved) Center-Suppressed (Lt/Rt) mix to make sure

   there's not a lot going on between the 11:00 and 1:00 space on the stereo field.

4 Make your discrete center-suppressed rear-channel mix a.k.a. TV mix (with bg vocals)

5 Make your other discrete center-suppressed rear-channel mix WITHOUT the bg vocals

6 Make your Master Rear Mix out of that and whatever main reverb or other effects you need.

7 Open up Stereo Imagery> Graphic Phase Shifter

8 Slide the left and right channels apart from each other to the correct phase for the matrix.

   You can use the same Main Stereo mix for every matrix

9 Mix your rear and front channels together just as you would mix in new elements normally

All that should be an automated point and click feature and nobody's ever done it.

The closest anybody has come is the various Batch Process Scripts that are around

most for QS and SQ because they are the most common.

But the fact that

A) Dynaquad is the reverse for QS

B) EV-4 is the reverse for SQ

C) Dolby Pro Logic, UHQ and Ambisonics (H/J) have elements of all of those

shouldn't be any preclusion to somebody automating that without having to

break the bank buying Pro Tools Ultimate.

But I digress.

The developer forums here have repeatedly referred me back to the tech support chat and to escalate there to supervisors managers and directors of operations and those guys in their third party response processing centers with only the ability to cut and paste database entries into the chat are

1 mostly irrelevant most of the time or

2 redirecting back here creating a stalemate.

So I opened up a ticket AGAIN to notify the original developers, so I guess we'll have to wait and see AGAIN what somebody comes up with.

[SteveG_AudioMasters_]

Audition 3 (it was never really part of the CS range, despite some claims to the contrary) went completely out of development in 2007. It was written using a completely different codebase to the current versions and many of the people who developed it simply aren't around any more. And even if they were, they wouldn't be allowed to do any work on Audition 3 anyway - that's Adobe policy. It would violate the conditions laid down by the legal department that say that only the current version and its -1 are allowed to be downloaded from the CC app unless you have a prior subscription to them. Audition 3 was never part of the CC range, so it couldn't be included as part of the app anyway.

I can promise you that nobody will take any notice of your 'ticket' (whatever that is), and the reason that developer forums keep referring you elsewhere is, I would have thought, pretty obvious.

[jway01]

SteveG said: Many of the people who developed it simply aren't around any more.

And even if they were, they wouldn't be allowed to do any work on Audition 3 anyway.

And I already said I wasn't interested in listening to people whose only abilities were

A) Research the Web/keyword a knowledgebase

B) Recite FAQs/Explain policy

C) Refer out to someplace else with only the same 3 abilities creating a stalemate.

SteveG said: The reason that developer forums keep referring you elsewhere is, I would have thought, pretty obvious.

Yes. Everybody is either Paid Too Much or Not Paid Enough to tolerate having to tolerate the issue.

And that applies equally well across the board for tech support, developrs' forums, consumer information bureaus or anything else. So instead of doing theor jobs, they perpetuate the same stalemates discussed in A) B) and C) above, think their job is done and then whine and complain to whoever will listen when they are told that's an invalid response.

So as far as the legal aspect - if all I can get is A), B) and C) above then (shrug) I just report the stalemates back to all the legal affairs and inter-corporate communications back office administrations of everybody who asked me to do the legwork in the first place trying to get it done the normal way.

All these (formerly AEI) now DMX/Mood Media and Hearst and Bonneville and every other radio network big or small who wants to keep all its profits for itself and its' executives the same as Adobe - means all these production companies all have their attorneys on salary - and also means they can go do battle with each other until the cows come home and it doesn't cost any one of `em a cent.

But sooner or later - the one with the least amount of members on its team (digital audio workstation manufacturer [small group] vs corporations that use it [huge group]) will eventually do what it is told by the larger and more populous team.

It's happened before to AVID/ProTools and Diamond Cut Pro the latter after it ceased to be a museum equivalent of a single source funding provider and who knows how many others. Defunct features on defunct editions were forced to be brought back - either by course or by force.

