26 Feb
2011
26 Feb
'11
4:52 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 12:39:04PM -0500, Paul Davis
wrote:
i'm confused about who the customer is. the older way of thinking
about the overall workflow is an attribute of the engineer/editor, not
the singer.
if the engineer/editor is the customer, i'd tell them to use another
program right now because ardour doesn't support their workflow. i try
not to spend much time convincing people to work in a different way
than they are used to, it seems pretty pointless to me since i don't
really believe that one way is superior to the others (though some are
definitely more connected to ideas rooted in some kind physical
operation like tape splicing).
hint: there's no reason to replace the section from [2:03 to 2:27]
with another take at all.
the position that i take with N-point editing is
not that there is
some other way to do "the following". There isn't. its that the way of
approaching the task that leads to needing to do "the following" is
rooted in an older way of thinking about the overall workflow.
Tell that to your customer when he (or she in this case) wants you
to replace part of an edited track with the same fragment from
another take. Now I could have told her that what she wanted was
'rooted in an
older way of thinking', or that she was stupid and should have had
that bright idea before we had done the five edits following this
fragment,
that would just have confirmed that you have the skills to be abrasive
and difficult to get along with when you choose to.
but I didn't and actually performed the edit to
her
satisfaction.
much better idea.