opening 3 channel file on a 4 channel track

[e deleflie]

Hi all,

I'm a new user to Ardour, so I hope my question isn't too newb.

I have configured Ardour to create 4 channel tracks. Basically, I just
want to use Ardour to mix existing multitrack files where the gains on
each channel in the track is always identical to the others.

I've turned off the default panner. However, I notice that when I
bring in a 3 channel file, the 4th channel is always filled up with
some data. It looks like perhaps that 4th channel might be a copy of
the thrid. I'm wondering if this is the case, and how I can turn that
off.

Etienne
_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

[Jörn Nettingsmeier-5]

e deleflie wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm a new user to Ardour, so I hope my question isn't too newb.
>
> I have configured Ardour to create 4 channel tracks. Basically, I just
> want to use Ardour to mix existing multitrack files where the gains on
> each channel in the track is always identical to the others.
>
> I've turned off the default panner. However, I notice that when I
> bring in a 3 channel file, the 4th channel is always filled up with
> some data. It looks like perhaps that 4th channel might be a copy of
> the thrid. I'm wondering if this is the case, and how I can turn that
> off.

hi etienne!

i think you can't turn this off too easily. it happens automatically.
the reasoning seems to be that if you dump a mono file into a stereo
track, it does the logical thing and sounds like a signal in the middle.
however, i'd also prefer if ardour set it to silence rather than
duplicating the preceding channel. (btw, the same happens when a plugin
produces less outputs than there are channel outs, and i'd also prefer
silence in that case).
maybe someone in the know can explain the rationale of this behaviour?

the cleanest solution would be to have 3 and 4ch tracks separate. you
can then route them onto a 4ch bus and apply all common effects etc. in
that bus. if you route a 3ch track into a 4ch bus, you have full control
about which channel goes where, via the output edit dialog.

hth,

jörn



--
Jörn Nettingsmeier

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik

Audio and event engineer
Ambisonic surround recordings

http://stackingdwarves.net
[phone]

_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

[e deleflie]

thanks Jörn,

> i think you can't turn this off too easily. it happens automatically.
> the reasoning seems to be that if you dump a mono file into a stereo
> track, it does the logical thing and sounds like a signal in the middle.n.

ah ... darn. So Ardour isn't totally liberated from stereo thinking...
(still much better than other DAWs I guess).

I think my preferred solution is to have 4 tracks where the fourth one
is an empty one. (i.e. I'll just add an empty track to all my 3
channel ones).

I'm just testing before moving onto mixing 3rd order periphonic with
3rd order horizontal (9 empty channels out of 16).. so there's going
to be lots of empty channels (I'd rather not re-route).

Etienne

> however, i'd also prefer if ardour set it to silence rather than
> duplicating the preceding channel. (btw, the same happens when a plugin
> produces less outputs than there are channel outs, and i'd also prefer
> silence in that case).
> maybe someone in the know can explain the rationale of this behaviour?
>
> the cleanest solution would be to have 3 and 4ch tracks separate. you
> can then route them onto a 4ch bus and apply all common effects etc. in
> that bus. if you route a 3ch track into a 4ch bus, you have full control
> about which channel goes where, via the output edit dialog.
>
> hth,
>
> jörn
>
>
>
> --
> Jörn Nettingsmeier
>
> Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik
>
> Audio and event engineer
> Ambisonic surround recordings
>
> http://stackingdwarves.net
> [phone]
>
>

_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

[Ricardus]

On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 11:02 +1100, e deleflie wrote:

 Steven, 16 tracks is better.

 Ricardus...

> thanks Jörn,
>
> > i think you can't turn this off too easily. it happens automatically.
> > the reasoning seems to be that if you dump a mono file into a stereo
> > track, it does the logical thing and sounds like a signal in the middle.n.
>
> ah ... darn. So Ardour isn't totally liberated from stereo thinking...
> (still much better than other DAWs I guess).
>
> I think my preferred solution is to have 4 tracks where the fourth one
> is an empty one. (i.e. I'll just add an empty track to all my 3
> channel ones).
>
> I'm just testing before moving onto mixing 3rd order periphonic with
> 3rd order horizontal (9 empty channels out of 16).. so there's going
> to be lots of empty channels (I'd rather not re-route).
>
> Etienne
>
> > however, i'd also prefer if ardour set it to silence rather than
> > duplicating the preceding channel. (btw, the same happens when a plugin
> > produces less outputs than there are channel outs, and i'd also prefer
> > silence in that case).
> > maybe someone in the know can explain the rationale of this behaviour?
> >
> > the cleanest solution would be to have 3 and 4ch tracks separate. you
> > can then route them onto a 4ch bus and apply all common effects etc. in
> > that bus. if you route a 3ch track into a 4ch bus, you have full control
> > about which channel goes where, via the output edit dialog.
> >
> > hth,
> >
> > jörn
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jörn Nettingsmeier
> >
> > Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik
> >
> > Audio and event engineer
> > Ambisonic surround recordings
> >
> > http://stackingdwarves.net
> > [phone]
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Ardour-Users mailing list
> ardour-users@...
> http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

[Jörn Nettingsmeier-5]

e deleflie wrote:
> I think my preferred solution is to have 4 tracks where the fourth one
> is an empty one. (i.e. I'll just add an empty track to all my 3
> channel ones).
>
> I'm just testing before moving onto mixing 3rd order periphonic with
> 3rd order horizontal (9 empty channels out of 16).. so there's going
> to be lots of empty channels (I'd rather not re-route).

hmm. if you mix 3h1p, your panner will determine the channel order.
it doesn't make much sense to use a 16ch master bus in that case - you
will be shuffling a large number of zeros around for no reason. make
your master bus 9 channels, and add the silent channels when you export.

if you have the resources to move all those zeroes, you might just as
well produce in 3rd order peri and downgrade when you master... so you
can later benefit from the superior h/v mixed order scheme once suitable
players are available.

