Comparing with copy & paste in a word processor won’t do.
In image editing apps like Photoshop you can set the amount of opacity of the copied selection that you’d want to paste, so that it will mix more (transparent) or less (override) with the underlying image that it’s copied to.
Since SpectraLayers in ways aims to be a ”Photoshop for audio” and treat audio in a way analog to images it would be nice to have the ability to set the ”opacity” (i.e. the degree of mixing, or audio copy see thru if you want) of the selected/copied audio that you wish to paste.
Wow, a lot of discussion here, so an awful lot to cover off!
I’ll start responding here
Here we go, yes, albeit more time consuming, this is how SL is designed, in my short experience: non-destructive
1_paste source audio to another layer>
2_move or copy with transform tool to the area
user might consider using different colors for layers (I do)
or
destructive
clone stamp tool and or eraser tool
with SLP, the one thing I cannot (un)do outside of limited per session undos or from session to session is track clone stamp moves…it is purely destructive unless user keeps far too many layers to manage
undo limitations have been covered on this forum before. The SLP undo limitation is by design to avoid file-bloat.
Manage Layers
um, the program is named SpectraLayers for a reason. In SL, we manage layers, that is the point!
It took me months to develop my layer coloring scheme which works for me. Not everyone will agree with my choices.
I’ll try to grab some more quotes from this thread and annoy the board with my perspectives and deep ignorance.
Rob, thanks for that great video.
Indeed, SLP covers (or attempts to cover) what you are asking for with Clone Stamp like @J_Harry had talked about.
Yes, different workflows. Rob, in your video, you show the stereo channels. I, personally, always downmix so I’m dealing with a full screen of what “looks like” mono…(most of my source material is mono. I’m just saying: “workflows” in agreement with @J_Harry
Yes, Clone Stamp and any preview tool in SL can be tedious. It really depends upon workflow.
So back to @Rob_Walker paste to selection; I don’t see SLP working like this, it’s an RX thing. I don’t expect CuBase to be Reason or Reaper or PT, either.
In SLP, the way I handle the bubble video is on a much more macro scale. I’m not putting 15s in a buffer and expecting SLP to fill the target buffer area into a subsequent selection because that is not a tool I have ever used in SLP. Again, to achieve such a thing, I’d copy that buffer to another layer and then either move the copied selection with Transform tool or move the selection (buffer) somewhere near the area I want to edit and use clone tool.
But, in my typical workflow, I wouldn’t do any of that; I would work in the same area as what I want to edit. I create a trash layer and mute it; use whatever methods to move unwanteds to the trash layer and then cover the holes with clone stamp from the same area where I edited out unwanteds.
Is my workflow more time consuming? Very likely yes, takes longer.
I don’t have all the answers, no, no, no, I surely do not…I have a lot of experience performing NR on location recordings of ambience and human voice interviews…mostly in mono. I really do not edit very much music.
And that leads to the types of uses for SL.
We have post for film users who perform NR on ambience, FX and dialog;
music unmixers and music editors;
then there are the creatives working to invent new sounds with transforms;
and of course, scientists and software testers.
Maybe some linguistic and forensics specialists?
I dunno, I focus on what film and TV call dialog, FX and Backgrounds.
Thanks everyone for citing my examples with text editing. I was more so using the example in comparison to how DAW editing on a timeline, and how user expectations are informed and aligned with certain terminology from other program usages. The example overall was to highlight that there IS a difference obviously with a spectral tools, and that we do not have to be limited by the terminology.
@Marshall is completely correct in that there are many more options potential available in the SL to explore these types of workflows. The opacity/mix settings suggestion is a great example.
Thanks also to @ctreitzell to contextualizing some of my feedback as well. I will counter that yes…some of your workflow suggestions appear more time consuming, and agree the operations with certain tools are tedious - but I think that is what we are all navigating. We all have different workflows and expectations, but I appreciate this space to discuss use cases and operational improvements that could be had by exposing each other to new possibilities. There is very clearly a existing paradigm of operation that exists here with more seasoned SL users, and I am trying to learn and understand more of that as well. But I will counter that being able to accomplish something quickly, with the best results as possible is unfortunately the race that we all run at some point. I am sure with the existing tools and workflows, there are still areas where time can be bought back from being able to work more efficiently? (there always is ins’t there )
I think this succinctly frames up the whole feature request I am trying to navigate. Does a paste special type function, or clone stamp better own this?
Wonderful! Man, this board has helped me tons, thanks to so many helpful members. I logged my teething and experiences on this board. I deeply value the discussion to help each other arrive at highly efficient workflows
own? hmmm, the issue with the clone stamp is it follows your cursor
BEFORE selecting the source for Clone Stamp, set the size of your Clone Stamp brush; if you set that brush to 15s, computer will most likely hang (guaranteed it will hang!)
I mean, all workflows clearly depend upon the desired end result.
For “dialog”, I always run Unmix Noisy Speech first and work on 3 or 4 layers after saving a saftey.
Just wanted to grab these quick before moving on with my day!
Yes, this is a destructive workflow that I am asking for, anyone coming from RX will also have this context as that is the core mechanic behind “paste to selection” (just stating so we are all on the same page).
This hit me pretty hard. The one thing that I am noticing in my transitioning to using SL more and more, is the absolute time taken to manage layers… I am really trying not to fall into a time or organizational trap, or context change with an objective task at hand, but I will say that SL is potentially not great at mitigating any of this. I know this is a strength of the tool, but when all is said at the end of the day, I need finished audio, and not an elegantly organized session that I will not return to, nor do I constantly want to audition layers to see where x ended up from whatever module process I’ve slapped on. (This is a “it’s not you, it’s me” problem, I’m just venting now).
