Thread: [Audacity-devel] loop-play
A free multi-track audio editor and recorder
Brought to you by:
aosiniao
From: Shane M. <smu...@um...> - 2003-05-27 06:23:33
|
The loop-play function is way cool. I'm not sure how whether adding a whole new button for it is a great idea (I think that only audio processing gearheads would ever use the function), but in the meantime, I made shift-play engage loop-play. I also updated the tooltip. An alternate idea would be to have double-click on play operate loop-play. |
From: Tino M. <a.t...@ch...> - 2003-05-27 06:40:02
|
Op di 27-05-2003, om 08:22 schreef Shane Mueller: > The loop-play function is way cool. I'm not sure how whether adding a > whole new button for it is a great idea (I think that only audio > processing gearheads would ever use the function), but in the meantime, > I made shift-play engage loop-play. I also updated the tooltip. An > alternate idea would be to have double-click on play operate loop-play. Yes, on second though, a button would be too much, I agree. Shift-click is a good way to invoke this. But perhaps there could be some visible indication when we are in looped playing mode? Perhaps by altering the play button in some way? --Tino Meinen |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-05-27 07:00:19
|
Tino Meinen wrote: > Op di 27-05-2003, om 08:22 schreef Shane Mueller: > >>The loop-play function is way cool. I'm not sure how whether adding a >>whole new button for it is a great idea (I think that only audio >>processing gearheads would ever use the function), but in the meantime, >>I made shift-play engage loop-play. I also updated the tooltip. An >>alternate idea would be to have double-click on play operate loop-play. > > Yes, on second though, a button would be too much, I agree. > Shift-click is a good way to invoke this. > But perhaps there could be some visible indication when we are in looped > playing mode? > Perhaps by altering the play button in some way? Actually that's a great idea: When you press the shift key, the play button should automatically change to a loop button! That's a great way for a discoverable interface. Anyone want to draw a loop graphic? - Dominic > --Tino Meinen > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. > If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a > relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. > Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge > _______________________________________________ > Audacity-devel mailing list > Aud...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-27 07:54:46
|
On Tue, 27 May 2003 00:02:59 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > Tino Meinen wrote: > > Op di 27-05-2003, om 08:22 schreef Shane Mueller: > > > >>The loop-play function is way cool. I'm not sure how whether > >adding a>whole new button for it is a great idea (I think that > >only audio>processing gearheads would ever use the function), but > >in the meantime,>I made shift-play engage loop-play. I also > >updated the tooltip. An>alternate idea would be to have > >double-click on play operate loop-play. > > > > Yes, on second though, a button would be too much, I agree. > > Shift-click is a good way to invoke this. > > But perhaps there could be some visible indication when we are > > in looped playing mode? > > Perhaps by altering the play button in some way? > > Actually that's a great idea: When you press the shift key, the > play button should automatically change to a loop button! That's > a great way for a discoverable interface. Anyone want to draw a > loop graphic? i think I could but not right now. The new feature is really sweet. But will I survive :) if I suggest an extension of the feature? Let it be... 1. ... Select a region 2. Shift + Play. 3. While playing, change the region's duration with cursor (at the left or right or both sides). 4. The new region will be looped by playback -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Lee A. <le...@fa...> - 2003-05-28 02:18:00
|
On Tue, 27 May 2003, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > 1. ... Select a region > 2. Shift + Play. > 3. While playing, change the region's duration with cursor (at the > left or right or both sides). > 4. The new region will be looped by playback Here is the way Peak handels this, which I think is a very elegant. 1) select region 2) define as loop -- it then draws red markers as the looped region 3) press enable loop play button 4) play 5) drag the red markers to change the loop points in realtime I have a musician friend who uses Peak as a performance program in exactly the way Alexandre described. Other programs similar to Audacity: Both Logic Audio and Cubase have a single key which toggles loop play or not and ProTools has nothing but loop play i.e. a selection will always loop if it is selected and the user hits play. Personally, I like the ProTools method the best, since the act of making a selection and then pressing play sort of impiles that it would be a good idea to loop it. ProTools will not loop if there is no region selected. -l[e^2] ------------------------------ http://www.fallingforward.net/ people experimenting with music, art and technology |
From: Tino M. <a.t...@ch...> - 2003-05-29 13:51:37
|
