Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

how to fade out in Audition (CEP)?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
July 19, 2004 4:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In multitrack view, I have 2 tracks.
The 1st track ends b4 the second. So after the 1st track ends, I want
the 2nd track to fade out for 5 seconds.

I can splice off the part of the 2nd track, i know how to do that.
But I don't know how to fade out the 2nd track for those 5 seconds, in
multitrack view. TY for any help.

jason shohet

More about : fade audition cep

Anonymous
July 19, 2004 8:10:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"jason" <ash477@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3b3e2b5.0407191152.8a54185@posting.google.com...
> In multitrack view, I have 2 tracks.
> The 1st track ends b4 the second. So after the 1st track ends, I want
> the 2nd track to fade out for 5 seconds.
>
> I can splice off the part of the 2nd track, i know how to do that.
> But I don't know how to fade out the 2nd track for those 5 seconds, in
> multitrack view. TY for any help.
>
> jason shohet

Highlight the part of the track(s) you want to fade. Click on
Effects/Amplitude/Amplify. Then, choose "Fade Out" from the presets. You
can choose both tracks or just one track. Choose an individual track by
clicking on that track as far from the 'center-line' as possible.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 19, 2004 10:04:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"jason" <ash477@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3b3e2b5.0407191152.8a54185@posting.google.com

> In multitrack view, I have 2 tracks.
> The 1st track ends b4 the second. So after the 1st track ends, I want
> the 2nd track to fade out for 5 seconds.

> I can splice off the part of the 2nd track, i know how to do that.
> But I don't know how to fade out the 2nd track for those 5 seconds, in
> multitrack view. TY for any help.

Since you are in multitrack view you want to use non-destructive editing.

I recommend going to View and ensuring that Show Volume Envelopes is on.
This will cause a green line to be displayed at the top of each track. The
green line's initial locations represents 100% volume. You can click the
green lines to add break points. You can click and drag break points to
create an envelope that slopes to zero. That's a fade out!

If you create a break point you don't want, just click and drag it down a
bit, and then without releasing it, drag it sharply towards the top of the
track. The break point will disappear.

One advantage of non-destructive editing is that it minimizes the time it
takes to save changes. The changes will be effective if you playback in
multitrack view, and they will be reflected in the mixdown file. But they
won't be reflected in the actual .wav file for each track. Another advantage
is that you can save a bunch of different changes to a given session without
filling your hard drive up with multiple copies of the track files.
Related resources
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 2:42:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:WI-dnaa72p3H2GHdRVn-qA@comcast.com...
> "jason" <ash477@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e3b3e2b5.0407191152.8a54185@posting.google.com
>
> > In multitrack view, I have 2 tracks.
> > The 1st track ends b4 the second. So after the 1st track ends, I want
> > the 2nd track to fade out for 5 seconds.
>
> > I can splice off the part of the 2nd track, i know how to do that.
> > But I don't know how to fade out the 2nd track for those 5 seconds, in
> > multitrack view. TY for any help.
>
> Since you are in multitrack view you want to use non-destructive editing.
>
> I recommend going to View and ensuring that Show Volume Envelopes is on.
> This will cause a green line to be displayed at the top of each track. The
> green line's initial locations represents 100% volume. You can click the
> green lines to add break points. You can click and drag break points to
> create an envelope that slopes to zero. That's a fade out!
>
> If you create a break point you don't want, just click and drag it down a
> bit, and then without releasing it, drag it sharply towards the top of the
> track. The break point will disappear.
>
> One advantage of non-destructive editing is that it minimizes the time it
> takes to save changes. The changes will be effective if you playback in
> multitrack view, and they will be reflected in the mixdown file. But they
> won't be reflected in the actual .wav file for each track. Another
advantage
> is that you can save a bunch of different changes to a given session
without
> filling your hard drive up with multiple copies of the track files.
>

Oops. Didn't notice that the OP specified he was in the multi-track view.
Earlier, I gave the stereo view solution.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 9:28:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:
\>
> I recommend going to View and ensuring that Show Volume Envelopes is
> on. This will cause a green line to be displayed at the top of each
> track. The green line's initial locations represents 100% volume.
> You can click the green lines to add break points. You can click and
> drag break points to create an envelope that slopes to zero. That's a
> fade out!
>
> If you create a break point you don't want, just click and drag it
> down a bit, and then without releasing it, drag it sharply towards
> the top of the track. The break point will disappear.

