as a dumb question.

The people at SF are really nice for answering these poorly worded
questions about painfully obvious features in Vegas.

I don't work for anybody here or own stock or whatever, but I do tech
support for a living and always get rubbed the wrong way by people
who "can't get the stupid thing to work" when they have clearly put
marginal effort at best into trying things themselves.

Well, it's obvious that you are an idiot. No matter how marginal you
think my efforts may have been I spent $450 on this software that
gets me a large number of "poorly worded questions" I'm thinking
(considering it can be answered at their convenience). The manual is
poorly put togetherj, and the software won't do basic functions like
gather active tracks or export without tying them to the busses
(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle). And by the way you
are the reason we hate "tech support". All apologies the Sonic
Foundry person who answered my question. It's a good think the people
who answer questions on this board don't work for SF.

F. Paul Lembo III wrote:
>>as a dumb question.
>>
>>The people at SF are really nice for answering these poorly worded
>>questions about painfully obvious features in Vegas.
>>
>>I don't work for anybody here or own stock or whatever, but I do
tech
>>support for a living and always get rubbed the wrong way by people
>>who "can't get the stupid thing to work" when they have clearly put
>>marginal effort at best into trying things themselves.
>>

Carl:

I guess I don't follow your problem.

>>and the software won't do basic functions like
>>gather active tracks or export without tying them to the busses
>>(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle).

Gather active tracks?
What does that mean and what does this gathering do?

We have to associate mixing to buses as busses also process the
signal. If we only processed tracks when rendering, the rendered file
would be different from what you hear when you play back in real time
through Vegas. If you are looking for a new feature that will
generate single wave files from tracks, this is a different
operation, but it would still not be what you are hearing as the
final bus mix stage and the possible inserts on the final out would
not be part of the rendered file.

We are always open to suggestions, but I don't see the benifit of
rendering each track to a seperate wave file. You can do it, but it
is not what Vegas is about. If your intent is to generate tracks that
you want to load into another application, well this is just not a
usage that Vegas was designed for. We believe that our mixing
features don't require this step, but we are biased I guess.

You call these basic functions. What other tool are you comparing
Vegas to? This may help to describe what it is you want.

If you want to specify what and how you want such a feature expose,
please let me know. I am an engineer on the Vegas team and will make
sure that the other team members hear your idea. (No joke.) I can't
say whether I will or the rest of the team will agree to it, but we
always will at least consider new ideas and approaches.


>>It's a good think the people
>>who answer questions on this board don't work for SF.
>>

Well I work for SF. Why would it be better that those that answer
questions don't work for SF?

Regardless, these forums are here to talk, praise, gripe, bitch,
complain, share, whatever. If somebody has a better way to do things,
by all means let the forum know. There are many SF developers that
lurk the forums. You will get heard, if not responded to all the time.

Peter

Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save as" menu that
says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard. That way
those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix well, or
those that have had their projects requests by other people
(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a folder to be
taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a great job
tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but I'm doing
basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a bigger studio.
I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all long
enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in a
folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do this. Where as
you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track ( that gives
me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active tracks"
thing. I do not write code but it seems that the " save as " thing
would be pretty easy, and the mix mono track not so bad. It sure
would make alot of peoples life easier. To further speak of this
think of the money one can spend on studio gear: monitors, cables,
rack effects, plug-ins, sound dampening, amps, mics, pres, the list
goes on. It's all i could do to buy the stuff I have what I'm asking
would just add some very useful options for us that want to make our
projects better and have chosen to at least start ( and, hopefully
finish with more gear and such in the future) our projects with your
software. Thanks Peter for letting me bend your ear :)

Peter Haller wrote:
>>Carl:
>>
>>I guess I don't follow your problem.
>>
>>>>and the software won't do basic functions like
>>>>gather active tracks or export without tying them to the busses
>>>>(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle).
>>
>>Gather active tracks?
>>What does that mean and what does this gathering do?
>>
>>We have to associate mixing to buses as busses also process the
>>signal. If we only processed tracks when rendering, the rendered
file
>>would be different from what you hear when you play back in real
time
>>through Vegas. If you are looking for a new feature that will
>>generate single wave files from tracks, this is a different
>>operation, but it would still not be what you are hearing as the
>>final bus mix stage and the possible inserts on the final out would
>>not be part of the rendered file.
>>
>>We are always open to suggestions, but I don't see the benifit of
>>rendering each track to a seperate wave file. You can do it, but it
>>is not what Vegas is about. If your intent is to generate tracks
that
>>you want to load into another application, well this is just not a
>>usage that Vegas was designed for. We believe that our mixing
>>features don't require this step, but we are biased I guess.
>>
>>You call these basic functions. What other tool are you comparing
>>Vegas to? This may help to describe what it is you want.
>>
>>If you want to specify what and how you want such a feature expose,
>>please let me know. I am an engineer on the Vegas team and will
make
>>sure that the other team members hear your idea. (No joke.) I can't
>>say whether I will or the rest of the team will agree to it, but we
>>always will at least consider new ideas and approaches.
>>
>>
>>>>It's a good think the people
>>>>who answer questions on this board don't work for SF.
>>>>
>>
>>Well I work for SF. Why would it be better that those that answer
>>questions don't work for SF?
>>
>>Regardless, these forums are here to talk, praise, gripe, bitch,
>>complain, share, whatever. If somebody has a better way to do
things,
>>by all means let the forum know. There are many SF developers that
>>lurk the forums. You will get heard, if not responded to all the
time.
>>
>>Peter
>>

I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear what you mean
by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are not muted?

All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the track is
muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no events, it
is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to the mix.

So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or post? - to
a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a track is made up
of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of other files,
or the same file repeated, and say the first event in that track
doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track and the total
length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single wave file
that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track processing - i.e.
insert fx, volume envelopes?