Op wo 28-05-2003, om 04:14 schreef Lee Azzarello: > On Tue, 27 May 2003, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > not and ProTools has nothing but loop play i.e. a selection will always > loop if it is selected and the user hits play. > > Personally, I like the ProTools method the best, since the act of making a > selection and then pressing play sort of impiles that it would be a good > idea to loop it. ProTools will not loop if there is no region selected. Actually, that's an excellent idea! It makes a lot of sense. So as soon as the user makes a selection, the play button will display the looped play-button, indicating that by pressing it, the selection will be looped. When there is no selection at all, the play button is in its normal state and pressing it will play the project starting from the cursor position. I'm very much in favor, it is logical and intuitive. What do others think? Could we have this? --Tino Meinen |
From: Greg M. <mek...@ya...> - 2003-05-30 00:38:07
|
--- Tino Meinen <a.t...@ch...> wrote: > Op wo 28-05-2003, om 04:14 schreef Lee Azzarello: > > On Tue, 27 May 2003, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > > not and ProTools has nothing but loop play i.e. a selection will always > > loop if it is selected and the user hits play. > > > > Personally, I like the ProTools method the best, since the act of making a > > selection and then pressing play sort of impiles that it would be a good > > idea to loop it. ProTools will not loop if there is no region selected. > > Actually, that's an excellent idea! It makes a lot of sense. > So as soon as the user makes a selection, the play button will display > the looped play-button, indicating that by pressing it, the selection > will be looped. > When there is no selection at all, the play button is in its normal > state and pressing it will play the project starting from the cursor > position. > > I'm very much in favor, it is logical and intuitive. > What do others think? Many times when working with a selection, it is critical to know exactly how it starts and how it ends - to know if the selection boundaries are truly what you need. In this case it is critical that it play once since any looping would completely mask off knowledge of whether or not it starts and ends where you need it to. Having loop behavior as an option would certainly be a good thing to have for those situations where it may be preferred. Greg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com |
From: Lee A. <le...@fa...> - 2003-05-30 05:47:47
|
On Thu, 29 May 2003, Greg Mekkes wrote: > Many times when working with a selection, it is critical to know exactly > how it starts and how it ends - to know if the selection boundaries are > truly what you need. In this case it is critical that it play once since > any looping would completely mask off knowledge of whether or not it starts > and ends where you need it to. Having loop behavior as an option would > certainly be a good thing to have for those situations where it may be > preferred. Good point. Going back to my original example, protools deals with this by offering a realtime tape style scrubbing tool. I've read in the archives that this is a possibility but difficult to impliment, so until then it's probably best to keep it an option. But with a scrub tool I would vote for it to be default. Perhaps a single key toggle between loop mode and non-loop? As much as I dislike Digidesign as a company, the PT interface is quite nice, and a lot of recording engineers are acustomed to it...but then again, Ardour claims to fill this niche. -lee |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-05-29 16:44:52
|
Tino Meinen wrote: > Op wo 28-05-2003, om 04:14 schreef Lee Azzarello: > >>On Tue, 27 May 2003, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >>not and ProTools has nothing but loop play i.e. a selection will always >>loop if it is selected and the user hits play. >> >>Personally, I like the ProTools method the best, since the act of making a >>selection and then pressing play sort of impiles that it would be a good >>idea to loop it. ProTools will not loop if there is no region selected. > > Actually, that's an excellent idea! It makes a lot of sense. > So as soon as the user makes a selection, the play button will display > the looped play-button, indicating that by pressing it, the selection > will be looped. > When there is no selection at all, the play button is in its normal > state and pressing it will play the project starting from the cursor > position. > > I'm very much in favor, it is logical and intuitive. > What do others think? I think it's a neat idea, but my vote would be to make it an option, not the default. - Dominic > Could we have this? > > --Tino Meinen > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay > Get office equipment for less on eBay! > http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 > _______________________________________________ > Audacity-devel mailing list > Aud...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel |
From: Tino M. <a.t...@ch...> - 2003-05-29 18:10:06
|
