optimus
Whoa! This is getting far too complex for my meagre brain.
 

Well, you did ask......

paulo

Kev999

sharke
...I'm not sure I buy the disc saving explanation...

 
I agree. It won't save anything if the WAV file corresponding to the original large clip is still in the Audio folder.

 
When I'm done with the tracking side of the project, I "save as" to another location. I have always been under the impression that this copies only the audio that is actually used in the project and discards the rest. Are you saying that this is incorrect?

 
No, that's certainly correct. But it only saves HDD space if you delete the original project.

Kev999

paulo

Kev999

sharke
...I'm not sure I buy the disc saving explanation...

 
I agree. It won't save anything if the WAV file corresponding to the original large clip is still in the Audio folder.

 
When I'm done with the tracking side of the project, I "save as" to another location. I have always been under the impression that this copies only the audio that is actually used in the project and discards the rest. Are you saying that this is incorrect?

 
No, that's certainly correct. But it only saves HDD space if you delete the original project.

Yup, obviously.

I just tested remove silence and it does not perform a bounce, so the file size is unchanged. Simple test to prove to yourself:

1.  Create a project, insert the same discrete audio clip from the media browser (I grabbed an 8 bar loop and inserted it once at bar 3, then again at bar 30 - clip used was "DMS CPC PT2 05 E MINOR CHORDS 138 BPM.wav").
2. Check the audio folder, two discrete clips (these are identical, both 2401KB).
3. Select both clips and bounce to new clip (creates one file, size 24.122MB).
4. Save As (checking "copy all audio with project", and the 24.122MB file moves).
5. Run Remove Silence (I used default settings), clip size changes, but no bounce occurs (audio is still 24.122MB).
6. Save As (but this time check "copy all audio with project" and "Create one file per clip").
7. This save as renders new audio files (one per clip) (clip 1 = 6387KB (due to the silent tail), clip 2 = 5517KB (as at the end of the track so has no tail).

Again, "Remove Silence" unto itself does nothing to the underlying audio (no bounce occurs). What does change file size is the "Create one file per clip" in the save as dialog (render does occur for this).
 
Just to be clear on the original point for folks this is confusing - a "clip" is a window into an underlying wav file (what you are telling the DAW to use). Manipulating this window does not change the underlying file unless it is bounced/rendered, which is a "destructive edit" (the clip will no longer have access to the original file). "Destructive edit" in this case does not actually delete the original file (it is still in the audio folder), but does assign the clip (window) to a different file.

Yup.... I have seen those kind of pics and screen shots and many of them look, quite obviously to be loops that were dragged in and placed.
 
And yeah.... if I have the time to spare/waste, or it's noticeable.... I will use one of several methods, depending on the mood I'm in, to remove the noise between phrases with a mic recording..... I generally either process audio/mute, or use envelopes .... both have the same effect as deleting a clip without making the wave look all chopped up in the track view with a bunch of clips.

 
When I asked the forum about this after watching the speed comping video it was explained to me that songs may indeed be assembled from a bunch of short separate takes.  One reason was to save the singer's voice, no point having them repeat an enter song to develop or fix a phrase.
 
I can't help but think that if you assemble a song from a bunch of blocks, it'll sound like it.  That's fine for something like EDM which is obviously built from blocks, but I wouldn't apply the process to something like classical music where any change to the noise floor is very apparent.
 

Most pop songs look like they do in PT because it can.  There are a couple of things you don't want to see getting made - legislation, sausage and pop music.  Everything is beat matched - nothing can be off the grid.  Nothing not the slightest untuned, no accidents (and we aren't talking about notes).  A lot of the tools that exist were to fix mistakes.  Now it is used to fix what is right.  So what is integral to EDM and DM is now mainstream and squeezes the life out of rock and even pop, cause life is slop.  Or at least rock and roll was.  It was about emotion much more than precision.
 
Of course, major productions used to have great players.  I think the Wrecking Crew movie is out - everyone should see it.  Them boys can play.  And they also added that indefinable something that is what music is about.  The walking bass line from "These boots are made for walking" was something Carol Kane, the bassist, came up with on the spot.  And basically defined the song and walking bass lines forever more.  Now even I can sound as tight as Ms. Kane, but it doesn't mean PT will come up with the intro to the song on its own.  But if that walking bass got played in the break, it is easy as pie to copy and paste a walking bass line for the intro.  Maybe fix a few notes up so it doesn't sound exactly the same or put it in a better key going in.  But it won't provide the genius to do it.  And for that you have to cut it into a phrase or bar.
 
@
 
 

It's not an entirely dismal outlook, AT. I'm a regular fan of a TV show called "Later with Jools Holland". Look for it if you're not familiar with it. Live music at its best.
 
The fact that nobody buys recorded music anymore has a potential silver lining: live music might make a comeback as a result, and not just mega-acts in mega-venues.

bitflipper
The fact that nobody buys recorded music anymore has a potential silver lining: live music might make a comeback as a result, and not just mega-acts in mega-venues.

Having attended a few very small venue concerts in recent years, there's an incredible richness to the experience that has nothing to do with precision or mistakes or anything technical.  It all happens at the level of the relationship with the performer/s, something completely absent in recorded music.
 

Video editing software screen shots and tutorials have the same "clip-confetti" look as the DAW screens. Granted, a video (the art formerly known as film or cinema) is practically always a bunch of clipped shots taped together (well, not "Russian Ark" or "Rope"), but for visual arts the age of linear A and B roles is long gone. It's the age of Non-Linear Editing and that applies not only music and video--it may not be so visually apparent in a word processor tutorial, but NLE is there in the typed word as well. (Hah, what is the essence of blogging, if not a rebellious (and futile) linear throwback away from the totally NLE internet?) The arbitrary lines between pre- and production and post- (in music, in video, in publishing in--you name it) have blurred and are melting away (3D printers for sculpting, anyone?). "Non-Linear" is certainly a different approach to creativity (NLC), but is it a lesser approach? Was linear better?