Jeepers that intuitive and easy. Not.

In Vegas, you can do the volume envelope thing, or better merely position
mouse pointer at end of event at the top, then drag the resulting 'fade'
cursor back for as far as you want the fade. If you want a different fade
type to the default, right click and select from the variety of shapes.

geoff
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 9:28:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
news:I42Lc.9366$NA1.891425@news02.tsnz.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> I recommend going to View and ensuring that Show Volume Envelopes is
>> on. This will cause a green line to be displayed at the top of each
>> track. The green line's initial locations represents 100% volume.

>> You can click the green lines to add break points. You can click and
>> drag break points to create an envelope that slopes to zero. That's a
>> fade out!

>> If you create a break point you don't want, just click and drag it
>> down a bit, and then without releasing it, drag it sharply towards
>> the top of the track. The break point will disappear.

> Jeepers that intuitive and easy. Not.

Depends on whether you have any prior experience with volume envelopes, I
guess.

I think that volume envelopes are one of the most intutive elements of
nonlinear audio editing, once you see them used even once and understand
what they are. But, compared to editing with a regular console, it's like
they are from outer space.

> In Vegas, you can do the volume envelope thing, or better merely
> position mouse pointer at end of event at the top, then drag the
> resulting 'fade' cursor back for as far as you want the fade.

And this "fade cursor" is supposed to be some pinnacle of intuitive elements
found in audio editing programs? I never saw one on a studio console, have I
missed something. And this business of having to start the drag at the top
of the wave and drag bass ackwards? Where did this come from?

In Audition's edit view you can click at either end of the range of the
desired fade, at any point in the vertical area, and simply drag towards
the other end. Now that's intuitive, or is it? And, where does Audition get
off having at least 3 different procedures for fading?

> If you want a different fade type to the default, right click and select
> from the variety of shapes.

Again, a person without prior knowledge is going to know this?

Please understand that I'm NOT saying that Vegas has a problem. What I'm
saying is that in 40 years of experience with computer software, I've
determined for myself that "intuitive" means "I already know how to use it",
which means that the user's previous experiences are the prime determining
factor. That means that one person's intuitive is another person's cryptic,
depending on their past experiences.

IME nonlinear audio editing is always about as alien to working with a
regular audio console/studio as just about anything I've ever seen or done
with computers or audio. Even video editing is more intuitive. Ironically,
this is the good news because the original paradigm for audio editing
had/has lots of problems.

IME extensive experience with word processing software and test equipment
(what could be more disparate?) might give the best possible experience base
for learning how to do nonlinear audio editing.
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 12:03:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:

> And this "fade cursor" is supposed to be some pinnacle of intuitive
> elements found in audio editing programs? I never saw one on a studio
> console, have I missed something. And this business of having to
> start the drag at the top of the wave and drag bass ackwards? Where
> did this come from?

I never saw an envelope on a studio console either, apart from an unpaid
bill.

You owe is to yourself to open you mind and try it. Yes I have tried
Audition.

geoff
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 12:03:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
news:KUeLc.9464$NA1.902818@news02.tsnz.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> And this "fade cursor" is supposed to be some pinnacle of intuitive
>> elements found in audio editing programs? I never saw one on a studio
>> console, have I missed something. And this business of having to
>> start the drag at the top of the wave and drag bass ackwards? Where
>> did this come from?

> I never saw an envelope on a studio console either, apart from an
> unpaid bill.

So how can they be intuitive to someone who has never worked with a DAW
program?

