[QLab] Trim

[Christopher Ashworth]

On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Lee wrote:
>
> I guess you could use the TRIM window for this, but since I never look there, relative fades are easier to work with.

Question for the gallery:

Is Trim something we could/should consider cutting from version 3?

-C
________________________________________________________
WHEN REPLYING, PLEASE QUOTE ONLY WHAT YOU NEED. Thanks!
Change your preferences or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.figure53.com/listinfo.cgi/qlab-figure53.com

[Søren Knud]

Well, as i see it (without being a sounddesigner) the trim is the "better" way to do it, should'nt people just learn to use it?

Or is there something else that makes the relative-way-of-doing-things better? Or is there something i overlooked? (I do know about a lot of things- im talking about this specific "adjusting sound levels without adjusting each fadecue"-thing)

best
soren

Den 30/06/2010 kl. 17.44 skrev Christopher Ashworth:
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Lee wrote:
>>
>> I guess you could use the TRIM window for this, but since I never look there, relative fades are easier to work with.
>
> Question for the gallery:
>
> Is Trim something we could/should consider cutting from version 3?

________________________________________________________

[Jason Knox]

My 2 cents:  I've never used the trim faders - I always just want to see my level faders and know that they represent the actual level.

But that's just one approach / opinion.

Jason

[Dave Tosti-Lane]

I agree, so that’s two. ;-)

Dave Tosti-Lane

[Stephen Pruitt]

This is coming from another non-sound designer, as I use Qlab for a bit of everything, but most often just playing music tracks for dance concerts, so take it for what it's worth, but personally, I use the trim constantly. My standard procedure is to set the trim level on each track or sound cue to the highest level it will ever reach, so that my "levels" are at 0, then I tend to use absolute fades, adjusting "levels" down from that point as things need to change. That makes it easy to for me to jump to a fade and see exactly what is happening, and where my levels are. 

It wouldn't be the end of the world or anything, but I'd be sad to see trim go. Sorry for all the true sound designers who are cringing right now! 

Stephen

Stephen Pruitt

Fluxion Scenic and Light

www.fluxiondesigns.com

See my photography at Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seamonkey78704/sets/

[Mike Troncone]

I don't know if this seems ridiculous, but would it be worth making the trim a knob instead of a linear fader and include it over top of the level fader, similar to how a basic sound console is setup. I don't use trim very often But I think it is because I'm just used to one page of level setting.  

By putting them on the same page, maybe people will use it more. And it also cleans it all up into one menu tab. 

Mike

______________

Mike Troncone

Sound Engineer

Electrician

Jack of all Trades

GA>ME '09

[Søren Knud]

Agreed!!

Den 30/06/2010 kl. 18.48 skrev Mike Troncone:

> By putting them on the same page, maybe people will use it more. And it also cleans it all up into one menu tab.

[Leon Rothenberg]

Please, please, please, do not cut the trim faders. 

I use the trim all the time:

-For temporarily turning a cue up or down, b/c the director wants to try something, or the cue at show volume is just too loud or too quiet for the moment.

-I need to make a quick change, and there may be a combination of relative and absolute fades and I don't have time to check the sequence.

-Although it maybe ignored by some, it is of great use to others. It's fairly unobtrusive to the interface.

That being said, some indication on the levels page that there is a change to trim might be fun. For example, an unobtrusive and non-threatening color change to the slider cap (from yellow to orange perhaps, not red). Perhaps the trim sliders themselves should be a different color as well, to remind us at a quick glance that we are changing TRIMS and not LEVELS. I don't need an indication of what the combinant level is, just a little reminder that there is another multiplier in the chain. 

Or not---I don't mind being forced to remember that I changed something either. 

Also, please keep them as sliders, as rotary knobs on a computer are terribly wonky, unless the mouse path is still straight up and down. Or you use those lovely virtual P&G rotary pots.

I prefer the separate tab, as the control section of the window is already pretty crowded, and on a lower resolution screen (sometimes that is all the shop has) real estate is already pretty tight. I like the idea that it is a separate "function", and I really don't need to look at it with everything else.

Thanks!

Leon

[gtwi...@yahoo.com]

Agreed
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

[Matt Carpenter]

Oh please, leave trim as it currently is. For cue sequences with multiple fades, being able to globally change the level is a wonderful tool. IMHO it needs no further enhancement, tweaking, or improvement.

--
Matt Carpenter
Sound Director
PCPA Theaterfest
805-928-7731 x3140
macar...@pcpa.org

[Steve Lalonde]

IMHO, only a master TRIM fader could be enough, for the reasons invoked by Jeremy Lee and Leon Rothenberg. And it could be found in the settings window. I usually do the rest through the Audio Pref Pane. 

But I generally work with my own sound design. 

S.

2010/6/30 <gtwi...@yahoo.com>

[Charles Coes]

I use it all the time (mostly to avoid relative fades) and would be sad to see it go.