You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as this is a
bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan information on
mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since we always
mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to a single
channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)

My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the use that Vegas
was designed for. It would involve a different mixing paradigm than
we have in place.

I will have to run this one by the other developers to see what they
think.

Thanks
Peter


Carl Edwards wrote:
>>Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save as" menu
that
>>says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard. That way
>>those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix well, or
>>those that have had their projects requests by other people
>>(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a folder to
be
>>taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a great job
>>tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but I'm doing
>>basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a bigger
studio.
>>I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all long
>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in a
>>folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do this. Where
as
>>you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track ( that
gives
>>me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active tracks"
>>thing. I do not write code but it seems that the " save as " thing
>>would be pretty easy, and the mix mono track not so bad. It sure
>>would make alot of peoples life easier. To further speak of this
>>think of the money one can spend on studio gear: monitors, cables,
>>rack effects, plug-ins, sound dampening, amps, mics, pres, the list
>>goes on. It's all i could do to buy the stuff I have what I'm
asking
>>would just add some very useful options for us that want to make
our
>>projects better and have chosen to at least start ( and, hopefully
>>finish with more gear and such in the future) our projects with
your
>>software. Thanks Peter for letting me bend your ear :)
>>
>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>Carl:
>>>>
>>>>I guess I don't follow your problem.
>>>>
>>>>>>and the software won't do basic functions like
>>>>>>gather active tracks or export without tying them to the busses
>>>>>>(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle).
>>>>
>>>>Gather active tracks?
>>>>What does that mean and what does this gathering do?
>>>>
>>>>We have to associate mixing to buses as busses also process the
>>>>signal. If we only processed tracks when rendering, the rendered
>>file
>>>>would be different from what you hear when you play back in real
>>time
>>>>through Vegas. If you are looking for a new feature that will
>>>>generate single wave files from tracks, this is a different
>>>>operation, but it would still not be what you are hearing as the
>>>>final bus mix stage and the possible inserts on the final out
would
>>>>not be part of the rendered file.
>>>>
>>>>We are always open to suggestions, but I don't see the benifit of
>>>>rendering each track to a seperate wave file. You can do it, but
it
>>>>is not what Vegas is about. If your intent is to generate tracks
>>that
>>>>you want to load into another application, well this is just not
a
>>>>usage that Vegas was designed for. We believe that our mixing
>>>>features don't require this step, but we are biased I guess.
>>>>
>>>>You call these basic functions. What other tool are you comparing
>>>>Vegas to? This may help to describe what it is you want.
>>>>
>>>>If you want to specify what and how you want such a feature
expose,
>>>>please let me know. I am an engineer on the Vegas team and will
>>make
>>>>sure that the other team members hear your idea. (No joke.) I
can't
>>>>say whether I will or the rest of the team will agree to it, but
we
>>>>always will at least consider new ideas and approaches.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>It's a good think the people
>>>>>>who answer questions on this board don't work for SF.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well I work for SF. Why would it be better that those that answer
>>>>questions don't work for SF?
>>>>
>>>>Regardless, these forums are here to talk, praise, gripe, bitch,
>>>>complain, share, whatever. If somebody has a better way to do
>>things,
>>>>by all means let the forum know. There are many SF developers
that
>>>>lurk the forums. You will get heard, if not responded to all the
>>time.
>>>>
>>>>Peter
>>>>

"When you do a Save As or a Mix to New, Vegas will pay attention to
all mutes and solos, whether on a track or a main bus. If you want to
export one file for each track, you will have to do a Save As for
each track, soloing the track you want to export. If you use the
main busses as sub mixes, you can generate a file per bus by soloing
each of the buses in turn and doing a Save As."

I might not be following, but does the above entry from Peter explain
what Carl wants to do? For instance, I transported my files from
Cubase by "connecting" takes on the same track by setting my cue
points at the beginning and end of the song and it allowed me to set
all my tracks at one length through the export feature. I had to mute
the track that I wanted to export and also route it through the main
buss. Is that the same thing, Peter?

"I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all long
enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in a
folder."

Carl, this statement alone tells me that you have been recording long
enough to understand that some would certainly be offended by your
opening remarks instead of just getting to the question you wanted
answered. Try getting a dialog that has been as supportive as Peter
has been from other companies. It almost doesn't exist. It doesn't do
any good to kiss their asses or beat them up. You purchased the
program with which you had the ability to download in full before
buying. So if it doesn't live up, it's your fault. I, like you, have
a wish list for SF that I hope they pursue.

Hey, you're free to say and act like you want. I'm not telling you
how to live. But act like a nervous aggressive and you'll be treated
as such. By the way, if you can channel this aggressiveness into
songs that are worth listening to, post your link to an MP3 and I'll
give it a listen. Peace.





