I had a client that wanted indivilual .wav files of each paragraph that was
read.
This was for a Power point lecture.

I recorded the information, split the paragraphs into regions, bounced (only)
the paragraphs that had edits to disc, and exported the complete regions to
their respective files.

Is there a faster or easier way to do this?
New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast, plus
the talent would be there all day.

Suggestions?
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD. You can also
Ctrl+Shift+K (on the Mac) to export selected regions as files.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro


"Richard Kuschel" wrote in message
...
I had a client that wanted indivilual .wav files of each paragraph that
was
read.
This was for a Power point lecture.

I recorded the information, split the paragraphs into regions, bounced
(only)
the paragraphs that had edits to disc, and exported the complete regions
to
their respective files.

Is there a faster or easier way to do this?
New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast,
plus
the talent would be there all day.

Suggestions?
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD. You can also
Ctrl+Shift+K (on the Mac) to export selected regions as files.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro


"Richard Kuschel" wrote in message
...
I had a client that wanted indivilual .wav files of each paragraph that
was
read.
This was for a Power point lecture.

I recorded the information, split the paragraphs into regions, bounced
(only)
the paragraphs that had edits to disc, and exported the complete regions
to
their respective files.

Is there a faster or easier way to do this?
New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast,
plus
the talent would be there all day.

Suggestions?
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

In article ,
Richard Kuschel wrote:
I had a client that wanted indivilual .wav files of each paragraph that was
read. This was for a Power point lecture.

I recorded the information, split the paragraphs into regions, bounced (only)
the paragraphs that had edits to disc, and exported the complete regions to
their respective files.

Is there a faster or easier way to do this?

Yes. Set up the session so that .wav files are used/created by
default. Track and edit as normal, and then when you have your
regions defined, select a region and do a 'Duplicate' from the
Audiosuite menu. In the Audiosuite menu that comes up, change the
options so that something like 'one continuous file' is selected.
This will copy any edited regions (and whitespace) into one new file
whose length is what you select in the edit window. Repeat this until
all regions are copied to separate files.

The good part is that the duplication happens at hard disk speed, so
if you have a modern machine, it can be quite fast. All fades, empty
space and audio will be coalesced into a new file. (The only odd
behavior is with muted regions - try to avoid those as the audio is
essentially unmuted after duplication).

The downside is that Audiosuite duplication won't incorporate any
processing you've done to the track. That would have to be done in
realtime, or by applying AS versions of all of your plugins to the
track, a tedious and painful situation in its own.

This means that you have to get your sound by tracking 'wet'. For
just voice though, this is not such a big problem. How you'd do this
is to bring the audio into the mixer via an aux input, process it with
plugins as needed and route the aux to an internal bus. Then, set up
an audio track whose input is that bus and print the effected track to
disc. If you're paranoid, you can also set up another audio track and
set its input to the dry interface input and track that too, but
remember to turn its fader down so your monitoring isn't all messed
up.

New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast, plus
the talent would be there all day.

Indeed - no need for it either, and even that would still have messy
heads and tails to trim off. I've used exactly the method above for a
client doing exactly the same thing as yours and it was fast and
efficient. You can also name the duplicated files easily in the edit
window by double clicking on them after they're dup'ed. You'll
probably need to name them according to the script page number or some
other scheme that the producer comes up with.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire

In article ,
Richard Kuschel wrote:
I had a client that wanted indivilual .wav files of each paragraph that was
read. This was for a Power point lecture.

I recorded the information, split the paragraphs into regions, bounced (only)
the paragraphs that had edits to disc, and exported the complete regions to
their respective files.

Is there a faster or easier way to do this?

Yes. Set up the session so that .wav files are used/created by
default. Track and edit as normal, and then when you have your
regions defined, select a region and do a 'Duplicate' from the
Audiosuite menu. In the Audiosuite menu that comes up, change the
options so that something like 'one continuous file' is selected.
This will copy any edited regions (and whitespace) into one new file
whose length is what you select in the edit window. Repeat this until
all regions are copied to separate files.

The good part is that the duplication happens at hard disk speed, so
if you have a modern machine, it can be quite fast. All fades, empty
space and audio will be coalesced into a new file. (The only odd
behavior is with muted regions - try to avoid those as the audio is
essentially unmuted after duplication).

