Can't Import DDP in WL9 but can in WL8.5

I can’t import a DDP in Wavelab 9.5 on Windows if the image file doesn’t have an extension.
I can import the same DDP in Wavelab 8.5.
Can it be changed so we can import any valid DDP in Wavelab 9 ?

What software produces a DDP without extension?

Sonic for one I think, I’m not sure what program made the DDP I’m trying to import. I believe I’ve also seen DDPs where the image was not called IMAGE and that was still legal. In that case the DDP played in Hofa but not in the Steinberg DDP Player. I could be mis-remembering, but I know I came across something like that.

I could have found I was wrong about the Steinberg DDP Player, I really don’t remember for sure, but maybe that’s why I didn’t pursue it before, and if that’s the case I apologize.

But I got two DDP files today with image files with no extension, and they wouldn’t import in Wavelab 9 because of that. But they would import in Wavelab 8.5.

From everything I’ve read the image file name, including any extension, is not defined in the DDP spec and is only determined from the DDPMS. Therefore it makes sense to me that the program that made them was correct in it’s usage, and that’s why they imported in Wavelab 8.5. I’ll try to verify them in Hofa tomorrow, but if they’re correct, Wavelab 9 really should change to be able to import DDPs without extension if that’s how they’re named in the DDPMS.

Hmmm … I always believed that the spec required an Image.dat file/s (mandatory).

Here is the DCA specification: http://www.dcainc.com/support/faqs/index.html#faq22

I saw that too, and that’s talking about a DDPi. The question is whether a DDPi, being a name created by Universal Music Group, is saying what the actual DCA DDP 2.0 spec is. I know that FAQ page is on the DCA site, but what that paragraph says seems to only refer to DDPi.

I’ll check the DDPs I received, and some old Sonic DDP 2.0 filesets I have to see if they indeed have no file extension, because I know they conform to the original DDP 2.0 spec.

Also that paragraph says:
DDPi is fully compliant with DCA’s DDP 1.0 and 2.0 specifications.

But is the opposite true?

Well I understood that to mean that Universal used DDPi to differentiate between a DDP on a hard drive as we know it today as opposed to a DDP on an old Exabyte tape. Same thing and spec … different storage media. So they say ‘send us a DDPi … not tapes please’.

But I can always be mistaken.

i’ve found that Sonic used the file name IMAGE.DAT just like Wavelab, so I was wrong about that.

I still don’t know what program made the DDPs I’ve just gotten, but I went through some DDPs I received a few years ago and found some that also had an image file with no extension. Those were made by Cube-tec DDP for Wavelab, and they’re (supposedly) valid DDP 2.0 filesets.

They validate and play fine in Hofa, and they import fine in Wavelab 8.5. But they won’t import in Wavelab 9 or play in the Steinberg DDP Player because they don’t have a file extension.

Can this please be changed so Wavelab 9 can import them, like in 8.5?

I really wish the DDP spec was freely available, but Wikipedia says it’s not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_Description_Protocol

It’s confusing when people write what look like rules (use of the name PQDESCR in the wikipedia article and elsewhere), when I’ve often seen that file validly called SD in other DDP filesets.

I don’t plan to change this, as there was confusion in the past (WaveLab <= 8.5), when users had to select a folder rather than a file. Currently WaveLab respects the standard (image.dat), and if you have a trouble, you can still rename the file as image.dat, to import it.

PG I think that’s a really bad idea especially since it’s been found that Cube Tec DDPs now can’t be imported in Wavelab. That makes it probably the only mastering program that can’t (pyramix, sequoia, soundblade, sadie, not to mention hofa and sonoris). DDPs go from label vaults to mastering studios all the time for various purposes and Wavelab will be put in a very bad position comparatively. I’m pretty sure you can’t change the image file name (and nobody will be willing to do that anyway) without changing the DDPMS which probably won’t work and would break the DDP validation in other programs at least, wouldn’t it?

I think its a really bad idea not to fix this. It worked in Wavelab 8.5

Anybody having problem knowing how to import from a DDP folder I think should learn how to use it, it’s easy enough. It’s how it’s done in other programs afaik, and how it should be done for a DDP fileset.

Cube Tec DDPs now can’t be imported in Wavelab

Who is using Cube Tec DDP today? That was a module for WaveLab 6. That’s very old stuff.

Actually I am surprised that this DDP comes from CubeTec. The guys from CubeTec know me and they never told me their DDP can’t be imported in WaveLab.

Nobody is using CubeTec DDP today. I’m saying mastering studios receive label vault DDP catalog stuff for reference or verification all the time. And one of the biggest mastering studios in the world was using CubeTec DDP for many years. So that’s a lot of CubeTec DDP files flying around still and to continue still for many years.

CubeTec DDP can be imported in Wavelab. In Wavelab 7 - 8.5. And probably every other mastering program. (without a workaround that’s not going to be acceptable to many mastering studios.)

Please list me the exact contents of the DDP you can’t import (just the file names).

This is the contents of a Cube-Tec DDP

DDPID
DDPMS
IMAGE
PQ_DESCR

Changing the name of the image file to IMAGE.DAT doesn’t work with Wavelab 9. If you change the name, when you import the DDP and double click the IMAGE.DAT file in Wavelab 9, it says “A Valid DDP Image Could Not Be Found”. I’m glad Wavelab 9 does that, because it proves it’s doing validation against the DDPMS file.

Hofa will actually open the renamed file DDP (which makes me question why I’ve seen Hofa doing validation on load before), but it won’t play the DDP. It says “An audio file cannot be found”, so it also must be doing validation against the DDPMS as it should. But I think Hofa should not even load the invalid DDP in the first place, like Wavelab 9 won’t.

Why can’t Wavelab 9 just go back to the Wavelab 8 method and navigate to a folder? Then it would open the Cube-Tec DDP without problem, like Wavelab 8 does.

Navigating for the fileset folder has always seemed the proper method of doing this to me. Hofa navigates for a folder. Sonoris probably does too. And it’s also probably what the other mastering programs do. It’s all I’ve ever seen, it makes complete sense to me, and people should be used to it by now if they weren’t before. Because I’m pretty sure it’s how every other program does it. Except Wavelab 9 now.

Ok, next minor update will allow to select the IMAGE file, even if it has no extension.

Thank you PG. It’s so great that you’re here dealing with all the questions so quickly. Your’e great.

Agreed. I’ve been seeing a lot of reports on social media that trying to get support for WaveLab through the Steinberg website is slow or unresponsive. I try to direct users here because it’s the most direct and effective way to get WaveLab support.

It’s not often you get direct communication with the main person developing a bigger app/DAW like this.

Hi Philippe

any news on this topic, i.e. when this update will be available?
We’re having a lot of DDP’s which were created using Cubetec’s DDP solution in Wavelab 5, all with Image files without an extension.

Thanks in advance,

Eastside Mastering Studios Berlin GmbH
Christian

Hello Christian,

In my test, it has solved in WaveLab Pro 9.5.50 (build 208) on Mac. I hope it will be the same on Windows. Thank you, PG!

Shinobu
Mastering Studio TEMAS / Tokyo, Japan