Peter Haller wrote:
>>I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear what you mean
>>by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are not
muted?
>>
>>All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the track is
>>muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no events, it
>>is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to the mix.
>>
>>So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or post? -
to
>>a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a track is made
up
>>of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of other
files,
>>or the same file repeated, and say the first event in that track
>>doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track and the
total
>>length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single wave file
>>that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track processing -
i.e.
>>insert fx, volume envelopes?
>>
>>You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as this is a
>>bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan information on
>>mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since we always
>>mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to a single
>>channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)
>>
>>My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the use that
Vegas
>>was designed for. It would involve a different mixing paradigm than
>>we have in place.
>>
>>I will have to run this one by the other developers to see what
they
>>think.
>>
>>Thanks
>>Peter
>>
>>
>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save as" menu
>>that
>>>>says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard. That
way
>>>>those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix well, or
>>>>those that have had their projects requests by other people
>>>>(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a folder to
>>be
>>>>taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a great job
>>>>tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but I'm doing
>>>>basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a bigger
>>studio.
>>>>I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all
long
>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in a
>>>>folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do this.
Where
>>as
>>>>you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track ( that
>>gives
>>>>me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active tracks"
>>>>thing. I do not write code but it seems that the " save as "
thing
>>>>would be pretty easy, and the mix mono track not so bad. It sure
>>>>would make alot of peoples life easier. To further speak of this
>>>>think of the money one can spend on studio gear: monitors,
cables,
>>>>rack effects, plug-ins, sound dampening, amps, mics, pres, the
list
>>>>goes on. It's all i could do to buy the stuff I have what I'm
>>asking
>>>>would just add some very useful options for us that want to make
>>our
>>>>projects better and have chosen to at least start ( and,
hopefully
>>>>finish with more gear and such in the future) our projects with
>>your
>>>>software. Thanks Peter for letting me bend your ear :)
>>>>
>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>Carl:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I guess I don't follow your problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and the software won't do basic functions like
>>>>>>>>gather active tracks or export without tying them to the
busses
>>>>>>>>(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gather active tracks?
>>>>>>What does that mean and what does this gathering do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>We have to associate mixing to buses as busses also process the
>>>>>>signal. If we only processed tracks when rendering, the
rendered
>>>>file
>>>>>>would be different from what you hear when you play back in
real
>>>>time
>>>>>>through Vegas. If you are looking for a new feature that will
>>>>>>generate single wave files from tracks, this is a different
>>>>>>operation, but it would still not be what you are hearing as
the
>>>>>>final bus mix stage and the possible inserts on the final out
>>would
>>>>>>not be part of the rendered file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>We are always open to suggestions, but I don't see the benifit
of
>>>>>>rendering each track to a seperate wave file. You can do it,
but
>>it
>>>>>>is not what Vegas is about. If your intent is to generate
tracks
>>>>that
>>>>>>you want to load into another application, well this is just
not
>>a
>>>>>>usage that Vegas was designed for. We believe that our mixing
>>>>>>features don't require this step, but we are biased I guess.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You call these basic functions. What other tool are you
comparing
>>>>>>Vegas to? This may help to describe what it is you want.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you want to specify what and how you want such a feature
>>expose,
>>>>>>please let me know. I am an engineer on the Vegas team and will
>>>>make
>>>>>>sure that the other team members hear your idea. (No joke.) I
>>can't
>>>>>>say whether I will or the rest of the team will agree to it,
but
>>we
>>>>>>always will at least consider new ideas and approaches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It's a good think the people
>>>>>>>>who answer questions on this board don't work for SF.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well I work for SF. Why would it be better that those that
answer
>>>>>>questions don't work for SF?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regardless, these forums are here to talk, praise, gripe,
bitch,
>>>>>>complain, share, whatever. If somebody has a better way to do
>>>>things,
>>>>>>by all means let the forum know. There are many SF developers
>>that
>>>>>>lurk the forums. You will get heard, if not responded to all
the
>>>>time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>

Ok. Let's try again. What i mean by active is all tracks (or the
waves files that make them) that i am using for my project. In the
process of recording I have collected a large number of extra takes
and files such as solos that wanted to compare or comp together in a
folder. At mixing time (no matter where I want to do it) I would like
to be able to save only the waves or tracks that i want to keep. At
this point I have to go into explorer and find the tracks, but why do
that if I can move the wave files I am using (and only those files)
into another folder using a "save as/ active tracks/ as they sit
(regardless of their being mono or stereo, raw waves) function"
This would make transporting, storage, and disc cleanup a ton easier.
As of this thread a "save as" gives me only a mix and "all media"
funtion. I dont need "all media" because I can do that in explorer by
moving the entire file or copying it. The "save as/ active tracks or
waves in use" check box would only give me the files that I needed.
This would give me a folder that would contain only the files I am
using for my project and i could then store them or just clean up the
extra wave files without fear of burning something that I need.

