Old 09-26-2018, 04:21 AM   #1
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 10,446
Default ARA ghost vs real copies

Regarding the 5.96pre10 change in handling copied media items.

Prior to 5.96pre10, you could apply separate pitch edits to each copy of a media item. although edits to a looped item would be mirrored (ghosted) to all loop iterations. With the change, pitch edits are mirrored to all copied media items.

You can always achieve the same results either way , the only difference is the order in which you do things. Previously, if you wanted to apply identical edits to copies, you'd have to make the edits and then copy the item. If you apply more edits, you have to re-copy the item. Now, if you want to apply different edits to copies, you have to glue (bounce, render) one of the copies first.

There is a meaningful difference in resource use. If you want to apply different edits to copies, the new method uses around twice as much memory and disk space.

Because the two methods are not compatible with respect to how projects are saved and loaded, whichever way we go for the first official release that supports ARA will be what we have to stick with, so we want to make sure we choose the best method.

As an aside, Studio One handles copies the pre10 way; Logic and SONAR handle copies the other way.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2018, 04:47 AM   #2
Mercado_Negro
Moderator
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,265
Default

I like how pre10 does it.

+1 for using the source audio.
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
Mercado_Negro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2018, 07:09 AM   #3
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,939
Default

I would much prefer using the source audio. Doesn't it seem to be more congruent with the rest of reaper?
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 12:55 AM   #4
Luster
Human being with feelings
 
Luster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 571
Default

After thinking about it I realized that since I am not in the ARA2 beta (no interest) I have no idea how interface wise the editing is implemented (I guessed like take fx). Therefore my worries mentioned in the pre thread may be unsubstantial. IMHO more people should join this conversation as I believe it's an important aspect.
Luster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 01:51 AM   #5
Gass n Klang
Human being with feelings
 
Gass n Klang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Detmold - Germany
Posts: 591
Default

Mhh difficult. One could prefer the old behaviour for that reason: if you copy an item that has item envelopes and fades on it, you also copy these edits. Same with melodyne. If you want to re-edit, you can. But you have to start from scratch if you first copied the item and did the edit second. Same behaviour for all steps.

On the other side the new behaviour can save time: normally you don't want to treat a copy differently. If you want so, you can glue the item first. Is it possible to glue an item without rendering things like fades, item envelopes, stretchmarkers and so on into it? Then the new method could be really handy.
What happened to melodyne if you rendered an already melodyned copy using the new behaviour?

Last edited by Gass n Klang; 09-27-2018 at 02:09 AM.
Gass n Klang is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 03:38 AM   #6
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 10,446
Default

Celemony is fairly strongly recommending we go back to the old behavior, separate edits for each copy.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 04:45 AM   #7
Gass n Klang
Human being with feelings
 
Gass n Klang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Detmold - Germany
Posts: 591
Default

reasonable...
Gass n Klang is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 04:50 AM   #8
nofish
Human being with feelings
 
nofish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: home is where the heart is
Posts: 9,281
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
Celemony is fairly strongly recommending we go back to the old behavior, separate edits for each copy.
If you go that route, then maybe a way to 'propagate' Melodyne edits to copies (similar to the already existing Propagate actions) may be useful ?

(Just a thought, I'm no current Melodyne user...)

Last edited by nofish; 09-27-2018 at 05:17 AM.
nofish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 05:22 AM   #9
fortunatefolks
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 68
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro View Post
I like how pre10 does it.
I concur.
fortunatefolks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2018, 07:30 AM   #10
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,939
Default

i wish we could "pool" audio items
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2018, 03:54 AM   #11
multibody
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Germany
Posts: 131
Default

I do in general prefer the pre10-way since it seems more coherent with the reaper
architecture to me and unnecessery copies of audio files seem just not right.

My problem with that implementaion is that it is difficult for me to understand what happens to edits during splitting/healing and similar actions.

Is it inevitable that ARA-Edits are discared by such reaper-actions?

What about an additional automation lane with automatically created ARA-Automation-Objects per take? Would that help to let ARA-Automations behave more congruent during Reaper-Item-Actions like splitting/healing? At least it could help to make ARA more transparent to the user I think.
multibody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2018, 06:30 AM   #12
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,939
Default

I just don't understand -

I guess I can see how the pre9 behavior is better. Especially if celemony is moving you toward that...

but couldn't it be possible to pool audio items so that things propagate to it like item fx, melodyne, pitch envelope, etc... ?
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2018, 09:06 AM   #13
multibody
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Germany
Posts: 131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
I just don't understand -

I guess I can see how the pre9 behavior is better. Especially if celemony is moving you toward that...

but couldn't it be possible to pool audio items so that things propagate to it like item fx, melodyne, pitch envelope, etc... ?
I absolutly agree that pooled audio makes sense in general.

Concerning ARA: It think it would be very advantageous if audio could be splitted, rearranged and healed safely without loosing ARA-Edits and without having to glue/render.

Schwa statet in another thrad that it was difficult to design predictable behavior with actions like healing split items, in cases where both halves of the split might have different ARA edits.

If pooled audio can solve these problems I'm in!
multibody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 11:00 AM   #14
azslow3
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 770
Default

If the behavior can be controlled the same way as pooled MIDI, so clearly visible with a possibility to "unpool", that could be a feature.
But starting Melodyne 4.2 for the first time in rc3, I was almost sure that is a bug (till I have found this thread)
azslow3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 01:12 PM   #15
StuhRAH
Human being with feelings
 
StuhRAH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 221
Default

@schwa does this affect any media items not using ara? I love the way in Reaper that every pitch change, envelope edit or adjustment made to a seperate cut of the item is treated differently, and I hate the way Studio One's bend markers are all linked to source, so every bend marker is linked, and a change on a seperate slice moves the same marker on another slice. Is this change only affecting ara media items?
StuhRAH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2018, 12:00 AM   #16
musicbynumbers
Human being with feelings
 
musicbynumbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: brighton, uk
Posts: 12,781
Default

Pooling audio would be a great v6 feature.
__________________
subproject FRs click here
note: don't search for my pseudonym on the web. The "musicbynumbers" you find is not me or the name I use for my own music.
musicbynumbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2018, 06:47 PM   #17
hopi
Human being with feelings
 
hopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Right Hear
Posts: 15,141
Default

probably a good idea to listen to what celemony says as we move into the future... [hahaha so we move into the past to move into the future]
__________________
...should be fixed for the next build... http://tinyurl.com/cr7o7yl
https://soundcloud.com/hopikiva/angel-rain
hopi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.