Simultaneous track edit

Paul881

Paul881

Look Mom, I can play!
Help me out here guys. I have recorded a song with ten tracks. Problem is, the song has a long silent audio introduction (it was a long way from my computer to the microphone, took time for me to get there). Now I wish to cut the front end on all ten tracks simultaneously or at least, in a way to guarantee they all are cut and start at the same place. I was then wanting to drag the cut tracks to the left so they start pretty much straight away (I hope this is making sense).

Whats the best way of doing this?
 
It's you again, Paul! :)

Personally I normally leave the extra silence in the Cakewalk file, and trim it after I export the CW file to a stereo wave file. Trimming the beginning and ends of a file, applying fades, etc., are things I consider part of "mastering", and I do those things with the "finished" stereo wave.

However, it can be done in Sonar as follows:
1. Edit -> Select -> All
2. In the Time Ruler left-drag your mouse over just the portion of the file that you wish to cut out. When you release the mouse button, all ten tracks should be highlighted for only the piece of the file you are editing.
3. Edit -> Cut. Make sure that the "delete hole" checkbox is checked in the cut menu, and then click OK.

Mike
 
Thanks Mike. (Nice to know your "proper" name - didn't think for a minute dachay was your real moniker!)

Mission accomplished! :D

I knew it was a simple answer, but just couldn't figure it out. I was messing with the individual track slip editing icon after selecting Edit>All.

But I didn't understand your answer fully about trimming after exporting. How does that work? When I have finished a song, lets say 10 tracks of audio and midi, I usually then bounce all to a single stereo track in the same file, add fx, pan, adjust levels, apply EQ, compression etc and then export that stereo track as a stereo wav file. And save the file as a .bun (I don't save my work as anything other than .bun these days, the Cakewalk file naming system drives me nuts - I might upgrade to Sonar 2.0 just to get around this problem).

So if I need to go back and mess with some of the original 10 tracks to adjust or add to the bounced and exported file, I can do that easily if all the tracks start at the same time, otherwise it becomes messy trying to line em all up in synch.

I am interested to know what do you do different to that? And why?

Thanks again,

Paul
 
Paul - the difference seems to be that you are doing your "mastering" in Cakewalk, while I do mine in Wavelab.

Therefore, I have to create an external wave file first, before I can bring it into Wavelab. So I just leave the extra silence in the Cakewalk file, export it to a wave, then cut off the silence within Wavelab as part of the "mastering" process.

No big deal. It will work fine either way. I just find it easier in Wavelab, since at that point I am only working with a single (stereo) track.
 
Okay Mike, understood. But doesn't that mean you have synch difficulty if you wish to go back and modify your mastered track to its constituent clips/tracks?

And can you tell me again what the advantages are of using Wavelab?

One other point (question really), I have a spare, totally empty, unused 20gig drive in my pc. Should I go to Global>files and make all of my cakewalk defaults point to it? Currently, if I do a "save" it points to C:\Cakewalk Projects. I don't do that any more as my previous post states.

If I do a "save as...", I save it as a .bun in a partitioned D:\ music project file on my boot hard drive. Should I point both of these to my spare E:\ drive?

Questions, questions, questions, so many questions. But I do appreciate your knowledge and advice.:)

Paul
 
But doesn't that mean you have synch difficulty if you wish to go back and modify your mastered track to its constituent clips/tracks?
Click to expand...

Not sure I understand your question, Paul. I don't ever bring the exported wave file back into Sonar - so there is no sync issues to worry about.

Normally I would "master" it and then burn it to a CD. If in listening to the CD I find I need to make fixes to the original mix, I reopen the Sonar file, make the adjustments, and then re-export a new wave.
I have a spare, totally empty, unused 20gig drive in my pc. Should I go to Global>files and make all of my cakewalk defaults point to it? Currently, if I do a "save" it points to C:\Cakewalk Projects.
Click to expand...
Under Global Options there is a setting for Folders/Songs. This determines where your Cakewalk projects will be saved (by default). If you point that to your E drive, you can avoid the "save as" route, and just do a "save".

It's not very important where you save your projects - particularly bundle files, as they are essentially for backup purposes. You should organize them to your own taste and methods of working.
 
Oh right, I understand, you answered my question about the mastering.

But with regard to saving files, if I set up Sonar to save to a default drive & file and then do a "save" (not a "save as...."), doesnt HS/Sonar do a multiple .wav save of all the clips/tracks making up the song using those stupid random file names that drive everyone mad with frustration? Alternatively, as I understand it, if I save my work as a .bun file, I can save it as the name of the song, and it keeps all the .wav files in a neat bundle under the name of the song.

Or am I missing something? How do you save your work in progress and your finished Sonar files? (not your exported wav file for mastering, I now understand how you do that, its just the why you do it I don't fully comprehend).

Sorry for the questions!
 
doesnt HS/Sonar do a multiple .wav save of all the clips/tracks making up the song using those stupid random file names that drive everyone mad with frustration? Alternatively, as I understand it, if I save my work as a .bun file, I can save it as the name of the song, and it keeps all the .wav files in a neat bundle under the name of the song.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much correct.