Thomas Kay wrote:
>>"When you do a Save As or a Mix to New, Vegas will pay attention to
>>all mutes and solos, whether on a track or a main bus. If you want
to
>>export one file for each track, you will have to do a Save As for
>>each track, soloing the track you want to export. If you use the
>>main busses as sub mixes, you can generate a file per bus by
soloing
>>each of the buses in turn and doing a Save As."
>>
>>I might not be following, but does the above entry from Peter
explain
>>what Carl wants to do? For instance, I transported my files from
>>Cubase by "connecting" takes on the same track by setting my cue
>>points at the beginning and end of the song and it allowed me to
set
>>all my tracks at one length through the export feature. I had to
mute
>>the track that I wanted to export and also route it through the
main
>>buss. Is that the same thing, Peter?
>>
>>"I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all
long
>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in a
>>folder."
>>
>>Carl, this statement alone tells me that you have been recording
long
>>enough to understand that some would certainly be offended by your
>>opening remarks instead of just getting to the question you wanted
>>answered. Try getting a dialog that has been as supportive as Peter
>>has been from other companies. It almost doesn't exist. It doesn't
do
>>any good to kiss their asses or beat them up. You purchased the
>>program with which you had the ability to download in full before
>>buying. So if it doesn't live up, it's your fault. I, like you,
have
>>a wish list for SF that I hope they pursue.
>>
>>Hey, you're free to say and act like you want. I'm not telling you
>>how to live. But act like a nervous aggressive and you'll be
treated
>>as such. By the way, if you can channel this aggressiveness into
>>songs that are worth listening to, post your link to an MP3 and
I'll
>>give it a listen. Peace.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear what you
mean
>>>>by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are not
>>muted?
>>>>
>>>>All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the track is
>>>>muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no events,
it
>>>>is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to the mix.
>>>>
>>>>So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or post? -
>>to
>>>>a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a track is
made
>>up
>>>>of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of other
>>files,
>>>>or the same file repeated, and say the first event in that track
>>>>doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track and the
>>total
>>>>length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single wave
file
>>>>that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track processing -
>>i.e.
>>>>insert fx, volume envelopes?
>>>>
>>>>You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as this is
a
>>>>bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan information
on
>>>>mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since we
always
>>>>mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to a single
>>>>channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)
>>>>
>>>>My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the use that
>>Vegas
>>>>was designed for. It would involve a different mixing paradigm
than
>>>>we have in place.
>>>>
>>>>I will have to run this one by the other developers to see what
>>they
>>>>think.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save as"
menu
>>>>that
>>>>>>says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard. That
>>way
>>>>>>those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix well,
or
>>>>>>those that have had their projects requests by other people
>>>>>>(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a folder
to
>>>>be
>>>>>>taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a great
job
>>>>>>tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but I'm
doing
>>>>>>basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a bigger
>>>>studio.
>>>>>>I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all
>>long
>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in
a
>>>>>>folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do this.
>>Where
>>>>as
>>>>>>you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track ( that
>>>>gives
>>>>>>me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active
tracks"
>>>>>>thing. I do not write code but it seems that the " save as "
>>thing
>>>>>>would be pretty easy, and the mix mono track not so bad. It
sure
>>>>>>would make alot of peoples life easier. To further speak of
this
>>>>>>think of the money one can spend on studio gear: monitors,
>>cables,
>>>>>>rack effects, plug-ins, sound dampening, amps, mics, pres, the
>>list
>>>>>>goes on. It's all i could do to buy the stuff I have what I'm
>>>>asking
>>>>>>would just add some very useful options for us that want to
make
>>>>our
>>>>>>projects better and have chosen to at least start ( and,
>>hopefully
>>>>>>finish with more gear and such in the future) our projects with
>>>>your
>>>>>>software. Thanks Peter for letting me bend your ear :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>Carl:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I guess I don't follow your problem.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>and the software won't do basic functions like
>>>>>>>>>>gather active tracks or export without tying them to the
>>busses
>>>>>>>>>>(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Gather active tracks?
>>>>>>>>What does that mean and what does this gathering do?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>We have to associate mixing to buses as busses also process
the
>>>>>>>>signal. If we only processed tracks when rendering, the
>>rendered
>>>>>>file
>>>>>>>>would be different from what you hear when you play back in
>>real
>>>>>>time
>>>>>>>>through Vegas. If you are looking for a new feature that will
>>>>>>>>generate single wave files from tracks, this is a different
>>>>>>>>operation, but it would still not be what you are hearing as
>>the
>>>>>>>>final bus mix stage and the possible inserts on the final out
>>>>would
>>>>>>>>not be part of the rendered file.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>We are always open to suggestions, but I don't see the
benifit
>>of
>>>>>>>>rendering each track to a seperate wave file

My email is acting a little crazy try phlatulus@aol.com.

Carl Edwards wrote:
>>Ok. Let's try again. What i mean by active is all tracks (or the
>>waves files that make them) that i am using for my project. In the
>>process of recording I have collected a large number of extra takes
>>and files such as solos that wanted to compare or comp together in
a
>>folder. At mixing time (no matter where I want to do it) I would
like
>>to be able to save only the waves or tracks that i want to keep. At
>>this point I have to go into explorer and find the tracks, but why
do
>>that if I can move the wave files I am using (and only those files)
>>into another folder using a "save as/ active tracks/ as they sit
>>(regardless of their being mono or stereo, raw waves) function"
>>This would make transporting, storage, and disc cleanup a ton
easier.
>>As of this thread a "save as" gives me only a mix and "all media"
>>funtion. I dont need "all media" because I can do that in explorer
by
>>moving the entire file or copying it. The "save as/ active tracks
or
>>waves in use" check box would only give me the files that I needed.
>>This would give me a folder that would contain only the files I am
>>using for my project and i could then store them or just clean up
the
>>extra wave files without fear of burning something that I need.
>>
>>Thomas Kay wrote:
>>>>"When you do a Save As or a Mix to New, Vegas will pay attention
to
>>>>all mutes and solos, whether on a track or a main bus. If you
want
>>to
>>>>export one file for each track, you will have to do a Save As for
>>>>each track, soloing the track you want to export. If you use the
>>>>main busses as sub mixes, you can generate a file per bus by
>>soloing
>>>>each of the buses in turn and doing a Save As."
>>>>
>>>>I might not be following, but does the above entry from Peter
>>explain
>>>>what Carl wants to do? For instance, I transported my files from
>>>>Cubase by "connecting" takes on the same track by setting my cue
>>>>points at the beginning and end of the song and it allowed me to
>>set
>>>>all my tracks at one length through the export feature. I had to
>>mute
>>>>the track that I wanted to export and also route it through the
>>main
>>>>buss. Is that the same thing, Peter?
>>>>
>>>>"I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all
>>long
>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in a
>>>>folder."
>>>>
>>>>Carl, this statement alone tells me that you have been recording
>>long
>>>>enough to understand that some would certainly be offended by
your
>>>>opening remarks instead of just getting to the question you
wanted
>>>>answered. Try getting a dialog that has been as supportive as
Peter
>>>>has been from other companies. It almost doesn't exist. It
doesn't
>>do
>>>>any good to kiss their asses or beat them up. You purchased the
>>>>program with which you had the ability to download in full before
>>>>buying. So if it doesn't live up, it's your fault. I, like you,
>>have
>>>>a wish list for SF that I hope they pursue.
>>>>
>>>>Hey, you're free to say and act like you want. I'm not telling
you
>>>>how to live. But act like a nervous aggressive and you'll be
>>treated
>>>>as such. By the way, if you can channel this aggressiveness into
>>>>songs that are worth listening to, post your link to an MP3 and
>>I'll
>>>>give it a listen. Peace.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear what you
>>mean
>>>>>>by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are not
>>>>muted?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the track is
>>>>>>muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no
events,
>>it
>>>>>>is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to the
mix.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or
post? -
>>>>to
>>>>>>a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a track is
>>made
>>>>up
>>>>>>of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of other
>>>>files,
>>>>>>or the same file repeated, and say the first event in that
track
>>>>>>doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track and the
>>>>total
>>>>>>length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single wave
>>file
>>>>>>that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track processing -

