Does that mean you can make dozens of edit versions without using much more=
space than the original file until you start rendering them? That sounds l=
ike a good think, especially when the final version is often only an mp3 fi=
le. Or is the space used by temporary files anyway?=0D
=0D
Peter Shute=0D
=0D
Sent from my iPad=0D
=0D
On 03/06/2013, at 6:50 PM, "NICK DANDO" <<mailto:=
>> wrote:=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
Until the file is "rendered" all of the changes made to the original are no=
n-destructive. A set of instructions is created listing all of the editing =
decisions made which is only carried out at the moment that the file is ren=
dered. The original is untouched.=0D
=0D
Adobe Camera Raw behaves in a similar way for photos. All of the editing is=
logged and can be amended and re-thought at any stage, even years later, a=
s the original RAW file is never altered.=0D
=0D
Nick=0D
=0D
________________________________=0D
From: Peter Shute <<pshute%40nuw.org.au>>=0D
To: "<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups=
.com>" <<naturerecordists%40yahoogro=
ups.com>>=0D
Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2013, 21:31=0D
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Sound Editing Software=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
Same here, plus Audacity can make a copy when it imports the wav file anywa=
y. But I was under the impression that editors like Reaper also keep track =
of all the intermediate editing steps you've made, and allow you to, say, m=
odify the eq you did before you added fade in and fade out. Am I wrong abou=
t that?=0D
=0D
Peter Shute=0D
=0D
Sent from my iPad=0D
=0D
On 03/06/2013, at 5:05 AM, "Jez" <<tempjez%40hotm=
ail.com><<tempjez%40hotmail.com>>> wrote:=
=0D
=0D
well, I always keep a copy of the original recording anyway & certainly I t=
hink most folks would advise that. One often returns to tracks & sometimes =
any editing (even the simple top & tailing) decisions change with time.=0D
=0D
--- In <naturerecordists%40yahoogrou=
ps.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>=
>, umashankar <> wrote:=0D
>=0D
> there is now very little difference between destructive and non destructi=
ve editing. if you save the file with a new name, your original file is not=
touched at all, in any editing program. and you can always make a copy and=
work on that.=0D
>=0D
> umashankar=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> ________________________________=0D
> From: Peter Shute <>=0D
> To: "<naturerecordists%40yahoogrou=
ps.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>=
>" <<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.=
com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>>>=
=0D
> Sent: Sunday, June 2, 2013 12:11 PM=0D
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Sound Editing Software=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> Reaper does non destructive editing, doesn't it? If so, it's a very diffe=
rent beast to Audacity, even if it ends up delivering the same results.=0D
>=0D
> I've been meaning to give it a try.=0D
>=0D
> Peter Shute=0D
>=0D
> Sent from my iPad=0D
>=0D
> On 02/06/2013, at 12:46 AM, "Jez" <<>> wrote=
:=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> Reaper is one of the best suites around - the paths & processing software=
is top level & unlike Audacity, it's built & maintained by folks who are c=
ommitted to providing a very high level service. Audacity is 'ok' but the f=
act that you can't monitor while making adjustments (if you do that with yo=
ur recordings) is a major & bizarre, problem.=0D
>=0D
> Reaper is actually really easy to use once when gets past the basics & th=
ere are lots of video's online showing basic set up of tracks etc.=0D
>=0D
> --- In <naturerecordists%40yahoogr=
oups.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.co=
m>><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com><htt=
p://40yahoogroups.com>>, NICK DANDO <nick.dando@> wrote:=0D
> >=0D
> > That's good to know. I hadn't looked at Audacity for a few years, being=
happy with Soundtrack Pro. I'll have to give it another go to see if it's =
easier than the somewhat baffling Reaper.=0D
> >=0D
> > Nick=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
> > ________________________________=0D
> > From: Peter Shute <pshute@>=0D
> > To: "<naturerecordists%40yahoogr=
oups.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.co=
m>><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com><htt=
p://40yahoogroups.com>>" <<naturerec=
ordists%40yahoogroups.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http:/=
/40yahoogroups.com>><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yah=
oogroups.com><http://40yahoogroups.com>>>=0D
> > Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 21:24=0D
> > Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Sound Editing Software=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
> > =C2=0D
> > On 31/05/2013, at 4:37 AM, "Nick Dando" <nick.dando@<nick.dando@=
>> wrote:=0D
> >=0D
> > Alternatives are Reaper, which is cheap, and Audacity, which is free, b=
ut doesn't have the ability to deal with 24/192 recordings.=0D
> >=0D
> > Is that correct? A quick Google search says it's been able to handle 19=
2kHz recordings since at least 2011. (See http://forum.audacityteam.org/vie=
wtopic.php?f=3D16&t=3D61803)=0D
> >=0D
> > Peter Shute=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> ------------------------------------=0D
>=0D
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a=0D
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.=
=0D
>=0D
> Yahoo! Groups Links=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|