Merge = event structure is too complex


when you receive AAF from editor it’s always multiple mono… don’t get it really… hate it :stuck_out_tongue:
anyway. so you have to select all tracks… make sure some monos are not hidden in some stereos or some stereos on 2 different pairs of stereos… or some stereos where only one part has been edited with some fades etc… nightmare.
what does not help is that error message from nuendo saying event structure is to complex.
i have these 2 mono tracks i want to bring back to stereo. in 1h program there’s 1 region that has 10 frames more… now enjoy.

why doesn’t nuendo compare material and drops markers where there’s a difference between tracks ?
is there a way to logical editor this ?

or, more importantly why is there now way to copy multiple monos to a multichannel track and just ignore a 2 sample long difference in fade length?

If the video editor sends you a mess of an omf/aaf file, best thing to do is to hard left, hard right and link the respective channels. The file is a chaos to begin with, either link the channels or replace the aaf files with the original ones by editing accordingly to the aaf.
These are standard procedures in Post. Even if Nuendo allowed you to merge in that way, you’ll might end up with a bigger headache later on, by the looks of it, you might ended up with a specific score half stereo half mono.


nnaa… i mean if it’s a few regions for music ok . but if audio material i can’t do anything in mix with 2 tracks combined.
and resync audio same, if a few tracks ok. but i prefer to merge even if i choose to resync after.
i understand the “standard procedures in Post” but a standrard procedure used to be sync sound with clap i’m happy i don’t have to do that anymore. technology evolve and allows new solutions. i would be happy to see merge function beeing improved

Hey, I was just trying to help, and yes, the standard procedure really is to “clap”, “clack”, or have timecode from origin.
But that was not your question.


If the video editor makes a mess out of his project, then twice the time is needed to clean up the mess.

What you can do is pan these tracks hard left & right and lock them together.
You will end up with two faders moving in sync, but at least you have managed to work around the problem.


Not sure how to do it with a logical editor, but your first question is basically a good feature request. We’ve had this discussion before here on the forum and I would personally like a couple of options:

  1. Either as you say drop markers or something for where there’s a mismatch. It seems intuitive that it should be possible to do without too much fuss, but then again I’m not a programmer so what do I really know?

  2. Force the merge anyway and just throw up a warning that there were problems. At least this way we have the option of working with a sub-par edit and address on the fly basically.

As for workarounds - other than what was mentioned I’ve gotten fairly good over the years at just looking at two adjacent tracks and seeing where they aren’t symmetrical. 99% of the time I can spot inconsistencies and address them before I merge. It’s typically either clips that ended up going even-odd tracks instead of the other way around like all other clips, mismatched fades, or ‘stray’ mono files like nat or fx that ended up on one of two channels by mistake. It sucks having to go through that but as Fredo says if they give you a ‘poor’ AAF then it is what it is. If it takes me another 5 minutes for a 42min show (USA) then that’s something I can deal with. If it takes me far longer then I likely have bigger problems with the AAF anyway and are dealing with an inexperienced, indifferent or poorly paid editor.