>>>>i.e.
>>>>>>insert fx, volume envelopes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as this
is
>>a
>>>>>>bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan information
>>on
>>>>>>mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since we
>>always
>>>>>>mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to a
single
>>>>>>channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the use that
>>>>Vegas
>>>>>>was designed for. It would involve a different mixing paradigm
>>than
>>>>>>we have in place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I will have to run this one by the other developers to see what
>>>>they
>>>>>>think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>>>Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save as"
>>menu
>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard.
That
>>>>way
>>>>>>>>those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix well,
>>or
>>>>>>>>those that have had their projects requests by other people
>>>>>>>>(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a
folder
>>to
>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a great
>>job
>>>>>>>>tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but I'm
>>doing
>>>>>>>>basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a bigger
>>>>>>studio.
>>>>>>>>I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them
all
>>>>long
>>>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones
in
>>a
>>>>>>>>folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do this.
>>>>Where
>>>>>>as
>>>>>>>>you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track (
that
>>>>>>gives
>>>>>>>>me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active
>>tracks"
>>>>>>>>thing. I do not write code but it seems that the " save as "
>>>>thing
>>>>>>>>would be pretty easy, and the mix mono track not so bad. It
>>sure
>>>>>>>>would make alot of peoples life easier. To further speak of
>>this
>>>>>>>>think of the money one can spend on studio gear: monitors,
>>>>cables,
>>>>>>>>rack effects, plug-ins, sound dampening, amps, mics, pres,
the
>>>>list
>>>>>>>>goes on. It's all i could do to buy the stuff I have what I'm
>>>>>>asking
>>>>>>>>would just add some very useful options for us that want to
>>make
>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>projects better and have chosen to at least start ( and,
>>>>hopefully
>>>>>>>>finish with more gear and such in the future) our projects
with
>>>>>>your
>>>>>>>>software. Thanks Peter for letting me bend your ear :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>Carl:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I guess I don't follow your problem.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>and the software won't do basic functions like
>>>>>>>>>>>>gather active tracks or export without tying them to the
>>>>busses
>>>>>>>>>>>>(making taking to get mixing a serious hassle).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Gather active tracks?
>>>>>>>>>>What does that mean and what does this gathering do?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>We have to associate mixing to buses as busses also process
>>the
>>>>>>>>>>signal. If we only processed tracks when rendering, the
>>>>rendered
>>>>>>>>file
>>>>>>>>>>would be different from what you hear when you play back in

After your 4th email I understood what you are talking about...

The checkbox "copy with all media" combined with the "save as"
command copies all media that is used in the project and only the
used media (!) to a specific folder. Is that what you want? I read it
in the manual...

