[studiorecorder] Re: Are there still plans to enhance Studio Recorder?
- From: "Hamit Campos" <hamitcampos@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 16:21:58 -0400
Agreed. I was just commenting on the other guy's statement on trying other
things is all, as well as reflecting on a comment I made ages ago when the
multi track thing first came up. I figured even back then it may not fit,
but I guessed also it wouldn't hurt to ask.
-----Original Message-----
From: studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neal Ewers
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 11:58 AM
To: studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [studiorecorder] Re: Are there still plans to enhance Studio
Recorder?
Hi, I don't think it is SR's job to cover everything that is not accessible
via other recording applications. The point of Larry's message was that they
were going to work on things that enhanced spoken word content. Surround
sound, for example, is not something one uses for spoken word content except
in very infrequent situations. So, let's support the goals of APH and be
very thankful that we have what we have and that we may have more, but it's
the more that fits the product audience that is important here. So again, I
am back to spoken word content.
Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hamit Campos
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 9:12 AM
To: studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [studiorecorder] Re: Are there still plans to enhance Studio
Recorder?
You're right. Thing is, some of the other solutions aren't accessible.
That's why the first time some one brought up multitrack, I asked about
multi channel. See cause the thing is things like Pro Tools aint accessible.
Yeah Sound Forge Pro is multi channel, but not multi track. So you can't
inport something from a Sound-Devices 788-T to convert into a 7.1 surround
sound file. Or the new thing now which only Pro Tools will do Dolby Atmos.
That's 62.2 surround sound.I know SR is for audio books and spoken stuff,
and so they may not do stuff for movie audio design or ambiance recording,
but like mom says, you don't loos anything by asking. So I just brought it
up when some one brought up multitrack the first time. But I see your point.
Just remember that though. Some things especially things llike Pro Tools
aren't accessible. I here from a friend that the virsion of Sonar that can
do surround sound isn't accessible either.
-----Original Message-----
From: studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of jane kronheim
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 6:08 AM
To: studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [studiorecorder] Re: Are there still plans to enhance Studio
Recorder?
Hi all,
This is Roger Cicchese from Voices of Xperience, in New Hampshire, a regular
SR user. While I recognize the limitations of SR, and its many benefits, as
a long time audio production specialists (over 40 years) I've learned one
important thing. One size does not fit all and it never will. We use all
kinds of software and many outboard pieces of hardware, both analog and
digital. There's an old saying: "if wishes were horses, then beggars would
ride." And while all the ideas that people have for improving SR are great
to read about, learning how to use other options makes a lot more sense.
Roger Cicchese
On 5/1/13, Peter Torpey <ptorpey00@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Agreed with all of your comments below.
>
> First, Studio Recorder is a wonderfully accessible and intuitive
> program to use. We use it all the time in doing the first cut of
> edits for our Eyes On Success radio show/ podcast (www.EyesOnSuccess.net).
>
> I too would really find it useful to have multi-track editing
> capabilities as well as the ability to use available pluhg-ins. Even
> for something as "simple" as a podcast, it is often useful to have
> multi-track editing capabilities and we often have to perform certain
> tasks that require various plug-ins. For our show, then, we do the
> final edits using another program (which is not nearly as accessible,
> but does have many of these features).
>
> All that being said, I would guess that adding these cabilities to
> Studio Recorder would require a reasonably substantial development
> effort and APH developers just can't do everything.
>
> But, if it were possible, enhancingthe capabilities of Studio Recorder
> to meet more advanced requirements for today's sophisticated
> production requirements would b great.
>
> --Pete
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 1, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Harry Brown <wd8oep2464@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I also am in support of multitracking! This will make SR even better,
> and as a matter of fact, it will make it the easiest multitrack
> software to use, because of all the windows commands it already has,
> but then also, it would have multitracking available!
> Harry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Jamie Pauls <jamiepauls@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2013 6:19 PM
> *Subject:* [studiorecorder] Are there still plans to enhance Studio
> Recorder?
>
> Greetings to the APH development staff and the list in general:
>
>
>
> Several months ago there was discussion of possible enhancements to
> Studio Recorder, but Larry was pretty frank about the fact that
> resources at APH were tied up with several very important projects.
> I'm curious if there is currently any work being done on a new version
> of Studio Recorder that would address things such as plugin support
> and maybe even true multitrack capability. I realize this would take
> the product into a whole new area, and I understand that this simply
> may not be practical in the forseeable future, but I am still curious
> as to where things stand. I'm hoping APH will be able to comment a bit
> on this. I continue to be a very happy SR user along with other
> programs
such as Goldwave and Reaper.
>
>
>
> Take care and have a great week.
>
Other related posts:
