20 Nov
2017
20 Nov
'17
6:06 a.m.
On 11/19/2017 11:13 PM, Tim wrote:
D'oh. Not true. Ardour's router can "route anything anywhere"
as they say.
It looks like that splitting operation should have been possible
with Ardour?
Tim.
I recently had
a demonstration where the mics were wired wrong and so
the two "stereo" channels I recorded on were mixed up. You think I
managed to split the tracks into mono in order to salvage two usable
tracks? No beef. I'd have had to do a stem export and reimport. Or
something. Didn't really fit in the demo time frame.
Hi, may I offer some technical perspective:
I'm no Ardour expert but I've studied a few areas in detail.
Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm curious if I've actually got this right.
With the MusE Sequencer, the 'splitting' you describe is easy.
The two halves of a stereo track can be further routed to any
other tracks, mono or stereo. In fact /any/ channels from any
track can be routed to any other track's channels individually.
How does MusE accomplish this, while Ardour seems to /enforce/
track channel routing compatibility? For one reason only: The panner.
You see, MusE does not yet have /true/ multi-channel tracks
beyond 2 channels - except for synth tracks: we do support
all multi-channel synths.
(The extra channels of such a synth track can be routed elsewhere,
the first two are presented on a mixer strip. In other words,
we don't yet have multi-channel wave tracks so you can't just
take all the synth channels and route them to one wave track,
you must split them up and send to several wave tracks.)
Therefore, currently our 'panner' is just fine - it looks
the same whether for a mono or stereo track. MusE magically
manages to route all signals properly.
For example, if you route /two/ of a stereo track's output
channels to some other /mono/ track, while /also/ routing
those channels to some other /stereo/ track, MusE's panner
'just works' correctly, as a panner for the former and a
balance for the latter.
FYI: To ease user routing, instead of having to route individual
channels like that, we support a concept called 'omni routing'
where you just make /one/ connection from the source track to
the destination track and MusE automatically figures out how
to mix all those channels together - and most importantly
how to pan or balance - depending on the number of source
and destination channels. It also works for multi-channel
synth tracks - you can route all 16 channels of drumgizmo
into some other multi-channel plugin, with just one route.
Anyway I digress...
Full, true multi-channel tracks for MusE have been on my mind,
of course. And with that came a question:
Since we allow such 'free-form' channel-to-channel connections,
then how the heck would the panner work with multi-channels?
What panner will we show on each mixer strip?
You see, it's /impossible/ with a single all-purpose panner
like MusE currently has.
So that's why I believe Ardour enforces such routing
compatibility, because of the panner.
Am I right, or way off again?
Tim.
The MusE Sequencer project.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user