mobile recording dilemma

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

Hi,

After a long career in recording, I've 'retired' to play in two bands,
a trio and a quartet, both of which are acoustic, with the exception
that I play an electric bass in the quartet. Both bands enjoy to play
live and have great live shows, and we'd like to capture these,
multitracked.

(Samples of both bands can be heard at the addr's below my signature.)

I've been doing research into using the smallest hardware we can, and
in the PA realm we're not doing badly with that, tho we might be able
to do better. Only one guitar and the bass go direct, so we use a
Mackie 1604vlz Pro for mic inputs (the quartet used to be a sextet...),
with Mackie 450 powered speakers and a Galaxy HotSpot monitor system.

I have and have used ProTools/Mac rigs since the early '90's, and we've
used my studio and another PT/Mac studio to make our CDs thus far. I
like using PT, so the first thought was to use an 002 rack and a Mac
laptop, and feed the 002 from the direct outs from the 1604. This adds
two boxes to carry and about $2k to the inventory.

It was recently suggested to me that I could replace the 1604 with a
Mackie Onyx 1620/40 and use the FireWire out to a Mac Laptop. The Onyx
is a bit smaller than the 1604, and without the 002 rack box, that's
one less box.

Since PT won't 'see' the Onyx, I'll have to use some other sofware for
tracking and then move the track to my main PT system. I'm concerned
about how tracks made in GarageBand2, Logic, etc., will move over to
PT.

Clearly there are some 'givens' here... I'm happy working in PT on
Macs, so I assume that to be the final destination of the live tracks
will be my main PT/Mac system. I also intend that we would record the
live shows very simply, without effects, no compression nor limiting
and if anything, only a bit of EQ to the recorder. Any changes would
be made later in the studio.

So the questions are:

1) Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA and digital
multitrack recording functions?

2) How well do tracks made in Garageband2, Logic, etc., move over to
PT?

3) Do you multitrack live in venues now, and what recording hardware
and software do you like to use?

Many thanks,

stv

http://cdbaby.com/Lopers
http://cdbaby.com/Culchies
20 answers Last reply
More about mobile recording dilemma
  1. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    I used to do mobile recording for a living. If I were doing it today, I
    would probably use a PC running Cubase SL (the cheapest version of
    Cubendo) with a 24-channel Lightpipe card, connected to a Yamaha O1v96
    which would provide mic pre's, A/D conversion, and the ability to
    monitor the signal coming back from the computer (for verification). If
    I wanted great fidelity I might also have an 8-channel mic pre and
    8-channel A/D in a rack, for the most important tracks.

    Pretty much any DAW software that records WAV files will transfer just
    fine into Pro Tools. Some DAW's even timestamp the files, but that
    won't be a concern for you since they will all be contiguous.
  2. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    There are some cheapo ways to go. I don't see anything but this post so
    if I don't hit the mark, don't hit me :-)

    There are several little dinky mixers that convert a/d/a and are as
    simple as caca. The USB-842 (think that is the name) from Tascam 8
    track mixer, 4 track A/D/A, + stereo master. I think it has some
    other input but I haven't even looked at it in about 3 years. It can be
    used as a live mixer and converts 4 tracks to digital. I have used it
    with a REEEEEALY old Mac G3 wallstreet laptop and Cubase 5.something
    and it worked, not great, but it worked. I used it to record a demo
    where the drummer had a midi kit so the MIDI inputs came in handy
    too... yes I think there are 2 midi ins.

    Anyway, depending on how low you want to go, that sort of dookicky
    might fit your needs.

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

    In article <1119391887.621759.255590@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> TarBabyTunes@gmail.com writes:

    > After a long career in recording, I've 'retired' to play in two bands,
    > a trio and a quartet, both of which are acoustic, with the exception
    > that I play an electric bass in the quartet. Both bands enjoy to play
    > live and have great live shows, and we'd like to capture these,
    > multitracked.

    > It was recently suggested to me that I could replace the 1604 with a
    > Mackie Onyx 1620/40 and use the FireWire out to a Mac Laptop.