Thank you for upping my account so I can post videos!
Here is the 1st example I wanted to post where Thomas Boykin uses it:
Here is a video of me trying out SpectraLayers and round tripping parts of it to RX (as I cant get the paste to selection to work, otherwise I think SL would have me covered in this example):
Maybe it gives an idea of how we work in a real world example. I believe its simpler and faster to copy and paste than using the clone stamp tool. The function paste to selection is there in SL, it just doesn’t respect the paste to selection in terms of time and frequency selection.
If someone can point me how to do this kind of work in SL (despite possibly other terminology). I would love it!
Bonus if someone can address this:
2nd Question. I love the unmix noisy speech, it is like having individual control over the roomtone on a clip to clip basis. Is there a way to drag the speech and noise layers of multiple clips from SL to protools? Right now I do it on a clip per clip basis and its quite time consuming to line it all up (especially if you want a bit of extra handles)
We can use ARA to batch process a whole bunch of clips, but is there a way to give it handles and sync multiple clips? In the video above you can see its easy enough with 1 clip and its layers, but for a scene with lets say 15 clips, it does slow you down a bit to realign everything to get the maximum amount of control. Probably its a lot of work, but count it as a future request from me if at all in the realms of possibility, it would help a lot!
Just having the possibility to have a bit of handles would already speed up the work by quite a bit. In order to have handles now, my work around is to extend the clip on a separate track, align and cut all the layers, rinse and repeat for 15 clips.
Maybe off topic, but the workflow I think you are trying to achieve from a speed standpoint is using Hush Pro in audio suite to spit out the elements of a dialogue separation… The only faster way would be to use something like soundflow in PT but SL ARA does not play well with the API at the moment, so there is limited functionality that you can really get at.
I would counter if this level of extreme granularity is helpful for the mix, or just becoming a time bottle neck for the sake of having the control? Assuming you are a one person setup, as dialogue editors would have to qualify all the extra tracks needed at mix stage with what mix stage is looking for? Maybe that is the case, just curious overall!
I might try this, and it sounds insane, but you might get more control short term, in keeping multiple instances of your sources in ARA before extracting them, so that you have an understanding of all the layers in SL, then move after a few isolated clean up passes?
Tom’s video is again a great reference, and I am going to coin a new phrase for what it is we (RX peeps) are looking to achieve:
Clone from Selection = Select a target source on the time line. Copy to clipboard. Clone stamp then has an alternate setting, which can use the clipboard as the source, and then paint onto new targets based on the time and frequency content that has been captured to the clipboard.
Sure enough, at the moment I am often a one person taking care of it all, or together with the same colleague. Most of the time its not needed to split all tracks on layers as we have been getting by with “just” one layer for years.
But I believe the granularity of layers is what SL shines in. Sure, it does slow you down a bit, but the benefits are truly amazing.
Two recent examples where SL really helped:
1st example) One boom track where the footsteps were overwhelming but the Dialogue good. I split out onto two tracks and used a transient shaper to the “noise” track. It felt safer to have it this way than to commit to it, as this film had similair problems more times, so I could go back and forth between scenes to tweak it to get a similair sound.
2nd example) I had a scene where wind and rain picked up during the course of shooting. Unmix noisy speech was extremely useful and it was almoust like I could adjust how much “roomtone” I had to match all the clips together. I did it directly on ARA and committed the clips, but in hindsight I wish I had it on split tracks with long handles to smoothen it out or make small adjustments to the noise timbre when I had missed it on first pass.
@Puma0382@Joey_Kapish Hi all, sorry for being away for the past couple months, things have been pretty dense on my side… And there’s so many messages it’s hard to follow.
If I understand well, I’m being tagged regarding an equivalent to RX’s “Paste to Selection”.
There’s indeed no such feature right now, but I’m adding this to the list for 13, it shouldn’t be too hard to implement.
That being said, for the purpose of covering sound with another sound, or repeating a specific sound, I would highly recommend having a look at the Clone Stamp tool. It’s a more precise, organic way of doing that, and it provides more flexibility as well.
Feel free to tag me here or in other topics (even if you already did) if you feel my attention should be drawn to some subject in particular.
Hi @Robin_Lobel its great to finally see you here again mate!
Please, take a look at some of the issues myself and others have been facing with Spectralayers 12 in Nuendo 14, Win 11. For some of us it is unusable due to HIGH lagging off tools such as eraser, transfer, etc. (I think this happens with any tools that are “previewable”, but I’m not sure), even if we turn realtime preview to 0.
I have bought the update even after having issues during trial, thinking that a clean install of the OS would solve the issues, but they remain, so I’m stuck on 11.
Other problems include “sticky events” in ARA. You will work on an event, make it permanent, and then any other event you use SL on will show up as that one “sticky event” when you open it, and the only way to make it go away is to close everything, restart the computer, and so on.
Please, please, if you are able make solving these issues your top priority when it comes to Spectralayers. We need to be able to use it!
Thanks!
EDIT: I’m sorry for being a thoughtless prick. @Robin_Lobel I hope everything is well with you my friend. I’m very grateful for what we have here, just a bit anxious and frustrated. All the best to you!
Hi @henrique_staino I’ll definitely have a look at this tool lag issue. This is not something I can repro on my computers, so I’ll PM you at some point to run some extended tests.
Sorry I’m not sure I understand the sticky events issue. Could you please describe it again, more in details ? Or as a step by step, describing what you would expect, but what you see instead.
)
