New take without going out of record

[klaukholm]

Please consider implementing the possibility of starting a new take without going out of record.

I would love to be able to hit the spacebar (or the record button) and create a new take without interrupting the recording process.
All I need is for the audio to be split and a and getting the popup for previous take naming as usual.

[fl]

While this is not a new request, it sure is a good one that many of us have been awaiting for a while.

It would be incredibly marvelous if this could be implemented with the frequently expressed request for some sort of "advance" or "pre-roll" record option, where the five or ten seconds prior to hitting the "Record" button would be included in the resulting file, (for those of us who, um, on occasion, do not have mongoose-like reaction times).

I would think that this would require some sort of finite buffer memory which goes into a "first in, first out" recording process, once a track is record enabled, and then the contents of the buffer get placed into the file once recording is actually started.

In the case of a new take being started while already recording, it would require copying the final five or ten seconds of the first (preceding) recording, to the beginning of the new one - so that in fact you'd end up with two overlapping copies of that five or ten second section, one at the end of one file, and one at the beginning of the other. I suspect this would be something of a memory hog, and you'd want the option to enable or disable it as required, in the Settings.

[phaseboy]

Make it like boom recorder

[Perfect Record]

Take VS soundfile? I've never considered or needed them to be one and the same. What's wrong with markers? (Maybe I'm missing something?)

After years of doing location recording, trying all sorts of different ways of managing sessions, I've finally decided that I'd rather have fewer soundfiles, and just use markers to indicate takes.

I've never tried Boom Recorder. Curious what that feature is, Mark.

[mpdonahue]

We used to do it the old way, but it's very useful to to have each take named in a file, especially when it comes to edit revisions. Often by the time I get to the 3rd or 4th round of revisions, nobody is really sure which take is in the EDL unless it is named. This feature request goes back to something like 9 years now. I think it was MT298 or something like that. To give some context, we are at MT5100.....We have all these great new features coming in v8.1. Can we please implement this !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that enough exclamation points! (apparently not.)
Also, With interleaved files, the number of files is far more manageable.
All the best,
Mark

[Perfect Record]

...Also, With interleaved files, the number of files is far more manageable.

Actually it's not so much the individual number of files as the number of discrete recordings. Not so bad as it used to be, but since so much of the work we do was not recorded in Pyramix (or Sonic back in the day) the fewer files, the less re-naming. Now the rename scripts I've written work so fast that I can re-name hundreds or thousands of files in a minute. Also when files are numbered properly, they'll drop into Pyramix in order much more simply than was true in Sonic. That's why I always had studio assistants keep rolling.

But Mark, a good point about having each clip with a unique name, and not having to rename segments in the edit so we can keep track of them. Where that falls apart in a session is where the artist wants to do a run of 3 or so takes without stopping.

[mpdonahue]

But Mark, a good point about having each clip with a unique name, and not having to rename segments in the edit so we can keep track of them. Where that falls apart in a session is where the artist wants to do a run of 3 or so takes without stopping.

And the circle is completed....What you need for that is the ability to split the files while in record.........

[Perfect Record]

And the circle is completed....What you need for that is the ability to split the files while in record.........

Just so long as the split happens really fast, and that we don't blow a take! Hate it when that happens.

[phaseboy]

Well I think what we would all want Preston (and what Boom Recorder - as one example - implements perfectly) is that the split happens instantly with no sample lost. There is no stopping and restarting of recording just the audio data itself is split across multiple files.

ie: if you place one soundfile directly after the other you can play across the break as if you never went out of record.

Don't over think this - it's a really good request that many people want - and as the other Mark said has been around for a very long time.

Best,

Mark

[Perfect Record]

OK, I'm down with it.

[avi]

Oh, yes please. Please.

As above - Boom Recorder does this (and Frank's buffer) elegantly, same scenario for PMX would be very useful.

[SoundKlang]

It would be very useful if this allows to record multiple passes within a defined loop. For a clip recorded in such a way, a selection list would be needed to select (ideally at any time, not only immediately after the recording) which pass of the recording will be played back by the clip.

[allemano bernard@neuf.fr]

Hi,

It's a pause during recording, in fact ?

Best regards,

Bernard

[Graemme]

No Pause...just the closing of the old file and the beginning of a new one, when the user tells the system to do that. Not a single sample is lost.


Graemme

[DJS]

Yes, please! This is SO FUNDAMENTAL to a recorder, its astonishing it has not been implemented. How hard is it to close the file and start a new one, when the record button is pushed if already in record, say. Background recorders and pre-record don't do it I'm afraid, we need this in the current active recorder.