    > Since PT won't 'see' the Onyx, I'll have to use some other sofware for
    > tracking and then move the track to my main PT system. I'm concerned
    > about how tracks made in GarageBand2, Logic, etc., will move over to
    > PT.

    > I also intend that we would record the
    > live shows very simply, without effects, no compression nor limiting
    > and if anything, only a bit of EQ to the recorder. Any changes would
    > be made later in the studio.

    This is exactly what the Onyx Firewire option does best. It sends the
    mic preamps (or line inputs) to an A/D converter, and spits that out
    the Firewire interface. No EQ, no inserts, no nuttin'. To the
    computer, it looks like a sound card with 8 stereo inputs, (usable as
    16 mono inputs) with the mics connected to the inputs. As a bonus, you
    can also record the stereo mix.

    The Onyx Firewire option comes bundled with Mackie's program
    Tracktion, but you can use it with any software that recognizes ASIO
    or WDM drivers. Most programs record WAV or AIFF files directly, or
    (as Tracktion does) allows you to export your recordings in those
    formats. Since you'll be starting and stopping your recording on all
    tracks simultaneously, you don't need to go to any special pains to
    line up tracks when importing the audio files you recorded on the gig
    into ProTools.

    > 1) Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA and digital
    > multitrack recording functions?

    Not that I can think of. You can of course get the same functionality
    by connecting a multi-input sound card to direct outputs of your
    mixer, but the Onyx is a good one-box solution for this application.

    > 2) How well do tracks made in Garageband2, Logic, etc., move over to
    > PT?

    I don't know about Garageband, but what you get free with the Onyx
    will get you there, and you have a lot of options.

    > 3) Do you multitrack live in venues now, and what recording hardware
    > and software do you like to use?

    Me, I use a Mackie hard disk recorder. I don't trust computers.
    However, I did use an Onyx/Firewire setup on a non-critical project
    and it worked without a hitch. My laptop computer is pretty feeble and
    I only used it to record 4 tracks. Your mileage will probably be
    considerably better.

    One thing that you need to understand about the Onyx/Firewire setup is
    that as far as recording goes, it's a multi-channel input device only.
    It's not a multi-channel output device. You do get a stereo output
    that goes to the monitor section of the mixer (equivalent to the "tape
    In" jacks on your present Mackie mixer) but you don't get 16 returns
    from the computer back into the mixer so you can use the nice Onyx EQ
    and the real knobs for mixing. The assumption is that once you've
    recorded the raw tracks, you'll do all your processing and mixing in
    the computer.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  4. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    stv wrote:

    > So the questions are:

    > 1) Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA
    and digital
    > multitrack recording functions?

    Two possibilities come immediately to mind - Yamaha 01V96
    and Behringer DDX 3216. Both offer ADAT digital connections
    into multitrack digital computer audio interfaces such as
    those from MOTU and Frontier.

    > 2) How well do tracks made in Garageband2, Logic, etc.,
    move over to
    > PT?

    If you want to do multitrack recording with similar
    functionality but lower cost, consider alternative software
    such as Adobe Audition for example.

    > 3) Do you multitrack live in venues now, and what
    recording hardware
    > and software do you like to use?

    I do a 20 track recording every Sunday morning off of the
    inserts of a live console. My current configuration is a
    Mackie SR32 console with several M-Audio Delta-series (1010,
    1010LT, and 66) audio interfaces running into a Athlon-2000
    Windows XP desktop running Audition/CE.

    This is a highly-seasoned configuration whose major weakness
    is the Mackie SR32 console, bad ribbon cables and all. The
    recording function runs like a clock. Since the console's
    insert points bypass most of the weirdness in the console,
    it works well even when bad things are happening to the live
    sound due to the console's bad ribbon cables, etc.

    I use the multitrack recordings to diagnose just about
    anything strange that happens to the live sound side of the
    operation. For example, for the last two Sundays we've been
    plagued with a mystery highly intermittant feedback problem
    that only seemed to happen during services, not rehearsals
    or tests. From the multitrack recordings I knew which mics
    were involved and the precise frequencies at which the
    feedback was happening (6 KHz). A quick technical survey of
    the system revealed that person or persons unknown had
    pushed the 6 KHz sliders on two of the monitor eqs (on the
    platform) up by about 8 dB.