Axel

Carl Edwards wrote:
>>My email is acting a little crazy try phlatulus@aol.com.
>>
>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>Ok. Let's try again. What i mean by active is all tracks (or the
>>>>waves files that make them) that i am using for my project. In
the
>>>>process of recording I have collected a large number of extra
takes
>>>>and files such as solos that wanted to compare or comp together
in
>>a
>>>>folder. At mixing time (no matter where I want to do it) I would
>>like
>>>>to be able to save only the waves or tracks that i want to keep.
At
>>>>this point I have to go into explorer and find the tracks, but
why
>>do
>>>>that if I can move the wave files I am using (and only those
files)
>>>>into another folder using a "save as/ active tracks/ as they sit
>>>>(regardless of their being mono or stereo, raw waves) function"
>>>>This would make transporting, storage, and disc cleanup a ton
>>easier.
>>>>As of this thread a "save as" gives me only a mix and "all media"
>>>>funtion. I dont need "all media" because I can do that in
explorer
>>by
>>>>moving the entire file or copying it. The "save as/ active tracks
>>or
>>>>waves in use" check box would only give me the files that I
needed.
>>>>This would give me a folder that would contain only the files I
am
>>>>using for my project and i could then store them or just clean up
>>the
>>>>extra wave files without fear of burning something that I need.
>>>>
>>>>Thomas Kay wrote:
>>>>>>"When you do a Save As or a Mix to New, Vegas will pay
attention
>>to
>>>>>>all mutes and solos, whether on a track or a main bus. If you
>>want
>>>>to
>>>>>>export one file for each track, you will have to do a Save As
for
>>>>>>each track, soloing the track you want to export. If you use
the
>>>>>>main busses as sub mixes, you can generate a file per bus by
>>>>soloing
>>>>>>each of the buses in turn and doing a Save As."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I might not be following, but does the above entry from Peter
>>>>explain
>>>>>>what Carl wants to do? For instance, I transported my files
from
>>>>>>Cubase by "connecting" takes on the same track by setting my
cue
>>>>>>points at the beginning and end of the song and it allowed me
to
>>>>set
>>>>>>all my tracks at one length through the export feature. I had
to
>>>>mute
>>>>>>the track that I wanted to export and also route it through the
>>>>main
>>>>>>buss. Is that the same thing, Peter?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them all
>>>>long
>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones in
a
>>>>>>folder."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Carl, this statement alone tells me that you have been
recording
>>>>long
>>>>>>enough to understand that some would certainly be offended by
>>your
>>>>>>opening remarks instead of just getting to the question you
>>wanted
>>>>>>answered. Try getting a dialog that has been as supportive as
>>Peter
>>>>>>has been from other companies. It almost doesn't exist. It
>>doesn't
>>>>do
>>>>>>any good to kiss their asses or beat them up. You purchased the
>>>>>>program with which you had the ability to download in full
before
>>>>>>buying. So if it doesn't live up, it's your fault. I, like you,
>>>>have
>>>>>>a wish list for SF that I hope they pursue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hey, you're free to say and act like you want. I'm not telling
>>you
>>>>>>how to live. But act like a nervous aggressive and you'll be
>>>>treated
>>>>>>as such. By the way, if you can channel this aggressiveness
into
>>>>>>songs that are worth listening to, post your link to an MP3 and
>>>>I'll
>>>>>>give it a listen. Peace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear what
you
>>>>mean
>>>>>>>>by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are not
>>>>>>muted?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the track
is
>>>>>>>>muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no
>>events,
>>>>it
>>>>>>>>is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to the
>>mix.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or
>>post? -
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a track is
>>>>made
>>>>>>up
>>>>>>>>of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of
other
>>>>>>files,
>>>>>>>>or the same file repeated, and say the first event in that
>>track
>>>>>>>>doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track and
the
>>>>>>total
>>>>>>>>length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single wave
>>>>file
>>>>>>>>that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track
processing -
>>
>>>>>>i.e.
>>>>>>>>insert fx, volume envelopes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as this
>>is
>>>>a
>>>>>>>>bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan
information
>>>>on
>>>>>>>>mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since we
>>>>always
>>>>>>>>mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to a
>>single
>>>>>>>>channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the use
that
>>>>>>Vegas
>>>>>>>>was designed for. It would involve a different mixing
paradigm
>>>>than
>>>>>>>>we have in place.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I will have to run this one by the other developers to see
what
>>>>>>they
>>>>>>>>think.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save as"
>>>>menu
>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard.
>>That
>>>>>>way
>>>>>>>>>>those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix
well,
>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>those that have had their projects requests by other people
>>>>>>>>>>(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a
>>folder
>>>>to
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>>>taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a
great
>>>>job
>>>>>>>>>>tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but I'm
>>>>doing
>>>>>>>>>>basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a
bigger
>>>>>>>>studio.
>>>>>>>>>>I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them
>>all
>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones
>>in
>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do
this.
>>>>>>Where
>>>>>>>>as
>>>>>>>>>>you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track (
>>that
>>>>>>>>gives
>>>>>>>>>>me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active
>>>>tracks"
>>>>>>>>>>thing. I do not write code but it seems that the " save
as "
>>>>>>thing
>>>>>>>>>>would be pretty easy, and the mix mono track not so bad. It
>>>>sure
>>>>>>>>>>would make alot of peoples life easier. To further speak of
>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>think of the money one can spend on studio gear: monitors,
>>>>>>cables,
>>>>>>>>>>rack effects, plug-ins, sound dampening, amps, mics, pres,
>>the
>>>>>>list
>>>>>>>>>>goes on. It's all i could do to buy the stuff I have what
I'm
>>>>>>>>asking
>>>>>>>>>>would just add some very useful options for us that want to
>>>>make
>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>>projects better and have chosen to at least start ( and,
>>>>>>hopefully
>>>>>>>>>>finish with more gear and such in the future) our projects
>>w

That's actually not true... It copies all media referenced in the
project - not just the portions visible or edited. It's not a way to
save space - like compacting in Pro Tools. It is a nice way to get
everything in one place, though...

