How to copy between projects in Audio Cleaning Lab?

XEyedBear wrote on 5/7/2012, 12:35 PM

I want to copy a section of a vinyl recording made in one project into a different project, overwriitng the date in that receiving project. I can see no way of doing this.

I can switch between projects via the File menu - not elegant, but it works.

I can copy in any project - but have no way of knowing how much of the current project I am copying - not helpful.

There is no 'Paste' option in the edit menu - even though the help file discusses this option. It seems like either the program or the help file is wrong.

There is an 'insert' option in the edit menu, but that's greyed out. The help file does not mention the insert option. It seems like either the program or the help file is wrong.

I can't even display the 2 projects together, which would allow me to align or synchronise them, to ensure the 'copy/paste' operation I would like to do does not create any audible artifacts - that's not helpful.

So, an operation which is straightforward in my GNU-based audio editor does not appear to be supported - or is at least very well concealed, in MAGIX Audio Cleaning Lab.

Is their a solution?

Comments

john-auvil wrote on 5/7/2012, 1:27 PM

I am not sure I follow entirely, but I am going to take my best shot at this...

I do not think you can have two projects open at the same time in the same interface... You can with the Samplitude Music Studio program, which is also a multi-track arrangement and editor.

Audio Cleaning Lab does have two track mode, so you do have the ability of copying to a second track, but this is going to be within the same project.

If you have recorded side "A" of a vinyl record, and you want to take the whole side A to another project... or if you want to take parts of a recording, then I would recommend that you export out that material as .wav and import it into the new or existing project as a audio file.

I was playing around with this and I can have two instances of the Audio Cleaning Lab MX open at the same time, and I can copy from one Audio Cleaning Lab to another using the Copy and Insert feature. This works... to a degree. The problem I see is that the project length is not naturally extended when you paste in new material beyond the first paste... example: I have 5 song in a project. I want songs 1 and 4 in a new project. Each song in the original project is an individual object (meaning I can move them around at will to change the order if I wanted) I can select song 1 in the original project, right click it and select copy of CTRL+C and then I can go to the other Audio Cleaning Lab and click into the track area (making sure the play cursor is at the beginning and press CTRL+V to paste or insert).

This writes the material I copied. But, if I do the same thing for track 4, I do not get the entire track as my new project VIP only has a fraction of space from the end of song 1 to the end of the track. For me to make this work, I have to move the first song to the right, to allow the correct amount of time to be viewed... this is very cumbersome, but possible,

My suggestion is still to export each song as a individual file (that would be done by adding track markers at the correct locations) then you can import each into a new arrangement at will, this building the project you desire.

Audio Cleaning Lab is really for restoration, not project or compilation building... though I use it as such from time to time, mine is still based from exporting projects out or directly burning to disc so I can import each track individually.

Is that what you are looking to do, create a new project with audio parts from different projects?

john-auvil wrote on 5/7/2012, 1:30 PM

Also, I think you meant over writting the data from one project to another project; I do not think that is possible with Audio Cleaning Lab, whereas it is in the Samplitude Music Studio... at least as best I can tell... if I am following that thought correctly.

XEyedBear wrote on 5/8/2012, 4:54 AM

Thanks for taking the time to contribute 2 articles.

I note your distinction between 'project' and 'data' - and my confusing of the two. In fact the topic of my next question will be 'what is a project'?

I also note your comment that Audio Cleaning Lab is mostly a restoration tool, not a multi-track editing tool. Yes, I take your point here. I do have Pro-tools if I wanted to do multi-track editing. But all I'm trying to do is to transfer my (emotionally) precious collection of vinyl to some long lasting digital format (to be decided - but probably not CD). As part of that process I found that one of my most treasured disks had been damaged so severely that the stylus jumped about 4 seconds of music. I couldn't correct that with the available tools, at my current level of understanding. I discovered that by playing that section of the disk at a much lower tracking force, I was able to keep the stylus in the groove, and get some reasonable sound which could be processed with the available tools.

I did not want to record the whole disk at this stylus force settting, because it introduced other distortions. What I did want to do was 'overlay' the original recording with the new recording (of a slightly different length). This has proved impossible in this software.

The only work around I have found is to append the 'new' repair recording onto the end of the original recording, cut out the 'bad' part of the old recording, copy/paste the repair section from the end of the recording into the gap, and managed the problem of different lengths of sound by doing a lot of hand calculation (which should not have been necessary).

This experience has demonstrated to me that this product is difficult, cumbersome and confusing to use, with limited functionality in some, key, areas. The 'User Guide' has the fatal weakness of referring the reader to the passge currently being read, to get more information. The explanation of the 'spectral analysis' function is so obscure as to be un-usable.

The big advantage of the product is that is has a partial attempt to create a work flow approach to restoration, with a set of easy to use (but easy to over-use) restoration tools. Some of these are not well explained at all.

john-auvil wrote on 5/8/2012, 9:47 AM

I can agree that the documentation could use some fine tuning. I have used Audio Cleaning Lab since it was release in 2000/2001. This product was an annually released program, and I own just about every one of the products. On top of that, I also use the Magix owned Pro Audio Suite called Sequoia. This also has a restoration suite.

Now that I know a bit more of the situation you are in, I will share with you what I would do. This is in no way the only method, but it is how I would proceed.

First, vinyl that require this specialized recording method you discovered, need the track(s) recorded individually, and each would be processed for cleaning, than exported as .wav. The rest of that vinyl would also be recorded, but the track(s) that need replaced would be edited out but using the "cut mouse mode" to isolate that track (this might require some zoom in, zoom out to get the precision in the cut). Once these tracks are isolated, the "project" treats them as a individual "object".