--
Jörn Nettingsmeier

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik

Audio and event engineer
Ambisonic surround recordings

http://stackingdwarves.net
[phone]

_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

[e deleflie]

Hi Jörn,

> hmm. if you mix 3h1p, your panner will determine the channel order.
> it doesn't make much sense to use a 16ch master bus in that case - you
> will be shuffling a large number of zeros around for no reason. make
> your master bus 9 channels, and add the silent channels when you export.

The thing is that I already have all the material (generated using
Supercollider))... so I wont be doing any panning. All I want to do is
mix 3rd order periphonic and horizontal only.

I can write a script that copies the periphonic files and deletes any
non-horizontal channels. I guess that's probably the easiest.

I'm also very interested in work-flows for ambisonic authoring. I
think there is an important observation here ... which is the workflow
of mixing different orders. In an ideal world, you could just dump a
bunch of ambisonic tracks into an environment (without caring what
order they have implemented) ,,, and mix it down to the lowest-common
order (or just export certain chosen channels).

Actually, Ardour is really not that far away from being able to do
that. All it needs is to implement a switch to turn off spreading 1
channel into the other empty ones ... and it is practically there.

> if you have the resources to move all those zeroes, you might just as
> well produce in 3rd order peri and downgrade when you master... so you
> can later benefit from the superior h/v mixed order scheme once suitable
> players are available.

yes I agree. To my mind all synthetic material should be produced to
one agreed order. I'd say 3rd periphonic is ideal.

Etienne

> --
> Jörn Nettingsmeier
>
> Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik
>
> Audio and event engineer
> Ambisonic surround recordings
>
> http://stackingdwarves.net
> [phone]
>
>

_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org

[Jörn Nettingsmeier-5]

e deleflie wrote:

> Hi Jörn,
>
>> hmm. if you mix 3h1p, your panner will determine the channel order.
>> it doesn't make much sense to use a 16ch master bus in that case - you
>> will be shuffling a large number of zeros around for no reason. make
>> your master bus 9 channels, and add the silent channels when you export.
>
> The thing is that I already have all the material (generated using
> Supercollider))... so I wont be doing any panning. All I want to do is
> mix 3rd order periphonic and horizontal only.
>
> I can write a script that copies the periphonic files and deletes any
> non-horizontal channels. I guess that's probably the easiest.

you know that you can always manually connect (or not connect) the
output channels of any track? i don't really see the problem.

so if you use a peri master bus, connect your horizontal-only tracks by
hand, skipping the channels you don't use. if you use a horizontal-only
master bus, connect your peri tracks by hand, omitting the channels that
don't affect the horizontal plane. you can create "route templates" for
this, so that you don't have to do the wiring by hand each time.

> Actually, Ardour is really not that far away from being able to do
> that. All it needs is to implement a switch to turn off spreading 1
> channel into the other empty ones ... and it is practically there.

that spreading is something that must be revisited (as in, thrown away)
anyway, imho.

>> if you have the resources to move all those zeroes, you might just as
>> well produce in 3rd order peri and downgrade when you master... so you
>> can later benefit from the superior h/v mixed order scheme once suitable
>> players are available.
>
> yes I agree. To my mind all synthetic material should be produced to
> one agreed order. I'd say 3rd periphonic is ideal.

hmm. i don't see why. as soon as i have access to larger rigs and my
machine can handle it, i *will* go to fourth order or higher. why should
  people have to agree on an order?
for the forseeable future, first-order WXYZ with W at -3db is perfect as
a consumer format. any joe user that is capable of reproducing higher
orders will have a rig that can deal with arbitrary channel mappings and
normalisations.
as a convenient HOA interchange format, i'd be totally happy with
ACN/(S)N3D in any container that supports sparse data (i.e. handles
empty channels without significant storage or processing overhead, for
mixed order content).
i totally do not buy into endless lists of "this number of channels
means that..., except when...", and i don't care for backwards
compatibility. olden-style FuMa and a new standard can always peacefully
co-exist. but i don't want to have to explain to my grandchildren why
the normalisation doesn't make sense and the z-axis rotation-invariant
component keeps jumping around randomly from one order to the next.

(btw, i gues this is somewhat off-topic for ardour-users - if you wish
to discuss it further, feel free to take it over to sursound.)

best,

jörn


--
Jörn Nettingsmeier

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik

Audio and event engineer
Ambisonic surround recordings

http://stackingdwarves.net
[phone]


_______________________________________________
Ardour-Users mailing list
ardour-users@...
http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.org