Axel Gutzler wrote:
>>After your 4th email I understood what you are talking about...
>>
>>The checkbox "copy with all media" combined with the "save as"
>>command copies all media that is used in the project and only the
>>used media (!) to a specific folder. Is that what you want? I read
it
>>in the manual...
>>
>>Axel
>>
>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>My email is acting a little crazy try phlatulus@aol.com.
>>>>
>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>Ok. Let's try again. What i mean by active is all tracks (or
the
>>>>>>waves files that make them) that i am using for my project. In
>>the
>>>>>>process of recording I have collected a large number of extra
>>takes
>>>>>>and files such as solos that wanted to compare or comp together
>>in
>>>>a
>>>>>>folder. At mixing time (no matter where I want to do it) I
would
>>>>like
>>>>>>to be able to save only the waves or tracks that i want to
keep.
>>At
>>>>>>this point I have to go into explorer and find the tracks, but
>>why
>>>>do
>>>>>>that if I can move the wave files I am using (and only those
>>files)
>>>>>>into another folder using a "save as/ active tracks/ as they sit
>>>>>>(regardless of their being mono or stereo, raw waves) function"
>>>>>>This would make transporting, storage, and disc cleanup a ton
>>>>easier.
>>>>>>As of this thread a "save as" gives me only a mix and "all
media"
>>>>>>funtion. I dont need "all media" because I can do that in
>>explorer
>>>>by
>>>>>>moving the entire file or copying it. The "save as/ active
tracks
>>>>or
>>>>>>waves in use" check box would only give me the files that I
>>needed.
>>>>>>This would give me a folder that would contain only the files I
>>am
>>>>>>using for my project and i could then store them or just clean
up
>>>>the
>>>>>>extra wave files without fear of burning something that I need.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thomas Kay wrote:
>>>>>>>>"When you do a Save As or a Mix to New, Vegas will pay
>>attention
>>>>to
>>>>>>>>all mutes and solos, whether on a track or a main bus. If you
>>>>want
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>export one file for each track, you will have to do a Save As
>>for
>>>>>>>>each track, soloing the track you want to export. If you use
>>the
>>>>>>>>main busses as sub mixes, you can generate a file per bus by
>>>>>>soloing
>>>>>>>>each of the buses in turn and doing a Save As."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I might not be following, but does the above entry from Peter
>>>>>>explain
>>>>>>>>what Carl wants to do? For instance, I transported my files
>>from
>>>>>>>>Cubase by "connecting" takes on the same track by setting my
>>cue
>>>>>>>>points at the beginning and end of the song and it allowed me
>>to
>>>>>>set
>>>>>>>>all my tracks at one length through the export feature. I had
>>to
>>>>>>mute
>>>>>>>>the track that I wanted to export and also route it through
the
>>>>>>main
>>>>>>>>buss. Is that the same thing, Peter?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them
all
>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones
in
>>a
>>>>>>>>folder."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Carl, this statement alone tells me that you have been
>>recording
>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>>enough to understand that some would certainly be offended by
>>>>your
>>>>>>>>opening remarks instead of just getting to the question you
>>>>wanted
>>>>>>>>answered. Try getting a dialog that has been as supportive as
>>>>Peter
>>>>>>>>has been from other companies. It almost doesn't exist. It
>>>>doesn't
>>>>>>do
>>>>>>>>any good to kiss their asses or beat them up. You purchased
the
>>>>>>>>program with which you had the ability to download in full
>>before
>>>>>>>>buying. So if it doesn't live up, it's your fault. I, like
you,
>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>a wish list for SF that I hope they pursue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hey, you're free to say and act like you want. I'm not
telling
>>>>you
>>>>>>>>how to live. But act like a nervous aggressive and you'll be
>>>>>>treated
>>>>>>>>as such. By the way, if you can channel this aggressiveness
>>into
>>>>>>>>songs that are worth listening to, post your link to an MP3
and
>>>>>>I'll
>>>>>>>>give it a listen. Peace.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear what
>>you
>>>>>>mean
>>>>>>>>>>by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are
not
>>>>>>>>muted?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the
track
>>is
>>>>>>>>>>muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no
>>>>events,
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to
the
>>>>mix.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or
>>>>post? -
>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a track
is
>>>>>>made
>>>>>>>>up
>>>>>>>>>>of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of
>>other
>>>>>>>>files,
>>>>>>>>>>or the same file repeated, and say the first event in that
>>>>track
>>>>>>>>>>doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track and
>>the
>>>>>>>>total
>>>>>>>>>>length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single
wave
>>>>>>file
>>>>>>>>>>that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track
>>processing -
>>>>
>>>>>>>>i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>insert fx, volume envelopes?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as
this
>>>>is
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan
>>information
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>>>>mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since
we
>>>>>>always
>>>>>>>>>>mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to a
>>>>single
>>>>>>>>>>channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the use
>>that
>>>>>>>>Vegas
>>>>>>>>>>was designed for. It would involve a different mixing
>>paradigm
>>>>>>than
>>>>>>>>>>we have in place.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I will have to run this one by the other developers to see
>>what
>>>>>>>>they
>>>>>>>>>>think.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>Basically, what i would like is a checkbox in the "save
as"
>>>>>>menu
>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>says "save active tracks only". That shouldnt be so hard.
>>>>That
>>>>>>>>way
>>>>>>>>>>>>those of us that can track reasonably and maybe not mix
>>well,
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>>those that have had their projects requests by other
people
>>>>>>>>>>>>(producers, labels, etc) to collect the wave files in a
>>>>folder
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>>>>>taken somewhere else to be worked on. Yes, Vegas does a
>>great
>>>>>>job
>>>>>>>>>>>>tracking ( and btw since you explained it, mixing), but
I'm
>>>>>>doing
>>>>>>>>>>>>basic tracks at home and plan on doing other work in a
>>bigger
>>>>>>>>>>studio.
>>>>>>>>>>>>I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make
them
>>>>all
>>>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active
ones
>>>>in
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>>>folder. The way it is now it'll take a long time to do
>>this.
>>>>>>>>Where
>>>>>>>>>>as
>>>>>>>>>>>>you could let me mix any mono track to a new mono track (
>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>gives
>>>>>>>>>>>>me joining and length actually) and the "save as""active
>>>>>>tracks"
>>>>>>>>>>>>thing. I

Although this thread is already way too long, I'd like to point out
that the "copy with all media" in fact is a feature to get rid off
unneeded takes. Of course you cannot compact the edited material in
order to save space. Each wav-file will have it's original length,
not matter how short the clip is you use out of it. But: from the 41
guitar solos you recorded, there's only 1 you want to keep. Here you
can use "copy with all media". Only the files used in the arrange
window of your project will be copied along with the project file
itself to a folder of your choice.
Didn't Carl ask for something like that?

=> "In the process of recording I have collected a large number of
extra takes and files such as solos that wanted to compare or comp
together in folder. At mixing time (no matter where I want to do it)
I would
like to be able to save only the waves or tracks that i want to
keep."
Cheers,

