[Ardour-Dev] [Ardour-Cvs] r6915 - in ardour2/branches/2.0-ongoing/libs/ardour: . ardour

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:36 PM, <fons at kokkinizita.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 05:37:10PM -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
>
> > I think the best answer would be to offer to 'convert' the region as
> dragged
> > onto different tracks.
>
> If you mean *really* converting it that means making
> a complete copy of the file on which the region is
> as view (as the region can be expanded later). Which
> may result in a copy of a few GB. It also requires
> a new but 'similar' name. Confusion waiting to strike.
>
>
No.  I mean 'convert' as in for things like a mono region dragged onto a
stereo track, would ask the user if they want it to be 'made into a stereo
region' (Dual mono in actuality).  This does not require any copying, just
taking the stream from disk and treating it like the source for two channels
instead of one.


> If you mean a 'virtual' conversion - just mapping
> the channels - that is what happens now.
>
>
Hmm in my experience that isn't always the case, at least not to the extent
that is being discussed with multiple different scenarios.


> AFAICS, the only case where it would make sense to
> do some automatic conversion/remapping as happens
> now is the mono/stereo one, and this can be handled
> as well by moving the panner as Joern already pointed
> out.


Some plugins do not handle this very well at all actually, especially if
those plugins are before the panner as they would be in A2(Not necessarily
the case in A3, but would be using a panner just to split the file seems a
bit obtuse of a solution.


> I do work a lot with multichannel tracks, and any
> automatic mapping is 99.99% guaranteed to do the wrong
> thing.


That is why I said the asking might be the best way to handle it.


> The only approach that makes sense to me is to
> either drop channels (if there are too much)


Bad, VERY bad.  I am honestly surprised you would suggest this.


> or silence
> some of them (if there are not enough).


Not to much better in my opinion, as I already mentioned some plugins would
not handle this well.


> If that doesn't
> do what the user wants he/she should seek another
> solution.
>
>
Again, the asking is the important thing, and providing solutions, instead
of telling the user to do more work, which could in actuality require a
multi-GB copy to duplicate files and all the drawbacks you mentioned above,
PLUS an increase in time invested to do what other DAWs would do in seconds.


      Seablade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-dev-ardour.org/attachments/20100416/2af2b5e9/attachment-0002.htm>