    I am in the process of implementing a Yamaha 02R96-based
    live sound/recording system. In the short term I plan to go
    to 24 or 28 channels by adding another Delta 1010LT
    interface running off of various analog outputs of the 02R96
    and attached ADA8000 ADAT-interface expansion units. Long
    term, I'm planning to using the ADAT inputs of MOTU 824(s)
    to eliminate the conversion back to analog and then back to
    digital.
  5. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Arny Krueger wrote:
    > stv wrote:
    >
    >> Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA
    >> and digital multitrack recording functions?
    >
    > Two possibilities come immediately to mind - Yamaha 01V96
    > and Behringer DDX 3216. Both offer ADAT digital connections
    > into multitrack digital computer audio interfaces such as
    > those from MOTU and Frontier.

    This would definitely work, but I'm not sure it would meet the
    smaller/simpler requirement. It would likely be more expensive as well.
  6. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    stv wrote:
    >
    > Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA and digital
    > multitrack recording functions?

    The Onyx 1220 should meet your current needs, but it has one less
    sweepable mid and fewer aux sends so I'd stick with the 1620.

    BTW, the direct ins on the Onyx are surprisingly good.
  7. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Kurt Albershardt wrote:

    > Arny Krueger wrote:
    >> stv wrote:
    >>
    >>> Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA
    >>> and digital multitrack recording functions?
    >>
    >> Two possibilities come immediately to mind - Yamaha 01V96
    >> and Behringer DDX 3216. Both offer ADAT digital
    connections
    >> into multitrack digital computer audio interfaces such as
    >> those from MOTU and Frontier.

    > This would definitely work, but I'm not sure it would meet
    the
    > smaller/simpler requirement. It would likely be more
    expensive as
    > well.

    The DDX 3216 is running under $600 with ADAT interface.
    This is almost a believe-it-or-not price.

    Older tech MOTU ADAT interfaces (OK, since the newer models
    differ mainly in terms of upgraded analog sections which
    would not be used) run about $250 on eBay.

    My recollection is that the Mackie Onyx 1620/40 pricing
    doesn't look nearly as attractive once you add the price of
    the Firewire interface.
  8. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Hey Mike,

    Sounds ideal. I had missed that some sort of recording s/w came with
    the Onyx. It did say on the Mackie website that it would work with
    various stuff, and I have G-band in the Mac already.

    <<One thing that you need to understand about the Onyx/Firewire setup
    is
    that as far as recording goes, it's a multi-channel input device only.
    It's not a multi-channel output device. You do get a stereo output
    that goes to the monitor section of the mixer (equivalent to the "tape
    In" jacks on your present Mackie mixer) but you don't get 16 returns
    from the computer back into the mixer so you can use the nice Onyx EQ
    and the real knobs for mixing. The assumption is that once you've
    recorded the raw tracks, you'll do all your processing and mixing in
    the computer. >>

    Yeah, that's cool. I could wish for access to EQ on the way down the
    FireWire, but ... that's ok.

    I was just looking at the Presonus Firepod, which is a pretty close
    alternative, pretty close in price, and it adds one small 1U box to my
    current setup, as opposed to replacing my 1604...

    Any thoughts on the FirePod box...?

    Many thanks, Mike,

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

    Thanks to all!

    Some limitations in general in reply: I really don't want to learn
    Windows, sorry. <GG> It's tough enough to learn new multitrack s/w.
    I had to do a location job one time with that stuff that came with the
    MOTU 828 MkI, and it drove me nuts. Clearly, I'm an old dog.

    (I'm beginning to sound really negative here....) Similarly, I have
    worked on the Yamaha digital consoles, and while they aren't arcane, I
    wouldn't really be comfortable with them 'on the fly'.

    The way I look at the price of the Onyx (the 1620 has the mic pre's I
    need), it seems to run up to $800 on the street, and I can cover a good
    deal of that with the sale of the 1604vlz Pro that I'm using now. The
    FireWire is $125 list, and I've seen dealers offer a nice price with
    the card kicked in, so I'm not too scared by the numbers.