Axel



Charles de Montebello wrote:
>>
>>That's actually not true... It copies all media referenced in the
>>project - not just the portions visible or edited. It's not a way
to
>>save space - like compacting in Pro Tools. It is a nice way to get
>>everything in one place, though...
>>
>>Axel Gutzler wrote:
>>>>After your 4th email I understood what you are talking about...
>>>>
>>>>The checkbox "copy with all media" combined with the "save as"
>>>>command copies all media that is used in the project and only the
>>>>used media (!) to a specific folder. Is that what you want? I
read
>>it
>>>>in the manual...
>>>>
>>>>Axel
>>>>
>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>My email is acting a little crazy try phlatulus@aol.com.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Carl Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>>>Ok. Let's try again. What i mean by active is all tracks (or
>>the
>>>>>>>>waves files that make them) that i am using for my project.
In
>>>>the
>>>>>>>>process of recording I have collected a large number of extra
>>>>takes
>>>>>>>>and files such as solos that wanted to compare or comp
together
>>>>in
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>folder. At mixing time (no matter where I want to do it) I
>>would
>>>>>>like
>>>>>>>>to be able to save only the waves or tracks that i want to
>>keep.
>>>>At
>>>>>>>>this point I have to go into explorer and find the tracks,
but
>>>>why
>>>>>>do
>>>>>>>>that if I can move the wave files I am using (and only those
>>>>files)
>>>>>>>>into another folder using a "save as/ active tracks/ as they
sit
>>>>>>>>(regardless of their being mono or stereo, raw waves)
function"
>>>>>>>>This would make transporting, storage, and disc cleanup a ton
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>>>>As of this thread a "save as" gives me only a mix and "all
>>media"
>>>>>>>>funtion. I dont need "all media" because I can do that in
>>>>explorer
>>>>>>by
>>>>>>>>moving the entire file or copying it. The "save as/ active
>>tracks
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>waves in use" check box would only give me the files that I
>>>>needed.
>>>>>>>>This would give me a folder that would contain only the files
I
>>>>am
>>>>>>>>using for my project and i could then store them or just
clean
>>up
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>extra wave files without fear of burning something that I
need.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thomas Kay wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>"When you do a Save As or a Mix to New, Vegas will pay
>>>>attention
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>all mutes and solos, whether on a track or a main bus. If
you
>>>>>>want
>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>export one file for each track, you will have to do a Save
As
>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>each track, soloing the track you want to export. If you
use
>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>main busses as sub mixes, you can generate a file per bus
by
>>>>>>>>soloing
>>>>>>>>>>each of the buses in turn and doing a Save As."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I might not be following, but does the above entry from
Peter
>>>>>>>>explain
>>>>>>>>>>what Carl wants to do? For instance, I transported my files
>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>Cubase by "connecting" takes on the same track by setting
my
>>>>cue
>>>>>>>>>>points at the beginning and end of the song and it allowed
me
>>>>to
>>>>>>>>set
>>>>>>>>>>all my tracks at one length through the export feature. I
had
>>>>to
>>>>>>>>mute
>>>>>>>>>>the track that I wanted to export and also route it through
>>the
>>>>>>>>main
>>>>>>>>>>buss. Is that the same thing, Peter?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"I need to be able to join wave files in a track, make them
>>all
>>>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>>>>enough to start at the begining and put all the active ones
>>in
>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>folder."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Carl, this statement alone tells me that you have been
>>>>recording
>>>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>>>>enough to understand that some would certainly be offended
by
>>>>>>your
>>>>>>>>>>opening remarks instead of just getting to the question you
>>>>>>wanted
>>>>>>>>>>answered. Try getting a dialog that has been as supportive
as
>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>>>>>has been from other companies. It almost doesn't exist. It
>>>>>>doesn't
>>>>>>>>do
>>>>>>>>>>any good to kiss their asses or beat them up. You purchased
>>the
>>>>>>>>>>program with which you had the ability to download in full
>>>>before
>>>>>>>>>>buying. So if it doesn't live up, it's your fault. I, like
>>you,
>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>a wish list for SF that I hope they pursue.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Hey, you're free to say and act like you want. I'm not
>>telling
>>>>>>you
>>>>>>>>>>how to live. But act like a nervous aggressive and you'll
be
>>>>>>>>treated
>>>>>>>>>>as such. By the way, if you can channel this aggressiveness
>>>>into
>>>>>>>>>>songs that are worth listening to, post your link to an MP3
>>and
>>>>>>>>I'll
>>>>>>>>>>give it a listen. Peace.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Peter Haller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>I guess I follow what you want, though I am not clear
what
>>>>you
>>>>>>>>mean
>>>>>>>>>>>>by active tracks. By being active to mean tracks that are
>>not
>>>>>>>>>>muted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>All tracks in Vegas are always part of the mix. If the
>>track
>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>>>>muted, it is just mixing silence. Even if a track has no
>>>>>>events,
>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>is part of the mix, it just doesn't contibute anything to
>>the
>>>>>>mix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>So a simple way to rendering each track - pre main bus or
>>>>>>post? -
>>>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>a sepeate wave file is what you want. This way if a
track
>>is
>>>>>>>>made
>>>>>>>>>>up
>>>>>>>>>>>>of multiple events, each from a different files,parts of
>>>>other
>>>>>>>>>>files,
>>>>>>>>>>>>or the same file repeated, and say the first event in
that
>>>>>>track
>>>>>>>>>>>>doesn't actually start until 25 seconds into the track
and
>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>total
>>>>>>>>>>>>length of the track is 4 minutes, you would get a single
>>wave
>>>>>>>>file
>>>>>>>>>>>>that is 4 minutes in length. With or with out track
>>>>processing -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>>>insert fx, volume envelopes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>You would loose any assignable fx you may have routed as
>>this
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>>>bus mixing aspect of Vegas. You would loose any pan
>>>>information
>>>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>>>>>>mono tracks, as this is done prior to the bus level since
>>we
>>>>>>>>always
>>>>>>>>>>>>mix to stereo buses. (There is no way to rout a track to
a
>>>>>>single
>>>>>>>>>>>>channel of a bus other than hard panning left or right.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>My intial reaction is that this is an exception to the
use
>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>Vegas
>>>>>>>>>>>>was designed for. It would involve a different mixing
>>>>paradigm
>>>>>>>>than
>>>>>>>>>>>>we have in place.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I will have to run this o