[ardour-users] 48 channels on ardour

[John Emmas]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Knecht" <markknecht at gmail.com>
Sent: 18 July 2007 18:42
>
> Only because other high end audio applications routinely support doing
> this and then provide a mechanism to get stuff working again without
> hand editing proprietary application files.
>
I can second this.  Most of my work is in post production, where it's
EXTREMELY common to move audio around between systems.  If the systems are
from different manufacturers, it usually involves an export/import
requirement. However, for moving between systems from the same manufacturer,
it's almost always done by using portable drives and physically moving them
from one system to the other..  Of course, there have to be rules.  You
can't expect any DAW to literally search all possible locations but I can
confirm that this is almost a prerequisite for a high-end system.

>
> Replaced with silence is a bit draconian.
>
Yes, I'd second that too.  "Offline" regions are supported by all the pro
systems now - precisely because media can be moved from system to system.
However, this does require that sources be identifiable using a unique ID.
In my AAF import code (which I'm just finishing off) I had to arrange for
all the sources to be named using UID's, rather than "friendly" names such
as "dialog" or "car door slam".  Thankfully, Ardour is already half way
there because it allows the region names to be different from the WAV names,
so that made it a lot easier.  The user can see friendly names, even though
the underlying source names will look meaningless.  To be honest, I'd
recommend that Ardour should think about adopting UID WAV names as a matter
of course.  It'll save a lot of headaches in the future.

John


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Knecht" <markknecht at gmail.com>
To: "Kevin Cosgrove" <kevinc at doink.com>
Cc: <ardour-users at lists.ardour.org>
Sent: 18 July 2007 18:42
Subject: Re: [ardour-users] 48 channels on ardour


> On 7/18/07, Kevin Cosgrove <kevinc at doink.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 18 July 2007 at 11:13, "Mark Knecht" <markknecht at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > So, let's not call it a bug and maybe make an enhancement request?
>>
>> Only because "user abuse tolerance" isn't a category? ;-) When I
>> move files, I consider it something that's all at my own risk and
>> that I'm doing something unplanned by the developers, so I get
>> what I deserve.  Did I say I make backups?
>>
>>
> Only because other high end audio applications routinely support doing
> this and then provide a mechanism to get stuff working again without
> hand editing proprietary application files.
>
> Take this example which happened to me. I was running two audio
> drives. My session grew to the extent that one of the drives became
> overly full so I added a 3rd audio drive to the system. I needed to
> move some of the session audio around for a lot of sessions. Ardour
> didn't provide any mechanism (at the time) for doing that.
>
> Had I still been running Pro Tools it would have said the file had
> moved. It would have searched my audio drives to find the right file,
> based on name, size, format, etc., and asked me if it had found the
> right file. If I answered yes, then it would have looked in similar
> locations or other missing files. Things get linked up again pretty
> quickly.
>
> Replaced with silence is a bit draconian.
>
> I do understand that Ardour isn't Pro Tools, nor is it Acid Pro.
> However moving audio files is part and parcel for working with with
> large recordings. I would, in fact, be surprised if the original
> poster really ever recorded 48 channels that he wouldn't run into the
> need to do this anyway. My experience, running ext3 audio drives, was
> not the data tranfer rates but rather appeared to be seek times as the
> number of open files increased. As the files get larger the head is
> moving around more and it all gets a bit messy. By moving the file
> there is a sector recolletion aspect to it that helps improve how the
> data is oriented and generally makes things work a bit better. Again,
> just my experience.
>
> Bye all. Over and out.
>
> - Mark
> _______________________________________________
> ardour-users mailing list
> ardour-users at lists.ardour.org
> http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org
>