> >>> stephband <stephband@...> wrote: > >>> Is there really no easy way to swap the left and right > >>> channels of an audio file (destructively, while sample > >>> editing)? > >> > >> Posted by: "markdvc2002" mark@logic-users.org > >> You could try logic's gain plugin, which allows swapping > >> of the L and R channels, or use this helpful freeware > >> plugin > > > > On 28.10.2006, at 01:08, stephband wrote: > > Yes, I know. But I said destructively, while sample editing. > > It still surprises me that such a simple thing is missed out > > of the Sample Editor. Oh well. > > Posted by: "Peter Ostry" po@ostry.com peter_ostry > Does it even make sense? We have the Gain plugin to swap the > sides and the DirectionMixer to do it continuously. Where is > the advantage of swapping in the sample editor? When editing samples! Say you are using the EXS Instrument Editor, and you click on the E to edit. I often have samples I want to play back with LR swapped compared to other samples in the same instrument. There's no easy way to do this. You must import them into the Audio window, insert them on a track, instantiate the Gain plug-in, set the locators, bounce down and save the file to good location where you can import it back into the Instrument Zone. Either that, or the other way is to convert them to split stereo... blah blah, you get the gist. It's a laborious process if you're editing a layered, multi-zone instrument. Also at times when you have recorded an MS signal but as an SM, and you just want to standardise your MS tracks to avoid future confusion. Or you've recorded with a couple of LR mic inputs reversed (it does happen!) and you want to avoid confusion when you come to mix later, perhaps importing the files elsewhere. You want to be able to fix problems before they happen. It seems to me a simple, helpful tool and an obvious omission from a Sample Editor. Cheers, Stephen.

>> Posted by: "Peter Ostry" >> Does it even make sense? > > On 30.10.2006, at 12:47, stephband wrote: > When editing samples! ... > ...when you have recorded an MS signal but > but as an SM, ... avoid confusion ... Now I got you. Two very good reasons indeed. A related question: do you record MS as one stereo signal? You don't need to work on the two channels independently? Since Logic lacks stereo sends splitting stereo is a bit complicated. ___ Peter Ostry

Peter Ostry wrote: > A related question: do you record MS as one stereo signal? You don't > need to work on the two channels independently? Since Logic lacks > stereo sends splitting stereo is a bit complicated. Not exactly related to the topic, but this is some issue I'd seriously love to see adressed. I'd also love to see an option to use separate inserts and pannings for stereo tracks. I'm just getting used to pretty much always recording two guitar signals, one pre-tweaked (real amp or hardware amp sim) and one dry D.I. signal. Right now I'm using two mono tracks for the task, but it'd be quite more comfortable being able to use a single stereo track for these kind of things, especially when doing cycle recordings. Regards Sascha

On 30.10.2006, at 14:37, Sascha Franck wrote: > Peter Ostry wrote: >> A related question: do you record MS as one stereo signal? You don't >> need to work on the two channels independently? Since Logic lacks >> stereo sends splitting stereo is a bit complicated. > > Not exactly related to the topic, but this is some issue I'd > seriously love > to see adressed. > I'd also love to see an option to use separate inserts and pannings > for > stereo tracks. > I'm just getting used to pretty much always recording two guitar > signals, > one pre-tweaked (real amp or hardware amp sim) and one dry D.I. > signal. > Right now I'm using two mono tracks for the task, but it'd be quite > more > comfortable being able to use a single stereo track for these kind of > things, especially when doing cycle recordings. Very true. Some external boxes have even a dry out function. I also prefer to record an effected and a dry signal. Especially with more extreme effects from a G-Major or a Whammy which can both be controlled by Logic if the recorded sound wasn't optimal. All we would need is a small addition to the send settings: left, right, both (default). Btw, does anybody know of a plugin with two volume faders (L+R) ? That would make splitting stereo tracks easier. ___ Peter Ostry

>>Btw, does anybody know of a plugin with two volume faders (L+R) ? That would make splitting stereo tracks easier.<< I found "Stereo Pan" somewhere in the Link Section here. I downloaded but didn´t install it yet. It seems to do exactly what you need. It was some Freeware. If you can´t find here I could send it to you. Matzy

On 30/10/06, Mathias Hagenah <forums@logic-users.org> wrote: > Message posted by Mathias Hagenah <niteblind@niteblind.com>: > > >>Btw, does anybody know of a plugin with two volume faders (L+R) ? That would make splitting stereo tracks easier.<< > > I found "Stereo Pan" somewhere in the Link Section here. There is also Stereo Image Munger at http://innig.net/ which allows you to change middle and side levels as well. -- with best wishes, John http;//abram.ca

