[ardour-users] Questions

philicorda philicorda at ntlworld.com
Wed Oct 26 11:24:09 PDT 2005

On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 18:41 +0100, Paul Symons wrote:
> > I'm not talking about desructive editing. I'm talking
> > about applying plugins to selections in the same way
> > you apply them to whole tracks. They are not
> > destructive when you apply them to whole tracks, why
> > should they be if you apply them to selections?
> It depends on what you mean. it sounds as you are suggesting that each
> region could potentially have a number of plugins associated with it; on
> playback, each region would first be processed by the plugins associated
> with just that region.

The way I've seen other DAWs handle this is much simpler.
A single plugin can be applied offline to a selection, and the only
option you have is to preview that selection with the plugin before
applying it.
A new region is created on disk, and the original file is unaffected.

This is enough for 90% of cases IMHO. I use offline processing like this
to get rid of pops on vocal parts, low pass clicks or clips, add more
top end to a mumbled single word, cut top end on a really siblant s etc.
Mainly fixing little stuff.

> to me, that raises a couple of questionable issues:
> 1. a track can have a huge (unbounded?) number of regions - allowing any
> region to have a plugin path would mean that a region changes from an item
> of discrete audio data, to an audio pathway - a stream of audio processing
> that must be computed, and while to a certain extent this is probably the
> case because of region gain curves, crossfades, etc., adding a plugin
> chain process would complicate things massively i reckon, and introduce
> some CPU overhead.

Samplitude works like this. I tried it and it was too much for my poor
brain. However, it lets you do conventional offline processing as well.

> 2. what happens when you copy/cut/paste/split a region? do new derivative
> regions inherit the plugin chain from the last region?
> i have found that in the 18 months i've been using ardour regularly, i've
> had to rethink the way i do things (my last audio mixing program was Sonic
> Foundry ACID). but in learning the way ardour/professional DAWs work,
> especially with respect to sends, inserts, automation, etc., i much prefer
> it now; the possibilities seem a lot greater than they did before.
> p.s. (to list)
> is send automation still on the cards at some point?
> _______________________________________________
> ardour-users mailing list
> ardour-users at lists.ardour.org
> http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

More information about the Ardour-Users mailing list