    Again, the PreSonus FirePod seems a pretty close alternative, and it
    would allow me to do some functional EQ in the 1604 before the FW
    send...

    Wow, Arny! All that church work sounds pretty cool, being able to
    analyze the live tracks each week... I've had varying levels of
    success with Mackies, but the 1604vlz Pro has been really dependable
    for me.

    Many thanks to all for your good and thoughtful responses!

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

    stv wrote:
    >
    > I was just looking at the Presonus Firepod, which is a pretty close
    > alternative, pretty close in price, and it adds one small 1U box to my
    > current setup

    And a bunch of interconnecting cables. More flexibility but also more
    complexity. KISS is important in live work.


    > Any thoughts on the FirePod box...?

    Never used one. Don't recall anyone raving about them -- or raging at them.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    stv wrote:
    >
    > The FireWire is $125 list

    $399 MAP for the FireWire option card.
  12. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <TeWdnY2K5sB8MCTfRVn-qA@comcast.com> arnyk@hotpop.com writes:

    > The DDX 3216 is running under $600 with ADAT interface.
    > This is almost a believe-it-or-not price.

    What? Fifty bucks cheaper than last week? What's going on?

    > My recollection is that the Mackie Onyx 1620/40 pricing
    > doesn't look nearly as attractive once you add the price of
    > the Firewire interface.

    I suspect that's true, and will continue to be true for a while, maybe
    even forever. The way it went with the Mackie HDRs and digital
    consoles (which shared the same I/O cards) was that the recorders and
    consoles, both of which have been discontinued, were discounted pretty
    fairly almost from the start, but the I/O cards were pretty much sold
    at MSRP across the board, even today. I just took a look at the
    Sweetwater web page as a benchmark, and the ADAT Optical I/O
    card, which is the only one that's still available, is selling for
    $89.97, a whopping $9.03 discount. That saving won't hardly buy lunch.
    They want $400 for the $500 MSRP Onyx Firewire card, a bit closer to a
    typical discount, but with MSRPs being what they are today, nobody
    (visibly) discounts as heavily as they used to.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  13. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <1119483223.316717.160760@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> TarBabyTunes@gmail.com writes:

    > Yeah, that's cool. I could wish for access to EQ on the way down the
    > [Onyx] FireWire, but ... that's ok.

    The thing that Mackie had in mind when they designed it that way was
    that when you're mixing for the house PA, you probalby will want
    different EQ on the inputs than if you were mixing in a more
    controlled environment, for recording. So unless the EQ is to correct
    a deficiency in the mic or its position, you're better off not
    applying the house EQ to your recording. It does make it a bit less
    useful to use as a studio mixer (where it's perfectly reasonable to EQ
    what's going to the track if you're confident of the sound), but,
    since it lacks multi-channel returns, the Onyx Firewire already not a
    really good choice if your first priority is as a studio mixer.

    > I was just looking at the Presonus Firepod, which is a pretty close
    > alternative, pretty close in price, and it adds one small 1U box to my
    > current setup, as opposed to replacing my 1604...

    It won't help you to mix live PA, but I'm sure it's a decent
    interface.

    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  14. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <1119484010.872415.113120@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> TarBabyTunes@gmail.com writes:

    > The way I look at the price of the Onyx (the 1620 has the mic pre's I
    > need), it seems to run up to $800 on the street

    > The
    > FireWire is $125 list, and I've seen dealers offer a nice price with
    > the card kicked in, so I'm not too scared by the numbers.

    You've found either some good deals or a mistake. The Onyx Firewire
    card lists for $500, and Sweetwater (typical dealer price) sells it
    for $400.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  15. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    > 2) How well do tracks made in Garageband2, Logic, etc., move over to
    > PT?