On 30.10.2006, at 16:13, Peter Ostry wrote: > Btw, does anybody know of a plugin with two volume faders (L+R) ? > That would make splitting stereo tracks easier. ("Fader" was misleading. Actually I want to mute the channels independently.) On 30.10.2006, at 16:33, Mathias Hagenah wrote: > I found "Stereo Pan" somewhere in the Link Section here. Found it on the web. It appears to be Windows VST only. On 30.10.2006, at 22:32, John Abram wrote: > There is also Stereo Image Munger at http://innig.net/ which allows > you to change middle and side levels as well. Hm, I have it. But it does not make the left or right channel dead if I pull the faders down. Strange, the labels say left and right gain. On 30.10.2006, at 22:53, stephband wrote: > How about holding down the Mono/Stereo button at the bottom of the > track and forcing it to just play the left or right channel of the > stereo file. This way you can record the original in a stereo file, > stick the file on two tracks, and force one L and the other R. Then the advantage is only for recording. Afterwards you end up with two tracks anyway. And in my opinion a duplicated stereo track is worse than two mono tracks. --- No problem with Universal Track Mode off, splitting happens then automatically. But a lot of workflow problems arise. Routing the stereo track to a stereo bus and setting up 2 mono Aux'es for that bus doesn't work either. Yet I didn't find a good way to split a stereo cannel. it is not really a problem for me but a weakness in the routing capabilities of Logic. ___ Peter Ostry

> I found "Stereo Pan" somewhere in the Link Section here. >Found it on the web. It appears to be Windows VST only. No, I found an AU. You´re allowed to Pan and to turn Volume down on each side. I installed and tested it in Pro 7.1, imho it should fit your needs. As I said before I could send it to you, no prob.

On 31.10.2006, at 09:25, Mathias Hagenah wrote: > No, I found an AU. > You´re allowed to Pan and to turn Volume down on each side. > I installed and tested it in Pro 7.1 Could you post a link? Cheers Hans

> On 31.10.2006, at 09:25, Mathias Hagenah wrote: > > No, I found an AU. > > You´re allowed to Pan and to turn Volume down on each side. > > I installed and tested it in Pro 7.1 > Hans Hafner <hanshafner@...> wrote: > Could you post a link? > > Cheers > Hans Hi Hans I think it might be the stereo panner: http://user.et-cip.rub.de/luther/download/StereoPan_1.1.zip - written by Hugo der Wolf from Logicuser.de, it's very useful too. More here (in German): http://www.logicuser.de/forum/viewtopic.php? t=27470&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 kind regards Mark Cahill

I didn´t find it back in the Link Section, may I´m wrong and I haven´t found at "this" one. Anyways I uploaded a zipped file to my Server: http://www.niteblind.com/StereoPan.component.zip Hope that helps, though it would be 1 better if there were Mute Buttons for each channel imo. Matzy

Mathias Hagenah <niteblind@niteblind.com> wrote: > I didn´t find it back in the Link Section, may I´m wrong and I haven´t > found at "this" one. > Anyways I uploaded a zipped file to my Server: > http://www.niteblind.com/StereoPan.component.zip Did you ask for and get permission from the developer to do this? regards Mark Cahill

>Did you ask for and get permission from the developer to do this? Honestly ? No. It´s the Hugo Der Wolf Panner you pointed to too. It´s Freeware, I didn´t sign in at Logic Users.de or similar but got it from their page. Anyways I´ll take it off again. Didn´t mean to hurt anyones authorities, just wanted to help. What´s wrong with sharing "Free"ware ??? Did you read something there that it´s not admired ?

