[Ardour-Users] Ardour punch in

[John Emmas]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Davis"
Subject: Re: [Ardour-Users] Ardour punch in
>>
>> Ardour seems to overlay an opaque region on top of the original region -
>> thereby giving the impression that the original region got edited when in
>> fact, it didn't.
>
> Not sure why it gives that impression, but it doesn't matter.
>
Hi Paul - I meant that "audibly" it creates the impression that the
underlying sound got erased when in fact, it's still there.

>
> if i understand what you are asking about, then it implies that if you
> "punch" over a single region, within its boundaries, you split the
> original region in two ("before punch" and "after punch") and insert the
> new region in between them.
>
> if so, then the answer is no, *except* that lincoln spiteri has recently
> written a nice patch that allows trimming a region in a single step to the
> boundaries of other regions that it overlaps (or that overlaps it)
>
Yes, that's the idea.  In fact I read about that patch only a week or so
ago.  I might try it out as it seems promising.

>
> i'd appreciate an explanation of the situations where the "leave a hole"
> approach is preferable.
>
Essentially there are 3 strategies for punching in - each of which would be
useful in different circumstances.

1)  Ardour's "overlay" approach.  This would be very useful if you wanted to
do a punch-in but you weren't sure if the new material is going to be any
better than the original.  For example, punching into a vocal track where
the producer is happy with the performance but the vocalist thinks he can
get it better.  The vocalist might end up agreeing with the producer and
preferring the original.  The overlay approach is very attractive in this
situation.

2)  "Destructive punch-in".  This is useful in situations where you're
recording something live and you want to stop when something goes wrong and
do a "pick-up".  Destructive punch-in saves disk space (which is always a
consideration when recording live) but you can only punch into a track
destructively if you're certain that you'll never need the material you're
over-writing.

3)  "Leave a hole" approach.  This is useful when when you definitely don't
want to retain the underlying material "in its current position" - but
there's a likelihood that the underlying material will be useful elsewhere.
For example, when recording voiceovers for an upcoming TV programme, 90
percent of the voiceover might be the same for each promo - but the first
one ends "Friday at 9 on CBS".  The second version ends "Tomorrow at 9 on
CBS" and the third version ends "Tonight at 9 on CBS".  Each version
definitely won't require either of the alternative wordings but the
alternative endings will definitely be needed somewhere else.

Cheers,

John