|
|
|
07-12-2019, 09:46 AM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
zero crossing question
i see actions for finding a zero crossing but is there a way to get more accuracy like determining zero crossing based on compression or rarefaction?
thanks,
babag
|
|
|
07-12-2019, 10:12 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 6,551
|
I'm not sure you can get any more accurate than "it crossed zero between this sample and that sample".
|
|
|
07-12-2019, 11:04 AM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
right. maybe accuracy is the wrong word. cleaner might be better. it does make for a cleaner edit if the waveform is going in the right direction, as in compressing or rarefacting. i'm working with folks who don't want to use crossfades and this makes for cleaner work. i'd like to automate it if i can.
|
|
|
07-12-2019, 11:06 AM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: mostly inside my own head
Posts: 346
|
Are you looking to distinguish zero-crossings going negative-to-positive, versus positive-to-negative?
I'm intruiged! Are you using REAPER to process and edit non-audio data?
|
|
|
07-12-2019, 02:54 PM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
both, ideally. it's audio data. i'm talking to an audiobook company who edit with protools. because of the incredibly klunky way protools seems to handle its fades, they try to avoid ever using crossfades. that means that, when they do things like remove a breath and replace it with roomtone, they need extremely clean cut points for both the breath removal as well as the roomtone insertion. matching the compression/rarefaction could become an issue, therefore.
|
|
|
07-13-2019, 08:30 PM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 2,613
|
I've been doing audiobooks since the dawn of time and I've never heard of this, of avoiding crossfades in an editor due to a bug in how it creates them.
Besides, the solution is to switch to a DAW that doesn't have this issue, not stay with it and edit without crossfades. Nuts. You have Reaper, which doesn't have any issue with crossfades (that I know of), so this company's perceived problem with PT wouldn't apply. I utilize zero crossings a lot but not in audiobooks, and I do them all the time. If someone told me I had to edit an audiobook without using crossfades (and I use PT for about half of them) I would double the rate to them before starting.
I just Googled "ProTools crossfade problem" and "ProTools crossfade issue" and found nothing pertinent to this at all (though I stopped going to the PT forum on the Avid site years ago, FWIW)
Seriously, can you be more specific about what they are claiming? Working with zero crossings in place of crossfades adds a huge amount of time to the edit, because if you use good room tone that matches the session tone perfectly, and it's nice and steady and quiet, you can slap the regions/items together and only check fleetingly over the timing of the edit, because you know it's not clicking. If there's something audibly wrong with the edit you'll hear it and adjust. But doing 600 edits with zero crossings where you have to spend extra time on each edit checking if the crossings work silently is something I personally wouldn't agree to if the rate is by finished hour, as it generally is. And for a clean, in-the-clear edit it's one thing. But fixing breaths without crossfades? Kind of not possible unless you make the cuts well before and after the word/breath and into clean room tone, which makes it impossible to pace, or at least adds minutes to each mouth noise edit.
Can you give more details? Thanks : )
__________________
The reason rain dances work is because they don't stop dancing until it rains.
|
|
|
07-14-2019, 10:18 AM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3wp...t&index=5&t=1s
at 8:54
not about protools bugs but about faster workflow. they try to standardize all of their editors. not my place to judge. if it were my choice i'd agree with you but they seem to work in a multi-user, corporate environment where compatibility and speed are paramount. honestly, though, i'd think this kind of question might be more important in music and sound design contexts over something like dialog editing and audio books.
|
|
|
07-14-2019, 07:27 PM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 2,613
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by babag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3wp...t&index=5&t=1s
at 8:54
not about protools bugs but about faster workflow. they try to standardize all of their editors. not my place to judge. if it were my choice i'd agree with you but they seem to work in a multi-user, corporate environment where compatibility and speed are paramount. honestly, though, i'd think this kind of question might be more important in music and sound design contexts over something like dialog editing and audio books.
|
Hi babag,
I don't work in a corporate environment but I do projects for different corporations. It's very important for them to have sets of standards and ways for the edited work to be done, that I'm totally on board for. I completely disagree with what he says about crossfades adding an element of problem when editing narration, but I think he may be referring to them in a different context. I send them finished audio, either unmastered or mastered. Crossfades add no time to the edit because they're either being automatically added to each edit or after finishing a chapter I add crossfades to all edits with one keystroke. These edit get rendered/duped to single wav files for the client. The only way I can see crossfades being an issue, which possibly is what he's referring to here, is if he sends you a DAW session of the project and wants a edited, but not rendered out, finished session with all edits still intact. That opens up the potential for crossfades to not be recreated on their end properly, although I have never had that happen, ever. Generally, if someone sends you a book to edit they only want finished audio back, so I don't think this is what he means, but I'm trying to figure out what : )
Faster workflow is #1, absolutely, and standardizing editing a well, but avoiding crossfades undermines that, as editing based on zero crossings first/crossfades as a second tier edit, is slower, certainly no faster, than using crossfades, and the risk of an audible edit is far greater even when the zero crossings meet. It's not that using zero crossing as a first tier for editing is unreasonable, but at the rates that audiobooks pay these days, and at the amount of quality that gets compromised due to the sheer amount of projects that get pushed through for the minuscule budgets alloted, it just doesn't jibe with me.
I'm curious what he's referring to, as my point isn't to cast aspersion on him. I've just never heard of this. Audiobook editing is a different kind of animal than dialog editing for film or narrative for documentary. It's a about the "bang, bang, bang, bang" workflow. The fastest way to do it that retains the quality (pacing, accuracy, no mistakes) is the best. Of course people have their own ways that are best for them and DAWs that are most comfortable for those weeklong all day burning through chapters, and some clients just want the audio right and others want it done with certain tools.
__________________
The reason rain dances work is because they don't stop dancing until it rains.
|
|
|
07-14-2019, 11:00 PM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
i don't disagree with anything you're saying but it's not my call so i just want to do what they want and am looking for the best way to do it, however screwy it seems. i assume they want both a wav file as well as protools session as delivery.
frankly, though, it seems like this would be more important in making music than in audiobooks. seems like being able to match compression and rarefaction in making a loop would be helpful.
thanks,
babag
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:26 PM.
|