    The other issues seem to be handled well, so I'll field this one. Often PT
    rejects the file headers put on by other software or HDR's, and sometimes
    even accepts them at first, but when the session is reloaded the files turn
    to static. The best way to deal with this is to copy the files using a file
    converter, even if you're not actually changing formats. This will write
    the files with non-proprietary headers, and PT has nothing to complain
    about. The originals still act as back-ups, provided they are "converted"
    again if needed. Not sure what software to use in OS X, I used SoundApp in
    Classic and use Sonic Foundry's Batch Converter in XP.
  16. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    would I be correct in surmising from this thread that:

    If I recorded multiple tracks from the Onyx, and ultimately wanted to
    upgrade from Traction to PT (or bring my raw data on a firewire hard
    drive to a studio using PT, I would be able to edit/mix by importing
    those raw tracks to PT??

    Mike...?? Please consider copying the repl to
    bohemianIHATESPAMatsnowcrest.netOn 21 Jun 2005 20:57:52 -0400,
    mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote:

    >
    >In article <1119391887.621759.255590@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> TarBabyTunes@gmail.com writes:
    >
    >> After a long career in recording, I've 'retired' to play in two bands,
    >> a trio and a quartet, both of which are acoustic, with the exception
    >> that I play an electric bass in the quartet. Both bands enjoy to play
    >> live and have great live shows, and we'd like to capture these,
    >> multitracked.
    >
    >> It was recently suggested to me that I could replace the 1604 with a
    >> Mackie Onyx 1620/40 and use the FireWire out to a Mac Laptop.
    >
    >> Since PT won't 'see' the Onyx, I'll have to use some other sofware for
    >> tracking and then move the track to my main PT system. I'm concerned
    >> about how tracks made in GarageBand2, Logic, etc., will move over to
    >> PT.
    >
    >> I also intend that we would record the
    >> live shows very simply, without effects, no compression nor limiting
    >> and if anything, only a bit of EQ to the recorder. Any changes would
    >> be made later in the studio.
    >
    >This is exactly what the Onyx Firewire option does best. It sends the
    >mic preamps (or line inputs) to an A/D converter, and spits that out
    >the Firewire interface. No EQ, no inserts, no nuttin'. To the
    >computer, it looks like a sound card with 8 stereo inputs, (usable as
    >16 mono inputs) with the mics connected to the inputs. As a bonus, you
    >can also record the stereo mix.
    >
    >The Onyx Firewire option comes bundled with Mackie's program
    >Tracktion, but you can use it with any software that recognizes ASIO
    >or WDM drivers. Most programs record WAV or AIFF files directly, or
    >(as Tracktion does) allows you to export your recordings in those
    >formats. Since you'll be starting and stopping your recording on all
    >tracks simultaneously, you don't need to go to any special pains to
    >line up tracks when importing the audio files you recorded on the gig
    >into ProTools.
    >
    >> 1) Are there simpler/smaller systems that will double PA and digital
    >> multitrack recording functions?
    >
    >Not that I can think of. You can of course get the same functionality
    >by connecting a multi-input sound card to direct outputs of your
    >mixer, but the Onyx is a good one-box solution for this application.
    >
    >> 2) How well do tracks made in Garageband2, Logic, etc., move over to
    >> PT?
    >
    >I don't know about Garageband, but what you get free with the Onyx
    >will get you there, and you have a lot of options.
    >
    >> 3) Do you multitrack live in venues now, and what recording hardware
    >> and software do you like to use?
    >
    >Me, I use a Mackie hard disk recorder. I don't trust computers.
    >However, I did use an Onyx/Firewire setup on a non-critical project
    >and it worked without a hitch. My laptop computer is pretty feeble and
    >I only used it to record 4 tracks. Your mileage will probably be
    >considerably better.
    >
    >One thing that you need to understand about the Onyx/Firewire setup is
    >that as far as recording goes, it's a multi-channel input device only.
    >It's not a multi-channel output device. You do get a stereo output
    >that goes to the monitor section of the mixer (equivalent to the "tape
    >In" jacks on your present Mackie mixer) but you don't get 16 returns
    >from the computer back into the mixer so you can use the nice Onyx EQ
    >and the real knobs for mixing. The assumption is that once you've
    >recorded the raw tracks, you'll do all your processing and mixing in
    >the computer.
  17. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <n38ad1hrsnop3or70fs11h2hd8343p00lj@4ax.com> alias@snowcrest.net writes:

    > would I be correct in surmising from this thread that:
    >
    > If I recorded multiple tracks from the Onyx, and ultimately wanted to
    > upgrade from Traction to PT (or bring my raw data on a firewire hard
    > drive to a studio using PT, I would be able to edit/mix by importing
    > those raw tracks to PT??