> You owe is to yourself to open you mind and try it.

There's a lot of things I owe myself that I am probabaly not going to afford
or take the time for lately. The point was that the implementation in
Vegas is no doubt just fine, but it's probably not intuitive to anybody who
isn't in on the joke.

Since all 5 of the implementations of envelopes in Audition are turned off
by default, it is pretty unlikely that someone is going to see them by
accident, and decide that they like them. They're nothing like perfect
implementations, either. They work in percentages, which is not the same as
dB, but dB might not be the perfect answer either.

> Yes I have tried Audition.

...but apparently you didn't like it that much. That's fine. You've got Vegas
and like it. That's fine.

In progamming languages, it is usually learning the second language that is
the sitcking point for most people. They tend to judge their second
language by the first one that they learned. The second one comes up short
for a while, no matter what. After they learn the second one clean and
clear, they usually just take the next one(s) as a matter of fact.
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 11:00:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> In progamming languages, it is usually learning the second language
> that is the sitcking point for most people. They tend to judge their
> second language by the first one that they learned. The second one
> comes up short for a while, no matter what. After they learn the
> second one clean and clear, they usually just take the next one(s) as
> a matter of fact.

Yep, that's fine. But please accept that Audition is just one of many DAW
apps, and it is just conceivable that others may have at least as good a
workflow.

No matter how implemented, I find using envelopes for fades c;lunky at best
(though in Vegas, and maybe Audition too) you can define the slope between
nodes on an envelope. However in Vegas the envelope tool certainly is as
quick as conceivably possible.

geoff
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 11:00:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
news:uwoLc.9610$NA1.907521@news02.tsnz.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> In progamming languages, it is usually learning the second language
>> that is the sitcking point for most people. They tend to judge their
>> second language by the first one that they learned. The second one
>> comes up short for a while, no matter what. After they learn the
>> second one clean and clear, they usually just take the next one(s) as
>> a matter of fact.
>
> Yep, that's fine. But please accept that Audition is just one of
> many DAW apps, and it is just conceivable that others may have at
> least as good a workflow.

More than conceivable, that something else is better is likely depending on
your requirements.

Remember, I answered a specific question about Audition in the context of
Audition. I didn't tell some SF user that Audition was generally better for
his purposes.

> No matter how implemented, I find using envelopes for fades c;lunky
> at best (though in Vegas, and maybe Audition too) you can define the
> slope between nodes on an envelope. However in Vegas the envelope
> tool certainly is as quick as conceivably possible.

I'm real comfortable with graphic envelopes. I use pre-programmed envelopes
in Auditions's Edit View, but I'm using Edit View less and less.
July 23, 2004 2:26:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny your advice was wonderful thanks.
Yea, it turned off by default. That threw me for a loop. I think
Audition should turn these very basic things on by default.
It would be much more intuitive if I could see the darn line ;) 

Thats the biggest prob. I have with audition, its GUI. Many things
can only be accessed thru the complex menu system... when it would be
much easier to just see the line (like here with the fading), or
right-click on the item and get a better context-sensitive menus. TY
for the help!
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 6:28:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"jason" <ash477@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3b3e2b5.0407230926.6484204d@posting.google.com

> Arny your advice was wonderful thanks.
> Yea, it turned off by default. That threw me for a loop.

Features like this are set to default off to keep the interface clean.

> I think Audition should turn these very basic things on by default.
> It would be much more intuitive if I could see the darn line ;) 

Trouble, is there is a whole family of lines.

> Thats the biggest prob. I have with audition, its GUI.

That's been true for just about ever new kind of program I've ever worked
with.

> Many things can only be accessed thru the complex menu system...

It's a powerful program.

> when it would be
> much easier to just see the line (like here with the fading), or
> right-click on the item and get a better context-sensitive menus. TY
> for the help!