The downside is that Audiosuite duplication won't incorporate any
processing you've done to the track. That would have to be done in
realtime, or by applying AS versions of all of your plugins to the
track, a tedious and painful situation in its own.

This means that you have to get your sound by tracking 'wet'. For
just voice though, this is not such a big problem. How you'd do this
is to bring the audio into the mixer via an aux input, process it with
plugins as needed and route the aux to an internal bus. Then, set up
an audio track whose input is that bus and print the effected track to
disc. If you're paranoid, you can also set up another audio track and
set its input to the dry interface input and track that too, but
remember to turn its fader down so your monitoring isn't all messed
up.

New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast, plus
the talent would be there all day.

Indeed - no need for it either, and even that would still have messy
heads and tails to trim off. I've used exactly the method above for a
client doing exactly the same thing as yours and it was fast and
efficient. You can also name the duplicated files easily in the edit
window by double clicking on them after they're dup'ed. You'll
probably need to name them according to the script page number or some
other scheme that the producer comes up with.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire

In article . net,
"Rail Jon Rogut" wrote:

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD. You can also
Ctrl+Shift+K (on the Mac) to export selected regions as files.



Another option that's fast when you just want the files and no plugs or
volumes is, after regioning the paragraphs, to "Export selected as
files" from the region bin mini menu and choose wavs as the format. As
fast as finder copies.


D

In article . net,
"Rail Jon Rogut" wrote:

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD. You can also
Ctrl+Shift+K (on the Mac) to export selected regions as files.



Another option that's fast when you just want the files and no plugs or
volumes is, after regioning the paragraphs, to "Export selected as
files" from the region bin mini menu and choose wavs as the format. As
fast as finder copies.


D

...which is Ctrl+Shift+K

Careful, we may get a feedback loop going.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro


"DW Griffi" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Rail Jon Rogut" wrote:

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD. You can
also
Ctrl+Shift+K (on the Mac) to export selected regions as files.



Another option that's fast when you just want the files and no plugs or
volumes is, after regioning the paragraphs, to "Export selected as
files" from the region bin mini menu and choose wavs as the format. As
fast as finder copies.


D

...which is Ctrl+Shift+K

Careful, we may get a feedback loop going.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro


"DW Griffi" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Rail Jon Rogut" wrote:

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD. You can
also
Ctrl+Shift+K (on the Mac) to export selected regions as files.



Another option that's fast when you just want the files and no plugs or
volumes is, after regioning the paragraphs, to "Export selected as
files" from the region bin mini menu and choose wavs as the format. As
fast as finder copies.


D

New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast,
plus
the talent would be there all day.

Indeed - no need for it either, and even that would still have messy
heads and tails to trim off. I've used exactly the method above for a
client doing exactly the same thing as yours and it was fast and
efficient. You can also name the duplicated files easily in the edit
window by double clicking on them after they're dup'ed. You'll
probably need to name them according to the script page number or some
other scheme that the producer comes up with.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire







Thanks for the help, basically what I did.

I didn't need to change anything so, any editing was strictly cut/paste.

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD.

What is Consolidate? and where do I find it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast,
plus
the talent would be there all day.

Indeed - no need for it either, and even that would still have messy
heads and tails to trim off. I've used exactly the method above for a
client doing exactly the same thing as yours and it was fast and
efficient. You can also name the duplicated files easily in the edit
window by double clicking on them after they're dup'ed. You'll
probably need to name them according to the script page number or some
other scheme that the producer comes up with.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire







Thanks for the help, basically what I did.

I didn't need to change anything so, any editing was strictly cut/paste.

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD.

What is Consolidate? and where do I find it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

Consolidate on the Mac is Option+Shift+3 (it basically runs the Duplicate AS
plug-in).

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro


"Richard Kuschel" wrote in message
...

New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast,
plus
the talent would be there all day.

Indeed - no need for it either, and even that would still have messy
heads and tails to trim off. I've used exactly the method above for a
client doing exactly the same thing as yours and it was fast and
efficient. You can also name the duplicated files easily in the edit
window by double clicking on them after they're dup'ed. You'll
probably need to name them according to the script page number or some
other scheme that the producer comes up with.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire







Thanks for the help, basically what I did.