Under ``Not Physically Possible Anymore'' I don't buy that argument either.

If people can cut, replicate and release 150 year old Edison Cylinders in 2022 with brand new music and the Federal Government can force Microsoft to not only continue to support e.g. Windows 7 (especially since hordes of Federally commissioned software prgrams

A) don't run on Windows 10 and

B) have nobody who is interested in developing them or similar programs for the new OS - possibility notwithstanding)

tells me that if somebody has enough time energy money and clout - they get whatever they want.

All I have to do is find out who it is.

The only thing ``obvious'' to me is what I already know - a fellow end-user-consumer who just happened to get elected board mod had no more ability

1 expertise or authority in getting something done than the man on the street and

2 than those 3 A) B) or C) discussed above,

and once again I've wasted my time in not speaking to fellow engineers.

So i report that back to them and let their attorneys and engineers do the same as they did to Avid and Diamond Cut and hundreds of others and we'll see who has to comply with whose directive.

Won't be on this or any other forum anymore that is populated run and moderated by end-user consumers as it is clearly a waste of time. Will also be reporting this as well to the escalation team back office so they can't refer me back here again since it's pointless.

[SteveG_AudioMasters_]

A number of your 'observations' are of course materially incorrect (including your point 1), but most importantly, my last point above will continue to apply. Even though I could pass this directly to the person directly responsible, I'm not going to. And that's not because I'm being unhelpful, but because I don't wish to waste his time.

[jway01]

Then I'll bypass you and find a workaround of my own.

Or as I said - turn it back in to the offices of Inter-Corporate Affairs of these various corporations and let them do their own legwork.

[jway01]

SteveG said: [Mod note: this comment was redacted, so the response to it is removed as well]

While that contact information is either not monitored or results in automated voice or email responses,

I'm sure if I turn it in to either the engineers or the inter-corporate affairs offices of the companies in question - they will be able to get him or somebody like him to be able to assist in them achieving their goals.

We're done here. Thanks for playing.

[SuiteSpot]

I must admit that my eyes started to glaze over halfway through reading this so I've probably missed something important in this spiel but what I did get from it is this (and please correct me if I'm wrong)....

You have a piece of software that you haven't paid for and that was originally developed by a guy who may be probably dead now (or I hope living on a beach somewhere) that Adobe purchased and massaged it a bit and hasn't been worked on for at least 10 years and although you haven't invested in the software with Adobe you want Adobe to invest some money in it for you.
As I said I may have it completely wrong but if not I guess it doesn't hurt to ask but I wouldn't be holding my breath

[Trevor L NSSC]

Just an aside that David Johnston, the creator of CoolEdit, is far from dead! In fact he's still around and still working on audio at Microsoft.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/people/davidjo/

[jway01]

So much for moderator blockages.

If I can't find his cirrent contact information myself, I will simply turn it in to the afroementioned inter-corporate affairs offices of the companies in question and once again let them do their own legwork.

[jway01]

I do low-level inter-corporate liaison for a number of companies looking to save money paying their own staff and doing it themselves. Most of the time it works just fine. Other times I run into hardheads who are fond of nothing else but providing roadblocks just because they can.

In the 30 years I have been doing this, I find that these are more often than not non-engineers but other end-user consumers that have been nominated to positions of semi-authority and wish to make themselves feel more important by providing blockages to the result.

These people are then summarily bypassed and the result is more often than not achieved in spite of them - which of course incences them to no end.

TV consumer (or inter-corporate) inventigative news reporters bypass these people all the time.

[SteveG_AudioMasters_]

I have no wish to feel 'important'. I do, on the other hand, wish to help people with reasonable, realistic requests for help. Yours does not fall into that category - pretty much for reasons that SuiteSpot outlined above. Nobody at all has withheld any information about David Johnston - that's public knowledge, as is his current lack of involvement with Adobe. As for the rest of what you said - well good luck with that - I'm not holding my breath. But I am impressed with the amount of management BS you've managed to put into a thread on a U2U forum, I must say.