Enjoy!
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 11:38:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:

> It's a powerful program.
>

Until it's time to mix. Much as I love it, the throughput
of its mixer and effects interfaces are incredibly poor
compared to the competition. With four tracks and a couple
of compressors going, my 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 12:40:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ash477@hotmail.com (jason) wrote:

>Thats the biggest prob. I have with audition, its GUI. Many things
>can only be accessed thru the complex menu system...

There are hundreds of keyboard shortcuts. And as with may other
GUI program you can always configure the layout, number and placement
of buttons. These are grouped as with "View", "Tranform", "Generate" etc.

> when it would be
>much easier to just see the line (like here with the fading), or
>right-click on the item and get a better context-sensitive menus.

I think you can activate the envelope line by default. But there
is the pan line as well. Maybe even more lines which I have never used.

HTH
Norbert
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 7:45:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain wrote:
>
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> It's a powerful program.
>>
>
> Until it's time to mix. Much as I love it, the throughput of its mixer
> and effects interfaces are incredibly poor compared to the competition.
> With four tracks and a couple of compressors going, my 1 GHz Pentium
> begins stuttering.

Increase buffer size in settings tabs. Their defaults are set too low.
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 7:45:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Garth D. Wiebe wrote:

> Bob Cain wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> It's a powerful program.
>>>
>>
>> Until it's time to mix. Much as I love it, the throughput of its
>> mixer and effects interfaces are incredibly poor compared to the
>> competition. With four tracks and a couple of compressors going, my 1
>> GHz Pentium begins stuttering.
>
>
> Increase buffer size in settings tabs. Their defaults are set too low.

Thanks. Have you got recommendations? I'm running Audition
1.0 to a Yamaha DS2416 on Win98SE.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 9:50:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cdshlq077i@enews4.newsguy.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> It's a powerful program.

> Until it's time to mix.

Shortly you admit that its not mixing, but mixing with specific EFX that
caused you problems.

Also, Audition applies EFX to the mix in the background while you are
editing and mixing, so you don't need a CPU that can apply the EFX in real
time. If you don't wait for the background mixing to complete by watching
the little bar graph, you can have stuttering.

Remember that with Audition you also have the option of applying EFX to
individual tracks in EV, and mix with no so-called real time EFX.

> Much as I love it, the throughput
> of its mixer and effects interfaces are incredibly poor
> compared to the competition.

Never had a problem.

> With four tracks and a couple
> of compressors going, my 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.

I duuno, for about a year I mixed 12 tracks, some with EFX, on a 666 MHz P3.
It did have 512 megs and two hard drives and ran very clean.

I did upgrade it to a 3200 MHz A64 to facilitiate mixing, but that was as
much to speed final mixdowns, as anything. Also, it seems like the more I
learn about recording, the less EFX I use.
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 9:54:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cdt2620gt@enews3.newsguy.com
> Garth D. Wiebe wrote:
>
>> Bob Cain wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's a powerful program.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Until it's time to mix. Much as I love it, the throughput of its
>>> mixer and effects interfaces are incredibly poor compared to the
>>> competition. With four tracks and a couple of compressors going,
>>> my 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.
>>
>>
>> Increase buffer size in settings tabs. Their defaults are set too
>> low.
>
> Thanks. Have you got recommendations? I'm running Audition
> 1.0 to a Yamaha DS2416 on Win98SE.

When I mixed on a P3-666, I used a Audigy for monitoring, and XP. IME XP
does a better job of buffering and multitasking than SE. The Audigy is also
well-known for its low CPU load.
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 2:49:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:


>
>> With four tracks and a couple
>>of compressors going, my 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.
>
>
> I duuno, for about a year I mixed 12 tracks, some with EFX, on a 666 MHz P3.
> It did have 512 megs and two hard drives and ran very clean.

I guess the stuttering is my imagination then.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
July 24, 2004 6:52:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cdu737011kl@enews2.newsguy.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
>>
>>> With four tracks and a couple
>>> of compressors going, my 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.

>> I duuno, for about a year I mixed 12 tracks, some with EFX, on a 666
>> MHz P3. It did have 512 megs and two hard drives and ran very clean.