Mathias Hagenah <niteblind@niteblind.com> wrote: > >Did you ask for and get permission from the developer to do this? > > Honestly ? No. > It´s the Hugo Der Wolf Panner you pointed to too. > It´s Freeware, I didn´t sign in at Logic Users.de > or similar but got it from their page. > Anyways I´ll take it off again. > Didn´t mean to hurt anyones authorities, just > wanted to help. > What´s wrong with sharing "Free"ware ??? > Did you read something there that it´s not admired ? It is simply a matter of courtesy. Hugo (who BTW, is a friend of mine, I did make one or two suggestions about and tested his plugin) went to the trouble to write this and give it to the logic community. The least you might do is acknowledge that, and if you wish to host it, ask for and receive his permission before doing so. regards Mark Cahill

On 31.10.2006, at 16:50, Mathias Hagenah wrote: > What´s wrong with sharing "Free"ware ??? Did you read something > there that it´s not admired ? It only has to do with crediting the author correctly which also includes pointing to the authors website. That's all and fair for the fact that they're putting their time into something for all of us to share. Don't take it so hard... Cheers Hans

Ok, Sorry I wasn´t aware of this, cause it´s still freely available on the site and I thought it´s serious. My Link is dead now. But please tell Hugo to put a Mute Button for each side in it. ;) Matzy

On 30.10.2006 Mathias and Mark wrote: > "Stereo Pan" Thanks, works good. The "legal" version obviously better than the "illegal" version ;-) For those who are interested in splitting a stereo track: Stereo track routed to a stereo bus. 2 stereo (!) Aux'es with inputs set to the stereo bus. A StereoPan in both Aux'es with R/L levels far down. Sends from the Aux'es to 2 mono busses. You can of course split any stereo bus with that method, that could be helpful if you want to process the two sides independently. That maneuvre would be easier if the L and R setting on an Aux would work. And it would not be necessary at all if we had L/R settings for sends. ___ Peter Ostry

I just got my new Mac Pro 2.66 / 2 gig Ram and MOTU traveler. I'm running my new sessions at 192k / 24 bit. Currently running 25 stereo audio tracks and 5 Instruments Ultra beat, Sculpture. I keep getting A Core Audio error message that says "System Overload, the audio engine was not able to process all required data in time. I've adjusted the I / O buffer size settings and still no luck. Am I missing something? I expected to get better performance from this set up. thanks Aaron

stephband wrote: >> >>> stephband <stephband@...> wrote: >> >>> Is there really no easy way to swap the left and right >> >>> channels of an audio file (destructively, while sample >> >>> editing)? >> >> >> >> Posted by: "markdvc2002" mark@logic-users.org >> >> You could try logic's gain plugin, which allows swapping >> >> of the L and R channels, or use this helpful freeware >> >> plugin >> > >> > On 28.10.2006, at 01:08, stephband wrote: >> > Yes, I know. But I said destructively, while sample editing. >> > It still surprises me that such a simple thing is missed out >> > of the Sample Editor. Oh well. >> >> Posted by: "Peter Ostry" po@ostry.com peter_ostry >> Does it even make sense? We have the Gain plugin to swap the >> sides and the DirectionMixer to do it continuously. Where is >> the advantage of swapping in the sample editor? > > When editing samples! Say you are using the EXS Instrument > Editor, and you click on the E to edit. I often have samples I > want to play back with LR swapped compared to other samples in > the same instrument. > There's no easy way to do this. You must import them into the > Audio window, insert them on a track, instantiate the Gain > plug-in, set the locators, bounce down and save the file to good > location where you can import it back into the Instrument Zone. > Either that, or the other way is to convert them to split > stereo... blah blah, you get the gist. > > It's a laborious process if you're editing a layered, multi-zone > instrument. > > Also at times when you have recorded an MS signal but as an SM, > and you just want to standardise your MS tracks to avoid future > confusion. Or you've recorded with a couple of LR mic inputs > reversed (it does happen!) and you want to avoid confusion when > you come to mix later, perhaps importing the files elsewhere. > You want to be able to fix problems before they happen. > > It seems to me a simple, helpful tool and an obvious omission > from a Sample Editor. > Audiofinder is very good at this kind of stuff. As well as being useful for other things! Check it out. -- Pete Thomas www.petethomas.co.uk Logic Tutorials, Hints, Tips, free Icons, Environments EXS Instruments (donationware)

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, aaron wrote: > >I just got my new Mac Pro 2.66 / 2 gig Ram and MOTU traveler. >I'm running my new sessions at 192k / 24 bit. >Currently running 25 stereo audio tracks and 5 Instruments Ultra >beat, Sculpture. >I keep getting A Core Audio error message that says >"System Overload, the audio engine was not able to process all >required data in time. >I've adjusted the I / O buffer size settings and still no luck. >Am I missing something? I expected to get better performance from >this set up. I would say that's damn good performance considering you're running at 192/24. Data I/O at 192 is huge... either the system bus will saturate or the drives cannot keep up. Are you using a separate high speed audio only drive? One question.... why 192, it makes absolutely no sense, your audio interface qualiry is far below the threshhold of any possible gain 192kHz could provide. Manufacturers use the 192kHz as mostly a marketing device. To benifit from 192kHz your hardware and recording environment would need to be pristine, and even then....... Howard

