WaveLab works the same way, if you want, at playback. You have eight
"channels" to use for manipulation. You can either write numbers (db etc) o=
r
use your mouse to turn on a "wheel". Then you can bypass or have the filter
connected, at playback.
Then use next "channel" for another filter etc.
When you think it sounds fine, you "render" your adjustments and it is all
applied.
Klas.
At 13:50 2003-06-30 -0700, you wrote:
>A small note here, since concern has been raised over (a) potentially
>detrimental rounding errors in [repeated] volume adjustments to digital
>files, and (b) potential recovery to the original state as Evert
>describes seems desirable.
>
>My comment is that a mature contemporary editing environment should to a
>significant degree answer these concerns.
>
>Samplitude, the (Windows-only) editor I use, by default performs all
>manipulations in its multitrack editing window as 'virtual' or 'realtime'
>edits, rather than 'destructive' edits.
>
>In other words, it creates a list of changes to be applied to a soundclip
>(normalization, fade in/out, in/out points, EQ, gating...) and those
>changes are calculated on playback, rather than written into the source
>clip. Ie, the file is normalized (etc.) on the fly, not on disk.
>
>Of course to do this, it must maintain and save its 'virtual' settings in
>a wrapper file (very small!), but the advantage is that the original
>recording remains forever untouched.
>
>A genuine advantage of this approach is that as long as your edits are
>limited to the 'virtual' domain and not 'committed' as I describe below,
>there is no generation problem ~ multiple normalizations/volume changes
>collapse into a single one, performed 'on the fly' on playback.
>
>(Incidentally, the 'realtime' calculations are no doubt cached away when
>you're actually working ~ I certainly notice no perceptible decrease in
>performance when manipulating virtually edited files.)
>
>Of course, the edited version can at any time be 'bounced' down ~ written
>out to disk as a flat, normal WAV (or AIFF etc.) file.
>
>In fact, the latest versions of Samplitude let you both automatically
>substitute into your multi-track composition the newly bounced file [the
>original btw is not overwritten unless you want it to be!], -or-, as of v7
>of the software, 'freeze' a version of your clip incorporating all of your
>the edits -- explicitly write and use a bounced version out to save
>processing if you're using expensive effects -- but with the caveat that
>you can 'unfreeze' and tweak any of the virtual edits you made at any
>time, then refreeze if you like...
>
>If there's any disadvantage to this whole approach to editing, btw, it's
>the proliferation of files -- both the 'wrapper' files that Samplitude
>makes, which point into the original soundfiles; and (potentially) the
>numerous versions of things I create, some affected in one way, some in
>others. But with disk space so comparatively cheap, this is only a
>file-wrangling problem.
>
>I describe these features as they're implemented in Samplitude; while one
>reason I chose it is that it pioneered 'virtual' (non-destructive) editing
>as a dominant paradigm, I have to believe that many other packages have
>adopted this strategy by now...!
>
>Best regards,
> aaron
>
>
> http://www.quietamerican.org
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/=
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|