> I guess the stuttering is my imagination then.

Not hardly. But, the big question is as always: "why"?

At this point I'd only want to suggest that the problem you observed was not
simply due to how badly Audition/CE implements mixing or general EFX.
Anonymous
July 25, 2004 3:13:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> Shortly you admit that its not mixing, but mixing with specific EFX
> that caused you problems.

Do you mean "FX", as in plugin FX ? Or is EFX internal native Audition
effects ? Can it not normally preview these in realtime ?

Only FX I've ever had trouble previewing is Izotope Ozone, due to sheer CPU
drain of the plugin.

geoff
Anonymous
July 25, 2004 3:13:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
news:4wrMc.139$zS6.21735@news02.tsnz.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> Shortly you admit that its not mixing, but mixing with specific EFX
>> that caused you problems.

> Do you mean "FX", as in plugin FX ? Or is EFX internal native
> Audition effects ?

Both, though I usually only use the latter.

> Can it not normally preview these in real-time ?

Sure, but Audition does background mixing while you edit so that real-time
operation can be virtualized.

> Only FX I've ever had trouble previewing is Izotope Ozone, due to
> sheer CPU drain of the plugin.

Then the bad boy is the external FX, not necessarily Audition.
Anonymous
July 25, 2004 4:36:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain wrote:
>
>
> Garth D. Wiebe wrote:
>
>> Bob Cain wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's a powerful program.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Until it's time to mix. Much as I love it, the throughput of its
>>> mixer and effects interfaces are incredibly poor compared to the
>>> competition. With four tracks and a couple of compressors going, my
>>> 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.
>>
>>
>>
>> Increase buffer size in settings tabs. Their defaults are set too low.
>
>
> Thanks. Have you got recommendations? I'm running Audition 1.0 to a
> Yamaha DS2416 on Win98SE.

Here are my settings. I am running a PC with 1.7 GHz AMD Athlon XP
processor and 512 MB memory.

The following is not scientific or well researched. When I got the
stuttering, I just bumped a bunch of things up and it went away.

I am able to do at least 26 tracks 44.1K, 32-bit, no live effects plugins.

Edit View Play/Record Buffer: 5 seconds using 12 buffers
EV Preview Buffer: 250 ms
Wave Cache: 32768 K bytes
Use System's Cache: No
Playback Buffer Size: 2 seconds
Playback Buffers: 10
Recording Buffer Size: 2 seconds
Recording Buffers: 10
Background Mixing Priority: 5

Background mixing disabled.
Anonymous
July 25, 2004 4:36:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thanks, Garth. I'll see if that helps.


Bob

Garth D. Wiebe wrote:

> Bob Cain wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Garth D. Wiebe wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Cain wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's a powerful program.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Until it's time to mix. Much as I love it, the throughput of its
>>>> mixer and effects interfaces are incredibly poor compared to the
>>>> competition. With four tracks and a couple of compressors going, my
>>>> 1 GHz Pentium begins stuttering.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Increase buffer size in settings tabs. Their defaults are set too low.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks. Have you got recommendations? I'm running Audition 1.0 to a
>> Yamaha DS2416 on Win98SE.
>
>
> Here are my settings. I am running a PC with 1.7 GHz AMD Athlon XP
> processor and 512 MB memory.
>
> The following is not scientific or well researched. When I got the
> stuttering, I just bumped a bunch of things up and it went away.
>
> I am able to do at least 26 tracks 44.1K, 32-bit, no live effects plugins.
>
> Edit View Play/Record Buffer: 5 seconds using 12 buffers
> EV Preview Buffer: 250 ms
> Wave Cache: 32768 K bytes
> Use System's Cache: No
> Playback Buffer Size: 2 seconds
> Playback Buffers: 10
> Recording Buffer Size: 2 seconds
> Recording Buffers: 10
> Background Mixing Priority: 5
>
> Background mixing disabled.
>

--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
!