: >> >> I just got my new Mac Pro 2.66 / 2 gig Ram and MOTU traveler. >> I'm running my new sessions at 192k / 24 bit. >> Currently running 25 stereo audio tracks and 5 Instruments Ultra >> beat, Sculpture. >> I keep getting A Core Audio error message that says >> "System Overload, the audio engine was not able to process all >> required data in time. >> I've adjusted the I / O buffer size settings and still no luck. >> Am I missing something? I expected to get better performance from >> this set up. > > I would say that's damn good performance considering you're > running at 192/24. Data I/O at 192 is huge... either the system > bus will saturate or the drives cannot keep up. Are you using a > separate high speed audio only drive? > > One question.... why 192, it makes absolutely no sense, your > audio interface qualiry is far below the threshhold of any > possible gain 192kHz could provide. Manufacturers use the 192kHz > as mostly a marketing device. To benifit from 192kHz your hardware > and recording environment would need to be pristine, and even > then....... > > Howard > I'm using 2 320 gig Barracuda perpendicular drives striped RAID. I have been running Logic the OS and the projects off of this set up. I just tried running Logic and my OS off the internal and opening projects from the RAID drives. Still no difference. I can hear a difference in quality now that I'm in 24 bit. I must admit I'm not sure what I'm gaining from the 192k. Is it advantageous to step down to 96k or just stick with 44.1 / 24 bit. Also as I am still new to Logic, how can I convert my audio files at 192k down to another sample rate? thanks for your feed back. Aaron

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, aaron <aaron@...> wrote: >>One question.... why 192, it makes absolutely no sense, your >>audio interface qualiry is far below the threshhold of any >>possible gain 192kHz could provide. Manufacturers use the 192kHz >>as mostly a marketing device. To benefit from 192kHz your hardware >>and recording environment would need to be pristine, and even >>then....... >>Howard >I'm using 2 320 gig Barracuda perpendicular drives striped RAID. >I have been running Logic the OS and the projects off of this set up. >I just tried running Logic and my OS off the internal and opening >projects from the RAID drives. Still no difference. > >I can hear a difference in quality now that I'm in 24 bit. Right, 24-bit provides a noticable improvement. If your target medium is a CD and you intend to run a higher sample rate you can try 88.2 or 96. Either way... you have to come down to 44.1 CD. If you're going to DVD then 96 is what you want... or even 48 upsampled. Many DVD tracks are recorded at 48 and later converted to 96 for burning. >I must admit I'm not sure what I'm gaining from the 192k. >Is it advantageous to step down to 96k or just stick with 44.1 / 24 >bit. Well, someone else just posted having a similar system and running a lot more than you, maybe wait and see what they have to say. Cutting the sample rate from 192 to 96 will reduce processor load by 40+ percent, especially with AUi and some plugins. Don't know what the best way to convert files to a lower sample rate would be, I think Logic was improved in that area and may be your best. The high sample rate is causing the load on your system, I'd really forget about recording ay 192kHz, unless you have a special project in mind that -requires- something like this. Howard

On 10/31/06 4:37 PM, "aaron" <aaron@cirruscirrus.com> wrote: > I'm using 2 320 gig Barracuda perpendicular drives striped RAID. > I have been running Logic the OS and the projects off of this set up. > I just tried running Logic and my OS off the internal and opening > projects from the RAID drives. Still no difference. > > I can hear a difference in quality now that I'm in 24 bit. > I must admit I'm not sure what I'm gaining from the 192k. > Is it advantageous to step down to 96k or just stick with 44.1 / 24 bit. > > Also as I am still new to Logic, how can I convert my audio files at > 192k down to another sample rate? Aaron I think a lot of people assume they should run their gear at the absolute maximum settings, but I would think that 192Khz is pushing your system pretty hard, and likely you won¹t hear any difference, as Howard has said. You would get a lot more tracks at 96k, even more at 44.1. I guess it depends on if you hear a difference and how important more tracks are to your project, versus absolute maximum recording quality (real or imagined). Maybe you should try some tracks at these various settings and see if you can hear a difference....I assume it is ending up at 44.1 when you bounce anyway? Blair -- blairfisher@shaw.ca