I normally backup my Sonar projects as .bun/.cwb files just as you do. I keep one copy on my hard drive, and put another on CD.

My most active projects - generally this is just one or two at time - I maintain as .wrk/.cwp files. I do that simply because I find them quicker to open and save in that format.
 
Y'know this thread didn't go the way I thought it would.
I thought Paul was asking something like "I recorded an acoustic guitar part in stereo with 2 mics onto 2 separate tracks. I made a mistake on the second verse and want to copy and paste the first verse over it, but since I recorded to 2 tracks simultaeously, I need to split the clips in the same place and move them together."
That I've done. Last week with six tracks of drums no less. Just hold down ctrl and select the tracks you want to edit. Establish the time at which you want to split by clicking the time ruler at the top of track view. Go to Edit>Split Clips. Key in the time if it's not already there. Repeat for the end of the clip. Select the clips. Move them, copy them, whatever.
Mike, I never tried the left-drag thing. It sounds like it will work for what I just described. I hold down Alt and drag over the parts of a clip I want to auto-punch, then set up the red loop thingy to snap to the selection.
 
Hi Chuck, this "slip editing" is a major advance on earlier CW versions. I know how to do this on one track, but my original question was how to do it accross several/all tracks simulaneously. As usual, Dachay (Mike) came to the rescue.:)
 
The latest post in this saga...need some more help:rolleyes:

Okay Mike, I understand why you use Wavelab, am pretty convinced from my research it is a good "mastering" piece of software, better perhaps than Sonar with better algorithms. There is a good piece in SOS magazine this month about mastering in Sonar and an indepth review of wavelab. I will probably buy it on the strength of the review.

But what I am confused about is the spatial mix. When I master in Sonar, I am trying to place the different instruments in a 3d space, bass guitar to the left, drums central, at the back etc. This can only be done before the final bounce in Sonar...before exporting a single stereo wav to wavelab. Unless you are exporting all the insrument files to wavelab and doing the spatial mix there?
 
dachay2tnr said:
Paul - the difference seems to be that you are doing your "mastering" in Cakewalk, while I do mine in Wavelab.

Therefore, I have to create an external wave file first, before I can bring it into Wavelab. So I just leave the extra silence in the Cakewalk file, export it to a wave, then cut off the silence within Wavelab as part of the "mastering" process.

No big deal. It will work fine either way. I just find it easier in Wavelab, since at that point I am only working with a single (stereo) track.
Click to expand...

wavelab is also more stable for me under high math plug in stress
 
When I master in Sonar, I am trying to place the different instruments in a 3d space, bass guitar to the left, drums central, at the back etc.
Click to expand...

Paul, anything that is done to the individual tracks is, IMHO, not part of mastering. It is mixing. Panning, for ex. is part of mixing. Adding reverb or delays to single instruments is part of mixing. Setting the relative volume levels of each individual instrument is part of mixing.

Mastering comes into play when you are working with the song as a whole.

Therefore, what you describe above is part of the mixing process and should be accomplished within Sonar before the mastering phase.
 
Mike, Gotcha, thanks for the definition of mixing and mastering. Thats what I was hoping you would say. Am now the proud owner of Wavelab. All I need now is to understand where I go from here. Another round of learning coming up.

Teacher, the SOS article agreed with you, it stated that Sonar is okay for mastering upto a point but for top notch, CPU hungry EQ and the like, Wavelab is king.
 
I use SEKD's RedRoaster which is now being marketed by Magix (www.magix.com) as Samplitude Master along with Wave's plug-ins.

I use sonar to record, and mix, and i use redroaster (ie.. samplitude master) to master, set PQ codes, and burn.

take a look at that as well.
 
I don't know if the hard drive question was ever fully addressed.

It is my understanding that using a dedicated hard drive is a far superior method for storing your recordings. Here are 3 reasons that should make good sense:

1) it is (obviously) easier to keep organized. Your project doesn't get burried several folders down in your program files or anything like that.

2) because recording is a demanding process where data is constantly being written, any other data seeking by your computer can cause glitches in recording. This is especially bad if you use your computer for anything other than a DAW. Windows is always doing 'things' and it is best that you record somewhere other than the drive that windows does these 'things' to/with.

3) an empty drive will right/read from the inside tracks of your hard disk platters first. think of a record. the needle travels much less distance on the inside groves to make a complete rotation. if your hard drive starts on these small inner 'groves' and works it's way out, it will locate/write data much more quickly to the inside tracks. therefore, an empty hard drive will perform in a superioir fassion for recording, again, reducing the chance for glitches in a track.

If your empty drive is fast (7200 rpm +), that will further enhance over the slower drives that machines often come with. If you didn't build your machine from the ground up, you should check the speed of each hard drive. other factors are your hard disk configuration and ide (or scsi) performance. this post comes from someone who's more a computer geek than a musician, so that may or may not have a bearing on the value of the information contained within.

anyway, to sum up my somewhat lengthy post, i would reccomend using that extra Hard drive to store your projects.

.scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top