Yes, this precision of Kevoin's is what I meant too:
> ... I was referring to a basic, run-of-the-mill
> fade-in fade-out, as in a linear or other amplitude
> envelope which affects a selected area. Some editors
> have this as a part of the core edit functionalty (as
> one of 4 or 5 choices in their "Edit" menu: cut, past,
> reverse, mix, fade-in/out, etc).
(Pardon me to be not that firm in the new terms; I'm used to
analogous, literally "manual" catting/montage.)
In the same vein, the other remark referred to "level" control:
Take two pieces of sound recorded at different events, or taken from
different files; quite probably, the overall level/volume of these
pieces would not be similar. Thus I would have to do an additional,
intermediary step to play/record one of the pieces through the mixer
in order to bring the the volume/level of it up or down, respectively.
A somewhat clumsy procedure; and one rather of "handicrafting" too
(even if Aumix for instance, nicely gives precise number posititions
ofr the rulers which does help a little to get consistent results.)
Ahn, and that remark from Erik that Conrad intends to do something about
the key bindings is GREAT news !
// Heimo Claasen // <hammer at revobild dot net> // Brussels 2002-10-27