    Data is data. You can make it easy to import the data by rendering the
    tracks first. If you don't, you can still import data, but you may
    find that you have a mass of confusion that will be difficult to sort
    out.

    > Mike...?? Please consider copying the repl to
    > bohemianIHATESPAMatsnowcrest.net

    Why reply to an address that I'll have to edit or decode? I make too
    many mistakes to do that reliably.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  18. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    > > would I be correct in surmising from this thread that:
    > >
    > > If I recorded multiple tracks from the Onyx, and ultimately wanted to
    > > upgrade from Traction to PT (or bring my raw data on a firewire hard
    > > drive to a studio using PT, I would be able to edit/mix by importing
    > > those raw tracks to PT??
    >
    > Data is data. You can make it easy to import the data by rendering the
    > tracks first. If you don't, you can still import data, but you may
    > find that you have a mass of confusion that will be difficult to sort
    > out.

    Mike suggests rendering the individual tracks to individual files, which can
    be a real bitch, but what really matters is that the Traktion files might
    have a proprietary header (code at the beginning to denote the file
    parameters) which PT might not accept. I've had to deal with this before,
    sometimes PT even accepts files from another editor then alters the headers
    when the session is saved, and then they can't be played with anything, even
    PT.

    The solution is to use a file converter program to copy the files (even if
    you're not changing the file type), and they should be backed up anyway.
    The file converter writes a generic header that PT can use fine, but doesn't
    alter the data in any way, and is as fast as copying the files. I always
    use a converter to copy files off CD's and DVD's from other editors for PT.
    On PC Sonic Foundry's Batch Converter works for me, I use Peak's batch
    converter function on Macs, but there might be a better task-specific app
    out there.

    Data is data, but headers vary. Damn I miss resource forks...
  19. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <oQHDe.3283$YG.277@read1.cgocable.net> no@no.no writes:

    > Mike suggests rendering the individual tracks to individual files, which can
    > be a real bitch

    Good design calls for this to be essentially a pushbutton function.
    That function resides in Tracktion but I haven't tried it. Well,
    actually, I tried to try it but it was a bit obtuse (not exactly what
    I'd call a "real bitch") and I didn't stick with it. But others seem
    to be able to do it with no problem. "Render" is Mackie's hard disk
    recorder term for the function. In ProTools, it's "consolidate."

    > but what really matters is that the Traktion files might
    > have a proprietary header (code at the beginning to denote the file
    > parameters) which PT might not accept.

    They're supposed to be plain vanilla broadcast wave files.

    > The solution is to use a file converter program to copy the files (even if
    > you're not changing the file type), and they should be backed up anyway.
    > The file converter writes a generic header that PT can use fine, but doesn't
    > alter the data in any way, and is as fast as copying the files. I always
    > use a converter to copy files off CD's and DVD's from other editors for PT.

    So you're suggesting that a Tracktion owner buy a copy of Sound Forge
    to use its file converter? Which software dealer do you work for? What
    ever happened to good ol' experimentation? Why are you telling us what
    might be wrong before you know anything really is wrong?

    The AES has hammered out a recommended standard for audio file
    interchange, and basically it's plain vanilla broadcast wave files.
    Believe it or not, it's to the benefit of software vendors to comply
    with industry standards when possible. While they may use their own
    internal format and headers, it would behoove them, when doing any
    "file export" operation, to generate files in a standard
    interchangable format. Many are coming around to that. Give 'em the
    benefit of the doubt until you know that there's a problem.

    > Data is data, but headers vary. Damn I miss resource forks...

    The bane of PC users in the past. I didn't know they were gone, but
    good riddance. If a user doesn't know what program to use to open a
    file, he shouldn't be messing with it.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Ask a new question

Read More

Pro Audio Audio