Charles Coes
cco...@gmail.com 
www.charlescoes.com
"When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." - Buckminster Fuller

[Rich Walsh]

On 30 Jun 2010, at 18:29, Steve Lalonde wrote:

> IMHO, only a master TRIM fader could be enough, for the reasons
> invoked by Jeremy Lee and Leon Rothenberg. And it could be found in
> the settings window. I usually do the rest through the Audio Pref
> Pane.

Ah, but what if you have an ambience that you want to turn up in the
surrounds but not everywhere else it is coming out of - and you don't
want to turn the surrounds up globally in the preferences?

Rich

[Charlie Richmond]

On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, Rich Walsh wrote:

> Ah, but what if you have an ambience that you want to turn up in the
> surrounds but not everywhere else it is coming out of - and you don't want to
> turn the surrounds up globally in the preferences?

Assignable DCA submasters.

C-)

[Steve Lalonde]

Then I do it directly in Levels except if the new sound file is quieter than the old one, I use the trim to bring it back to the same level as before. 

Is it a misuse of levels?

S

2010/6/30 Rich Walsh <rich...@mac.com>

[Rich Walsh]

On 1 Jul 2010, at 01:23, Steve Lalonde wrote:

> Then I do it directly in Levels except if the new sound file is
> quieter than the old one, I use the trim to bring it back to the
> same level as before.
>
> Is it a misuse of levels?

It wouldn't be a new sound file: you have programmed some crickets
playing onstage and in the surround - fading in, dipping, building and
then fading out - and you want to turn them up in the surround without
going into each Fade Cue and adjusting the levels. A master Trim fader
would only allow you to turn everything up.

[Christopher Ashworth]

Thanks everyone for thoughts on trim. Sounds like we should keep it in
some form. Good to check these assumptions!

C

(mobile)

[Jeremy Lee]

I think I might use it more if there was something in the icon that told me it was active. Or if the matrix window had the actual output levels (post trim) displayed somehow in both audio and fade cues.

But then again, maybe I wouldn't...

On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Christopher Ashworth wrote:

> On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Lee wrote:
>>
>> I guess you could use the TRIM window for this, but since I never look there, relative fades are easier to work with.
>
> Question for the gallery:
>
> Is Trim something we could/should consider cutting from version 3?

--
Jeremy Lee
Sound Designer, NYC - USA 829
http://www.jjlee.com

[Steve Lalonde]

You're right. 

But I realized that in the end I'd probably go through every fade cue because of the non-log nature of QLab faders which always caused me some kind of trouble so I ended up using levels for this cricket case and intuitively adding more to the fading in than the building. I dreamed many time of solving this problem by having a log checkbox near the faders. 

S 

2010/6/30 Rich Walsh <rich...@mac.com>

On 1 Jul 2010, at 01:23, Steve Lalonde wrote:

[Jeremy Lee]

These are 2 different things.  Trim is only available in an audio cue (not a fade cue) and affects that sound globally.  A relative fade says "turn it up by 5 dB" rather than "turn it up to -15dB"

On Jun 30, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Søren Knud wrote:

Well, as i see it (without being a sounddesigner) the trim is the "better" way to do it, should'nt people just learn to use it?

Or is there something else that makes the relative-way-of-doing-things better? Or is there something i overlooked? (I do know about a lot of things- im talking about this specific "adjusting sound levels without adjusting each fadecue"-thing)


best
soren


Den 30/06/2010 kl. 17.44 skrev Christopher Ashworth:

On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Lee wrote:

I guess you could use the TRIM window for this, but since I never look there, relative fades are easier to work with.

Question for the gallery:

Is Trim something we could/should consider cutting from version 3?

[Jeremy Lee]

You know that you can create a custom fade curve, right? Grab a point, and drag it all the way to the corner, and it becomes (basically- haven't run it through 'Foo) a logarithmic fade.

On Jun 30, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Steve Lalonde wrote:

> You're right.
> But I realized that in the end I'd probably go through every fade cue because of the non-log nature of QLab faders which always caused me some kind of trouble so I ended up using levels for this cricket case and intuitively adding more to the fading in than the building. I dreamed many time of solving this problem by having a log checkbox near the faders.
>
> S

--

Jeremy Lee
Sound Designer, NYC - USA 829
http://www.jjlee.com

[Steve Lalonde]

I know but we're talking about trim fader and not fade curve.

2010/6/30 Jeremy Lee <jerem...@jjlee.com>

[Steven Devino]

+1

Steve Devino
Mobile

[*]

+1

On Wed, June 30, 2010 9:12 pm, Steven Devino wrote:
> +1
>
> Steve Devino
> Mobile
>
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Matt Carpenter <so...@hancockcollege.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Oh please, leave trim as it currently is. For cue sequences with
>> multiple fades, being able to globally change the level is a wonderful
>> tool. IMHO it needs no further enhancement, tweaking, or improvement.

[Søren Knud]

Yes i do know that, but the discussion was about building a sequence of cues and then adjusting the "level of the audio file" up or down. And that is what the trim does.