Op do 29-05-2003, om 18:47 schreef Dominic Mazzoni: > Tino Meinen wrote: > > So as soon as the user makes a selection, the play button will display > > the looped play-button, indicating that by pressing it, the selection > > will be looped. > > When there is no selection at all, the play button is in its normal > > state and pressing it will play the project starting from the cursor > > position. > > > > I'm very much in favor, it is logical and intuitive. > > What do others think? The user loses nothing if the selection is looped by default. He can still push the stop button to stop the playing. Ever since looped playing is possible, I've always listned to my selections in looped play mode. Never once did I *needed* to have the selection to be played only once. > I think it's a neat idea, but my vote would be to make it an option, > not the default. I'm curious. Why? I think adding an option for something like that would be pretty lame. It's better to think and discuss what would be the right way to do this. Though if there's no time for that (due to 1.2 coming out) I'd rather just have it as it is right now. Please, no option for this. --Tino Meinen |
From: Markus M. <me...@me...> - 2003-05-29 18:27:59
|
Am Don, 2003-05-29 um 19.33 schrieb Tino Meinen: > > [loop play always enabled if selection] > > I think it's a neat idea, but my vote would be to make it an option, > > not the default. > > I'm curious. Why? > > I think adding an option for something like that would be pretty lame. > It's better to think and discuss what would be the right way to do this. > Though if there's no time for that (due to 1.2 coming out) I'd rather > just have it as it is right now. > > Please, no option for this. Tino, the problem is that you have to stop the sound manually. I vote for the option. Markus |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-27 15:01:18
Attachments:
loop2.xcf.bz2
|
On Tue, 27 May 2003 00:02:59 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > Actually that's a great idea: When you press the shift key, the > play button should automatically change to a loop button! That's > a great way for a discoverable interface. Anyone want to draw a > loop graphic? here goes the second one. If you want me to fix something in them, please feel free tell me about it -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-05-28 06:26:00
|
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > On Tue, 27 May 2003 00:02:59 -0700 > Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > >>Actually that's a great idea: When you press the shift key, the >>play button should automatically change to a loop button! That's >>a great way for a discoverable interface. Anyone want to draw a >>loop graphic? > > here goes the second one. If you want me to fix something in them, > please feel free tell me about it Thanks. Good start. We need it to be 16x16 pixels, though. (Audacity automatically centers the 16x16 icon on the image of the button.) I like loop2 better; it's more clear with the extra space. In order for it to still be readable at 16x16 pixels, I think that the circle needs to be twice as thick, and the arrows need to be about 5x as big. Can you come up with something like that? - Dominic |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-28 06:40:50
|
On Tue, 27 May 2003 23:28:48 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > > On Tue, 27 May 2003 00:02:59 -0700 > > Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > > > >>Actually that's a great idea: When you press the shift key, the > >>play button should automatically change to a loop button! > >That's>a great way for a discoverable interface. Anyone want to > >draw a>loop graphic? > > > > here goes the second one. If you want me to fix something in > > them, please feel free tell me about it > > Thanks. > > Good start. We need it to be 16x16 pixels, though. (Audacity > automatically centers the 16x16 icon on the image of the button.) > > I like loop2 better; it's more clear with the extra space. > > In order for it to still be readable at 16x16 pixels, I think that > the circle needs to be twice as thick, and the arrows need to be > about 5x as big. Can you come up with something like that? Sure. Will fix it today -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-28 08:25:19
Attachments:
loop.xpm
|
On Tue, 27 May 2003 23:28:48 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > In order for it to still be readable at 16x16 pixels, I think that > the circle needs to be twice as thick, and the arrows need to be > about 5x as big. Ahem, I could have drawn this XPM in vim :-) It's 16x16 pixels -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-05-28 17:13:48
|
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > On Tue, 27 May 2003 23:28:48 -0700 > Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > >>In order for it to still be readable at 16x16 pixels, I think that >>the circle needs to be twice as thick, and the arrows need to be >>about 5x as big. > > Ahem, I could have drawn this XPM in vim :-) > It's 16x16 pixels That's more or less what it will need to look like! Two more thoughts: 1. You don't need to include any border at all. Currently you have a 1-pixel border; get rid of it. There's already plenty of border. Even if we stick these icons in small-toolbar-sized icons, they'll be inside a 24x24 frame. At that size, an extra 2 pixels in diameter will make a big difference. 2. You can use anti-aliasing more. Go ahead and draw the icon at 32x32, with no borders, and then scale it down to 50%. It should look pretty smooth. If you can do it in GIMP on top of a transparent background, that would be great; that would make it easier for me to create the alpha mask. But a white background is OK too. - Dominic |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-30 10:45:29
Attachments:
loop5.xpm
|