What is a project? - In my own words, the project is a container file or EDL meaning Edit Decision List. It does not actually contain the audio, it is merely a file that contains the data of where the material used in the creation process is found. Projects will be labeled as VIP which my understanding means Virtual Project.

What is an object? - The object is a container box within the project which holds the media (audio in this case). When you edit a audio file within the Audio Cleaning Lab, you are editing the container box or... object. This creates a NON-Destructive edit as it does NOTHING to the actual audio only the container box the audio is found. So if you where to cut (as mentioned in my workflow) then you are placing a virtual begin or end point on the object, this is telling the project new start or stop points. The object also will contain any other edits, such as the cleaning effects. This is important to understand, because if you were to record one single song from a vinyl, process it for cleaning, then save and close the program, the actual recorded audio when played outside this project is unchanged. The reason is that the cleaning is at this point only part of the saved project. It requires that you export or burn the material out of the program into a NEW file for the effects or edits to usable outside the Audio Cleaning Lab.

That might sound confusing, and perhaps it is... again, I have just used Magix software so long it is somewhat second nature to me, so my explanations might need tweaking themselves to be more comprehensive.

Once you have project with the removed objects, you can import the previously edited material (the track with was recorded individually because of special needs) into the project with the remaining material. Now, you can process any final edits, mastering and even simple track naming for ID3 tags or what not.

What I do with my vinyl records once recorded, edited is burn them to CD (for archival purposes) and for daily use... I use AAC because I broke down, cried and got myself a iPod for daily listening. I also on occasions back the entire project, all its media to disc or external hard drives.

I hope this helps, but I am more than willing to go into more detail if need be.

XEyedBear wrote on 5/8/2012, 5:45 PM

Thanks for your continuing explanations. With your permission, I would like to disagree with you about the documentation requiring some 'fine tuning'.

I can remember my first course in jungle warfare training almost half a century ago. The environment was new, strange, a little terrifying at times, with many ways of dying either slowly and painfully, or quickly and painfully. But mostly I remember how slow the progress was and what a lot of noise one made (also a fatal mistake). So many things caught in your clothing, or gripped your boots, nothing made sense, there was no 'manual'. That's exactly how I feel now, after about 1 week of trying to use this product. It is, without any doubt in my mind, the worst documented sophisticated product I have tried to work with in my life.

The pdf user guide I have is written for the most part in valid English words, but give the very convincing impression that it was not composed by human being. Well, certainly not one whose intention was to provide guidance to a (new) user.

It is possibly) effective for a skilled user - but this implies two errors of design judgement: either the needs of a new user were not understood by the document designer, or he/she designed it for a skilled user who, by definiton, does not require it.

So much functonality goes undocumented or unexplained. My mind is now overloaded with examples, but I pick 2 at random: what are 'classic settings'?; what does 'Hi Fi sound (for music)' mean? - Actually they are rhetorical questions. My current guess is that less then 70% of the product's functions are described and less than 10% of that is described adequately.

As installed the product creates a 'Projects' directory on my system - and puts nothing into that drectory. All projects seem to be named 'New' - and contain a multiplicity of file types - including, but not limited to, VIP, H0, HDP, NRW, NRWTMP, cue. There is no explanation what these files are for and whether or not they should be retained. Using the option to delete old projects still leaves a lot of these files lying around, with no way of knowing whether they are required or not.

The file naming actions of the product are bizarre, to say the least. Trying to save an exported file results in the system insisting on giving it a file name of NEW. No matter how many times I set it to what i want, if I make any single change in the file saving options I get a file named 'New' - again.

I have no problem with the concept of a project container. The 'non-destructive edit' approach is one that I have been used to for some years with Adobe Lightroom and ACR. In the worst case I have to remember to manage just 1 additonal file - the side-car file - but mostly that is hidden. Magix seems to have a multiplicity of files. Audacity is sophisticated, but even easier to use, with its database approach.

There are aspects of this product I like - in concept: the work flow approach; the idea of user adjustable presets (if one has some idea of what they are doing!), the non-destructive edit. But the company that has developed the product appears to have been infected with the open-source rogue developer syndrome: "I bet I can make my system more complex and harder to use than yours". This is a macho-game for 20-something year old junior programmers, You don't really score any points for deliberately frustrating the end-user (well, the rational person doesn't).

I'm going to give it another week or so trying to fight my way through the user guide jungle pdf (which, by the way, I found only by accident in the program installation directory - why there? What not tell me that there is such a file and put it somewhere obvious, like on the desktop, or in the Proejcts file?). I spent many hours looking for any product documentation on the web but there s nothing. I tried using some of the on-line tutorials. Now, they really irritated me: firstly the screen shots are so small as to make it very difficult to see what the tutor is doing. The dialog is at a fast past - too fast to keep up with for an English-only speaker and there is not enough real-estaet on my 24 inch screen to have both the product and the tutorial runnning at the same time in order to follow along with the tutorial.

But the bad part of the tutorial is that it is based on the archtiecture of 'do this, then this and then this...'. This is a well-understood process for not providing any teaching value; it only generates a memory exercise challenge. It imparts no understanding. It should be telling me that to achieve this goal I need to follow these seps because step 1achieves this requirement, step 2 that requirement etc. If you understand the principles, you don't have to remember the method. You can find the tools which implement the process.

What irritates me is that we have known these human factors design principles for more than 30 years now. Why ignore them in a modern product?

Ooops - this really isn't a question, is it?