Say you turn up the fade #3 - that will even affect the level of fade #5. As i see it: that can really fuck things up, especially if the only intention (of using relative fades) was: to make it easy to chance the "level of the audio file".

Best

Soren

[Luka Mustafa]

Hey guys,

I spend last few hours browsing the web and did not find a solution how to bring a music visualizer into qlab. A quartz composer visualizer can be imported in qlab, but I do not see how audio for qlab can be routed to quartz. Any ideas?

The only option remaining seems recording a visualizer from iTunes, but this is only an emergency option.

Best regards,
Luka Mustafa

[Søren Knud]

Via soundflower i guess, but i just use my Metric Halo to route audio back into the computer...

http://cycling74.com/products/soundflower/

And kineme's audio tools should be fun for you too...:

http://kineme.net/release/AudioTools/0.8

Den 01/07/2010 kl. 11.52 skrev Luka Mustafa:

> Hey guys,
>
> I spend last few hours browsing the web and did not find a solution how to bring a music visualizer into qlab. A quartz composer visualizer can be imported in qlab, but I do not see how audio for qlab can be routed to quartz. Any ideas?
>
> The only option remaining seems recording a visualizer from iTunes, but this is only an emergency option.

________________________________________________________

[Rich Walsh]

On 1 Jul 2010, at 02:37, Jeremy Lee wrote:

> You know that you can create a custom fade curve, right? Grab a
> point, and drag it all the way to the corner, and it becomes
> (basically- haven't run it through 'Foo) a logarithmic fade.

It's more like an S-curve actually: I ran it into Pro Tools a few
months ago and took some pictures: http://groups.google.com/group/qlab/attach/cf8e79a2593b0ae2/Fade+Curves.pdf?part=2
. I have these pictures and curves in my template workspace (www.allthatyouhear.com
).

Technically, since QLab's default fade is linear in dB, it already is
"logarithmic"; what you're trying to achieve is something more like
the fader law for a mixing desk. Doing some very rough measurements on
a picture of an 01V96 fader, this would comprise 3 "logarithmic"
curves of different slopes joined together: -INF to -50 (6% of
travel), -50 to -20 (32%) & -20 to 0 (62%). Of course, that's not the
greatest fader in the world, but even a Cadac fader is the same basic
shape, I think.

Rich

[Leon Rothenberg]

That's very useful Rich, thanks.

So Chris, Can a custom default fade shape be added to the workspace preferences along with the fade time preference?
Or even a few custom fade shapes in the preferences to be selected from a pull down menu in the Inspector for a Fade Cue?
That, would be righteous.

-Leon

On Jul 1, 2010, at 7:32 AM, Rich Walsh wrote:

> On 1 Jul 2010, at 02:37, Jeremy Lee wrote:
>
>> You know that you can create a custom fade curve, right? Grab a point, and drag it all the way to the corner, and it becomes (basically- haven't run it through 'Foo) a logarithmic fade.
>

> It's more like an S-curve actually: I ran it into Pro Tools a few months ago and took some pictures: http://groups.google.com/group/qlab/attach/cf8e79a2593b0ae2/Fade+Curves.pdf?part=2. I have these pictures and curves in my template workspace (www.allthatyouhear.com).

[Jason Knox]

I agree that the ability to set a default fade shape in the Fade preferences would be a great feature.  I also like Leon's idea for creating a default and 2-3 custom fade curves that are available via pulldown.

Jason

[Christopher Ashworth]

Yup--these are all things definitely on the radar.

Also in the tracker, FWIW: http://tracker.figure53.com/qlab/ticket/471

Cheers from sunny Baltimore,
Chris

________________________________________________________

[Jeremy Lee]

Quite confused about what your issue is.

[Jeremy Lee]

Yes- thanks Rich for doing that!  I had forgotten you had.

The Fade Shape Preset thing has been on wishlists (and likely tickets) for a long time.  Would love to see them appear!

Jeremy

On Jul 3, 2010, at 8:10 AM, Leon Rothenberg wrote:

That's very useful Rich, thanks.

So Chris, Can a custom default fade shape be added to the workspace preferences along with the fade time preference?
Or even a few custom fade shapes in the preferences to be selected from a pull down menu in the Inspector for a Fade Cue?
That, would be righteous.

-Leon


On Jul 1, 2010, at 7:32 AM, Rich Walsh wrote:

On 1 Jul 2010, at 02:37, Jeremy Lee wrote:

You know that you can create a custom fade curve, right?  Grab a point, and drag it all the way to the corner, and it becomes (basically- haven't run it through 'Foo) a logarithmic fade.

It's more like an S-curve actually: I ran it into Pro Tools a few months ago and took some pictures:http://groups.google.com/group/qlab/attach/cf8e79a2593b0ae2/Fade+Curves.pdf?part=2. I have these pictures and curves in my template workspace (www.allthatyouhear.com).