On Wed, 28 May 2003 10:16:35 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > 2. You can use anti-aliasing more. Go ahead and draw the icon at > 32x32, with no borders, and then scale it down to 50%. It > should look pretty smooth. If you can do it in GIMP on top of > a transparent background, that would be great; that would make > it easier for me to create the alpha mask. But a white > background is OK too. As I exported to XPM Alpha treshold was defined to 127. I'm still afraid this will look ugly :( -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-05-30 15:59:08
|
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > On Wed, 28 May 2003 10:16:35 -0700 > Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > >>2. You can use anti-aliasing more. Go ahead and draw the icon at >> 32x32, with no borders, and then scale it down to 50%. It >> should look pretty smooth. If you can do it in GIMP on top of >> a transparent background, that would be great; that would make >> it easier for me to create the alpha mask. But a white >> background is OK too. > > As I exported to XPM Alpha treshold was defined to 127. > I'm still afraid this will look ugly :( Not bad! I'll check that one in. - Dominic |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-30 16:14:26
|
On Fri, 30 May 2003 09:02:02 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > > On Wed, 28 May 2003 10:16:35 -0700 > > Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > > > >>2. You can use anti-aliasing more. Go ahead and draw the icon > >at> 32x32, with no borders, and then scale it down to 50%. It > >> should look pretty smooth. If you can do it in GIMP on top > >of> a transparent background, that would be great; that would > >make> it easier for me to create the alpha mask. But a white > >> background is OK too. > > > > As I exported to XPM Alpha treshold was defined to 127. > > I'm still afraid this will look ugly :( > > Not bad! I'll check that one in. But we will need Aqua graphics for that as well You might like to contact the guy hwo does it ;) -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-05-30 20:42:39
|
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >>>As I exported to XPM Alpha treshold was defined to 127. >>>I'm still afraid this will look ugly :( >> >>Not bad! I'll check that one in. > > But we will need Aqua graphics for that as well > You might like to contact the guy hwo does it ;) Nope...Audacity uses its own routines to draw the icon on top of the button image, automatically using the Aqua button image on the Mac. I think this will look fine. I should have a chance to check it in and make the loop button functional in the next 2-3 days. - Dominic |
From: Tino M. <a.t...@ch...> - 2003-05-30 22:38:49
|
Op vr 30-05-2003, om 12:45 schreef Alexandre Prokoudine: > As I exported to XPM Alpha treshold was defined to 127. > I'm still afraid this will look ugly :( You'll improve it no doubt, but I would like to see the arrowpoints to show a bit more clearly. I hand edited your example to show what I mean. I further copied the left half and mirrored that on the right, the two arrows are symmetrical that way. First example is your loop5 the one after that my example. Hope that explains what I maen because a picture is hard to describe in words. Regards --Tino Meinen |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-31 13:47:52
Attachments:
loop7.xpm
|
On 31 May 2003 00:38:39 +0200 Tino Meinen <a.t...@ch...> wrote: > Op vr 30-05-2003, om 12:45 schreef Alexandre Prokoudine: > > As I exported to XPM Alpha treshold was defined to 127. > > I'm still afraid this will look ugly :( > > You'll improve it no doubt, > but I would like to see the arrowpoints to show a bit more > clearly. > > I hand edited your example to show what I mean. > I further copied the left half and mirrored that on the right, the > two arrows are symmetrical that way. > > First example is your loop5 > the one after that my example. > Hope that explains what I maen because a picture is hard to > describe in words. I see. Is this one better? -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |
From: Tino M. <a.t...@ch...> - 2003-06-01 01:12:14
|
Op za 31-05-2003, om 15:47 schreef Alexandre Prokoudine > I see. Is this one better? Not really, I think it is actually a little worse than loop5. The tails are too thin and the arrow-heads are less visible. Just my opinion though... --Tino Meinen |
From: Dominic M. <do...@mi...> - 2003-06-01 03:03:05
|
Tino Meinen wrote: > Op za 31-05-2003, om 15:47 schreef Alexandre Prokoudine > >>I see. Is this one better? > > Not really, I think it is actually a little worse than loop5. > The tails are too thin and the arrow-heads are less visible. > Just my opinion though... The one I checked in was based on loop5, I think. But I had to modify it a lot, because I needed an alpha channel. I think that the end result looks pretty decent. - Dominic > --Tino Meinen > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay > Get office equipment for less on eBay! > http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 > _______________________________________________ > Audacity-devel mailing list > Aud...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel |
From: Alexandre P. <av...@al...> - 2003-05-27 15:03:20
Attachments:
loop.xcf.bz2
|
On Tue, 27 May 2003 00:02:59 -0700 Dominic Mazzoni <do...@mi...> wrote: > Anyone want to draw a loop graphic? I know I'm not designer. So you feel justified to ad(a|o)pt it... ;) -- Alexandre Prokoudine ALT Linux Documentation Team JabberID: av...@al... |