I didn't need to change anything so, any editing was strictly cut/paste.

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD.

What is Consolidate? and where do I find it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

Consolidate on the Mac is Option+Shift+3 (it basically runs the Duplicate AS
plug-in).

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://home.earthlink.net/~railro


"Richard Kuschel" wrote in message
...

New file during tracking for each paragraph seems clumsy, and not fast,
plus
the talent would be there all day.

Indeed - no need for it either, and even that would still have messy
heads and tails to trim off. I've used exactly the method above for a
client doing exactly the same thing as yours and it was fast and
efficient. You can also name the duplicated files easily in the edit
window by double clicking on them after they're dup'ed. You'll
probably need to name them according to the script page number or some
other scheme that the producer comes up with.


Best of luck,

Monte McGuire







Thanks for the help, basically what I did.

I didn't need to change anything so, any editing was strictly cut/paste.

If there are no plug-ins or volume changes.. but simply straight edits..
Consolidate would be the fastest method, as opposed to BTD.

What is Consolidate? and where do I find it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

Consolidate on the Mac is Option+Shift+3 (it basically runs the Duplicate AS
plug-in).

Rail


Thanks. Found it!

That was what I needed and now that I know about it I have a lot of uses for
that one.

I had been using PT3.2 and the new versions have a ton of stuff that I didn't
have on the other version.

A bit overwhelming at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

Consolidate on the Mac is Option+Shift+3 (it basically runs the Duplicate AS
plug-in).

Rail


Thanks. Found it!

That was what I needed and now that I know about it I have a lot of uses for
that one.

I had been using PT3.2 and the new versions have a ton of stuff that I didn't
have on the other version.

A bit overwhelming at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

In article ,
Richard Kuschel wrote:
I had been using PT3.2 and the new versions have a ton of stuff that I didn't
have on the other version.

A bit overwhelming at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it.

3.2 was a real pain in the rear! If you can go up to 5.1.1, I'd say
it's worth it. The editing features are really pleasant, and sound
quality is tremendously improved too. The old 3.2 mixer was a 20 bit
single precision mixer and sounded pretty rough. 4.1 provided a 24
bit undithered mixer, but you can get a real 48 bit dithered to 24 bit
mixer for 5.x.

Download it at
http://download.digidesign.com/suppo...ered_mixer.hqx
and you'll have a 48 bit internal desk that dithers each output to 24
bit. It'll work on PT 5.0 and higher. Nice stuff...


Regards,

Monte McGuire

In article ,
Richard Kuschel wrote:
I had been using PT3.2 and the new versions have a ton of stuff that I didn't
have on the other version.

A bit overwhelming at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it.

3.2 was a real pain in the rear! If you can go up to 5.1.1, I'd say
it's worth it. The editing features are really pleasant, and sound
quality is tremendously improved too. The old 3.2 mixer was a 20 bit
single precision mixer and sounded pretty rough. 4.1 provided a 24
bit undithered mixer, but you can get a real 48 bit dithered to 24 bit
mixer for 5.x.

Download it at
http://download.digidesign.com/suppo...ered_mixer.hqx
and you'll have a 48 bit internal desk that dithers each output to 24
bit. It'll work on PT 5.0 and higher. Nice stuff...


Regards,

Monte McGuire

In article ,
Richard Kuschel wrote:
I had been using PT3.2 and the new versions have a ton of stuff that I
didn't
have on the other version.

A bit overwhelming at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it.

3.2 was a real pain in the rear! If you can go up to 5.1.1, I'd say
it's worth it. The editing features are really pleasant, and sound
quality is tremendously improved too. The old 3.2 mixer was a 20 bit
single precision mixer and sounded pretty rough. 4.1 provided a 24
bit undithered mixer, but you can get a real 48 bit dithered to 24 bit
mixer for 5.x.

Download it at
http://download.digidesign.com/suppo...ered_mixer.hqx
and you'll have a 48 bit internal desk that dithers each output to 24
bit. It'll work on PT 5.0 and higher. Nice stuff...


Regards,

Monte McGuire




Thanks,

I never used 3.2 for mixing. Too slow.

I just ran the direct outs into the board.

I have 5.1 on another computer and am just starting to get into it.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty