To all:
Is there a way to "selectively" undo a render where NOVA or any other processing has been employed without eliminating edits or other edl changes that followed that command. If not, might this be a possible suggestion that has merit for future software upgrades?
Jim
NOVA and selective undos
Forum rules
The Merging Technologies team cannot be held responsible for support queries logged on the public forums. If a support query is logged here and only here, it may not be found and dealt with by the appropriate team.
To ensure that your support issue or bug report is dealt with properly and in good time, please use the link to the tech support request form page on the Merging website.
Make sure to let us know what version you are using when you send your mail. THANKS!
The Merging Technologies team cannot be held responsible for support queries logged on the public forums. If a support query is logged here and only here, it may not be found and dealt with by the appropriate team.
To ensure that your support issue or bug report is dealt with properly and in good time, please use the link to the tech support request form page on the Merging website.
Make sure to let us know what version you are using when you send your mail. THANKS!
Re: NOVA and selective undos
Hi Jim,
Delete the rendered section and pull the audio from either side to re-connect it with it's opposite.
Select both sides of this 'edit point'
Choose 'Unsplit' from the edit menu.
You're done.
Best Regards,
Graemme
Delete the rendered section and pull the audio from either side to re-connect it with it's opposite.
Select both sides of this 'edit point'
Choose 'Unsplit' from the edit menu.
You're done.
Best Regards,
Graemme
soundaround wrote:To all:
Is there a way to "selectively" undo a render where NOVA or any other processing has been employed without eliminating edits or other edl changes that followed that command. If not, might this be a possible suggestion that has merit for future software upgrades?
Jim
Graemme Brown
Zen Mastering
1460 Wild Rose Drive
Gabriola Island, BC
Canada V0R 1X5
+1.604.874.9096
"A Horus, A Horus; My Kingdom for a Horus!"
Zen Mastering
1460 Wild Rose Drive
Gabriola Island, BC
Canada V0R 1X5
+1.604.874.9096
"A Horus, A Horus; My Kingdom for a Horus!"
... in the meantime I do all this work on NOVA in Sequoia. Undo there is really easy and much faster. Another @ stefanc: open your earsand eyes, please. No undo in retouch, no gain selective interpolation, no copy/paste, less speed, comfort. The only thing I would believe is if you make a real comparison. You apparently didn't. I am afraid you have no idea what these forensic tool really are about!
visiteur
visiteur
For the record, Retouch has unlimited redo/undo.
Visiteur wrote:... in the meantime I do all this work on NOVA in Sequoia. Undo there is really easy and much faster. Another @ stefanc: open your earsand eyes, please. No undo in retouch, no gain selective interpolation, no copy/paste, less speed, comfort. The only thing I would believe is if you make a real comparison. You apparently didn't. I am afraid you have no idea what these forensic tool really are about!
visiteur
Graemme Brown
Zen Mastering
1460 Wild Rose Drive
Gabriola Island, BC
Canada V0R 1X5
+1.604.874.9096
"A Horus, A Horus; My Kingdom for a Horus!"
Zen Mastering
1460 Wild Rose Drive
Gabriola Island, BC
Canada V0R 1X5
+1.604.874.9096
"A Horus, A Horus; My Kingdom for a Horus!"
-
Bernhard Guettler
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 13:35
- Location: Berlin, Germany
Visiteur wrote:yep, you are right. That wasn't the case quite a short while ago when I made my decision. But still: afaik only 1 minute of audio, for shure no gain sensitive interpolation, no copy/paste.
Visiteur
Hi Visiteur,
are you talking about Retouch or Renovator ?
what do you want to use copy/paste for here ?
Is more than 1 minute really necessary/practical, considering that you need sufficient resolution, to do your selections ?
Regards
Bernhard
Visiteur[/quote]
Hi Visiteur,
are you talking about Retouch or Renovator ?
what do you want to use copy/paste for here ?
Is more than 1 minute really necessary/practical, considering that you need sufficient resolution, to do your selections ?
Regards
Bernhard[/quote]
I am talking about the missing features in Retouch. It is not the question that I need it. Of course, it is very practical to load longer samples. For some problems like tonal noise 1 minute can be very short. The point is that retouch is not cutting edge technologically, these are facts, regardless of the stupid legal issues they have and dumb people thinking that the tool from the "bigger name company" *needs* to be better because of simply the fact that they have a bigger mouth.
Facts: Level dependent interpolation helps to avoid artifacts. (Masking Effect)
Copy/Paste is the most artifact free and easiest repair for many cases. This is as simple as using a "Photoshop" retouche. This is true independent of anbody's "golden ears". Sorry, but this is not about "quality", this is about usability and implementation, what means quality in the end. And concerning this I know how to make my decicision.
BTW these tools are not big business for anybody (yet). Specialist stuff.
Visiteur
Hi Visiteur,
are you talking about Retouch or Renovator ?
what do you want to use copy/paste for here ?
Is more than 1 minute really necessary/practical, considering that you need sufficient resolution, to do your selections ?
Regards
Bernhard[/quote]
I am talking about the missing features in Retouch. It is not the question that I need it. Of course, it is very practical to load longer samples. For some problems like tonal noise 1 minute can be very short. The point is that retouch is not cutting edge technologically, these are facts, regardless of the stupid legal issues they have and dumb people thinking that the tool from the "bigger name company" *needs* to be better because of simply the fact that they have a bigger mouth.
Facts: Level dependent interpolation helps to avoid artifacts. (Masking Effect)
Copy/Paste is the most artifact free and easiest repair for many cases. This is as simple as using a "Photoshop" retouche. This is true independent of anbody's "golden ears". Sorry, but this is not about "quality", this is about usability and implementation, what means quality in the end. And concerning this I know how to make my decicision.
BTW these tools are not big business for anybody (yet). Specialist stuff.
Visiteur
-
Bernhard Guettler
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 13:35
- Location: Berlin, Germany
Visiteur wrote:Copy/Paste is the most artifact free and easiest repair for many cases. This is as simple as using a "Photoshop" retouche. This is true independent of anbody's "golden ears". Sorry, but this is not about "quality", this is about usability and implementation, what means quality in the end. And concerning this I know how to make my decicision.
BTW these tools are not big business for anybody (yet). Specialist stuff.
Visiteur
Hi,
you mean by copy/paste, that inside the render-process window you copy *clean* audio and paste it over the noise ?
Your comparison to Photoshop is good, because the visual approach to audio manipulation needs many of the similar selection/manipulation tools. What we have so far is good but rather basic. (But Photoshop was 1.0 once too)
I'm not shure, why retouch should be better than nova. Would be interesting to have a professional comparison done by somebody independent (unfortunately most of the audio press is not), including double-blind tests with professional listeners.
Regards
Bernhard
Having used both, I'll jump in with my opinion.
I'm having alot of trouble running Retouch on my system. I'm not happy with how this is being handled by Merging. But to Cedar's credit, when it does work, the interpolation algorithm is better than Nova's. Some situations that would take alot of trial and error in Nova are handled with ease in Retouch.
But as has been pointed out, the copy/paste and gain-selective processing in Nova make it far more flexible. So Nova can handle things that would be impossible in Retouch.
So its difficult to say which is the better. But IMO if Retouch is to replace Nova, as Merging is doing, it should be clearly better, which as of now it isnt.
At this price-point, it's big business to me, and it should be handled that way.
Michael
I'm having alot of trouble running Retouch on my system. I'm not happy with how this is being handled by Merging. But to Cedar's credit, when it does work, the interpolation algorithm is better than Nova's. Some situations that would take alot of trial and error in Nova are handled with ease in Retouch.
But as has been pointed out, the copy/paste and gain-selective processing in Nova make it far more flexible. So Nova can handle things that would be impossible in Retouch.
So its difficult to say which is the better. But IMO if Retouch is to replace Nova, as Merging is doing, it should be clearly better, which as of now it isnt.
BTW these tools are not big business for anybody (yet). Specialist stuff.
At this price-point, it's big business to me, and it should be handled that way.
Michael
@ Bernhard: it isn't only comparing the algorithms. Working with these tools you need a lot of experience. Working with this is like painting, so the result fully depends on the whole programme, including all features there are.
@ mfilter: I mean business for Algo or Cedar. I am positive that you can still manually count the sold copies.... One question: How can you tell that the algorithm is better? Do you mean you can work on larger chunks without artifacts?
Visiteur
@ mfilter: I mean business for Algo or Cedar. I am positive that you can still manually count the sold copies.... One question: How can you tell that the algorithm is better? Do you mean you can work on larger chunks without artifacts?
Visiteur
-
Bernhard Guettler
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 13:35
- Location: Berlin, Germany
Visiteur wrote:@ Bernhard: it isn't only comparing the algorithms. Working with these tools you need a lot of experience. Working with this is like painting, so the result fully depends on the whole programme, including all features there are.
Visiteur
... and which human professional is applying them and how.
Still it would be helpful, to have something substantial about comparing the results of standardized tasks, because that would make it harder for these naive "x rules/y sucks" opinions to be heard.
With these tools, users should sign a statement: "public judgement is allowed only after reading and understanding the manual fully and having substantial workexperience under professional conditions"
Bernhard wrote:
With these tools, users should sign a statement: "public judgement is allowed only after reading and understanding the manual fully and having substantial workexperience under professional conditions"
Haha. Danke, Bernhard, you hit the nail!
Personally, I don`t care about double blind tests for a system I like to use. I know Retouch from the SADiE side, I actually don`t know how it is implemented in PMX.
I know Nova from the PMX side, and it is nice, but doesn`t give me the same results.
Further, Retouch is ONE out of FIVE processing algorithms by Cedar. If you need to get rid of long constant tones, Retouch isn`t the thing you should be looking for - as removing coughs or car horns can`t be made with satisfaction with De-Hum or De-Noise.
Visiteur, sorry, but from reading your postings, it seems to me like you are really angry about the company Cedar. Your opinion about the company`s products is extremely biased and seems not been made upon clear and rational facts.
Et c`est pourquoi tu reste sans nom?
Best regards,
Stephan Cahen
sempre la musica!
With these tools, users should sign a statement: "public judgement is allowed only after reading and understanding the manual fully and having substantial workexperience under professional conditions"
Haha. Danke, Bernhard, you hit the nail!
Personally, I don`t care about double blind tests for a system I like to use. I know Retouch from the SADiE side, I actually don`t know how it is implemented in PMX.
I know Nova from the PMX side, and it is nice, but doesn`t give me the same results.
Further, Retouch is ONE out of FIVE processing algorithms by Cedar. If you need to get rid of long constant tones, Retouch isn`t the thing you should be looking for - as removing coughs or car horns can`t be made with satisfaction with De-Hum or De-Noise.
Visiteur, sorry, but from reading your postings, it seems to me like you are really angry about the company Cedar. Your opinion about the company`s products is extremely biased and seems not been made upon clear and rational facts.
Et c`est pourquoi tu reste sans nom?
Best regards,
Stephan Cahen
sempre la musica!
mfilter: I mean business for Algo or Cedar. I am positive that you can still manually count the sold copies.... One question: How can you tell that the algorithm is better? Do you mean you can work on larger chunks without artifacts?
I'm not sure about larger chunks, but some noises that would require trying different block sizes, vert/horiz/left/right etc settings, and then maybe resorting to the copy/paste to get the best results in Nova are often a matter of selecting and processing in Retouch, with no audible artifacts (to my ears at least)
That has been my experience so far.
Michael
-
Dominique Brulhart
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 16:06
- Location: Geneva, Switzerland
- Contact:
Dear Visiteur,
As Product Specialist for Sequoia you’re certainly in a very good position to give your opinion on subjects like Source Destination Editing or Auto-tuning, but we’re less sure about your skill in Hardware, DSP, File Format or Video Synchronization…
We, at Merging, feel sad that you’re trying to help our customers having problems by advertising your product which, in most of the present cases, couldn’t help at all.
This is particularly sad as we have the greatest admiration for Sequoia, a truly wonderful product we know very well since many years as the person who occupied your position some years ago has become a Pyramix distributor…
So, as a tribute to your professionalism, and to help you better supporting our customers, Merging is willing to offer you a full blown Pyramix Workstation next time you come “visit” us at our office.
With our greatest respect,
Sincerely,
Dominique Brulhart
Mr Visiteur is best known as:
Sebastian Gabler MAGIX
Diplom-Tonmeister/Pro Audio Engineer
product specialist broadcast
phone: (Germany) +49 (0)30 29392-363
fax: +49 (0)30 29392-400
e-mail: sequoia@magix.net
As Product Specialist for Sequoia you’re certainly in a very good position to give your opinion on subjects like Source Destination Editing or Auto-tuning, but we’re less sure about your skill in Hardware, DSP, File Format or Video Synchronization…
We, at Merging, feel sad that you’re trying to help our customers having problems by advertising your product which, in most of the present cases, couldn’t help at all.
This is particularly sad as we have the greatest admiration for Sequoia, a truly wonderful product we know very well since many years as the person who occupied your position some years ago has become a Pyramix distributor…
So, as a tribute to your professionalism, and to help you better supporting our customers, Merging is willing to offer you a full blown Pyramix Workstation next time you come “visit” us at our office.
With our greatest respect,
Sincerely,
Dominique Brulhart
Mr Visiteur is best known as:
Sebastian Gabler MAGIX
Diplom-Tonmeister/Pro Audio Engineer
product specialist broadcast
phone: (Germany) +49 (0)30 29392-363
fax: +49 (0)30 29392-400
e-mail: sequoia@magix.net