Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] what's wrong with glame
From: Richard Guenther (rguenth_AT_tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de)
Date: Thu Jul 26 2001 - 16:32:06 EEST
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, delire wrote:
> This is a fairly lengthy rant on the latest glame. Some of you might find it
> boring. It's really directed at the authors.
> What I say here needs to be taken in context. My requirements for an editor
> are fairly heavy as I make both commercial special effects and
> noise/electroacoustic music.
> It's rare that I work under DAT level audio - 48khz. But like a normal
> studio it's not uncommon for me to have 50 or 60 audio files open at the
> same time. Similarly, with my electroacoustics, I rarely work under 4
> channels.
>
> So in this way i'm not your ideal subject. However I do produce alot of work
> for various multimedia productions, including games, which i think includes
> your target user. I say this because while glame isn't advanced in other
> areas, you have placed a strong emphasis on signal processing.
Ok, you actually _seem_ to be our ideal subject - somehow :) For the
following I will assume you tried GLAME 0.5.2 and mark things that are
_not_ available with 0.4.2 with a [~0.4.2].
> Two different systems are running glame in my studio, one is a debian box
> and the other runs suse [both latest kernels (now) thanks to a bad analogy
> from paul davis] All required libs are installed. I noticed that both don't
> have a play head that follows the audio - instead it remains static. In the
> install notes you said this worked - I may have done something wrong. Also
For esd output we didnt bother to add support for it (blame us - will fix
this in a minute), for other methods it should work [~0.4.2]
> it should be said that I've only been using Glame for a week or so, forgive
> me for the things I've overlooked [short keys / menu's etc]...
>
> I'll begin:
>
> The idea of a 'project' is a nice approach - but it tends to assume that one
> is about to embark on something of a large scale. In other environments this
> is also called the session - which is an option only if you want to save
> global setting as applied specifically to your work, or an arrangement, as
> in cool edit pro [windows].
Ok, our whole concept of the tree-view with projects is that you have
exactly one seession which handles multiple projects (aka subtrees). Maybe
not really obvious / useful.
> Often however i don't want to make a project, so much as quickly edit a
> wave. Most desktop studios are engaged in editing samples every few minutes
> during a normal day. This is where glame really struggles to be useful.
Is this because of the many steps you need to do before you are presented
with the wave editor? If so, adding shortcuts for this is easy. Or are
there more fundamental problems?
> What tends to happen in most studios is users become loyal to an editor
> through familiarity. As a result one editor is chosen as the native editor
> for all situations, so even when you're in another app, you can click
> [something like 'editor'] and your waveform immediately appears. Also it's
> necessary to be able to click on a sound-file and immediately bring it up in
> waveform view ready to go. In these two ways, 'setting up a project' blocks
> access to the urgent role of the editor in any audio.
Ok. Noted. I suppose, we'll add a Project/Edit file... main menu entry
which just inserts the imported wave as a "new project" and opens up the
wave editor with it.
> Glame's functionality needs to be considered within this hierachy of needs:
> Most studios, home and pro, require these in an editor /multitracker /dsp
> studio:
>
> Open sample [resample / attentuate / trim
> Record sample [line in or another output from app]
> Edit sample / signal process /clean [many of these open at once]
> Multitrack session [for composition, syncing and mix down]
> Custom project / session / filternetwork
>
>
> By orienting work around the 'project' you're stopping glame from becoming a
> popular [frequently used] editor.
>
> Once I made a project, i had to 'import audio'!! As though audio were not
> the native media of the app. All good apps assume that 'open file' leads to
> a wave. Cool edit pro [which is becoming so popular that many major studios
> [including the ABC in my country]
> are ditching pro-tools] simply has 'open' when in 'waveform view' - since in
> that window, you're always going to be opening soundfiles...import in so
> many desktop studios represents a special function, that's why when i first
> used glame, i reached for the 'add stereo wave' item.
>
> Even once i've imported the audio i'm still barred; held back before getting
> on with the job of editing...now i have to select the
> text-that-represents-my-file and choose to 'edit it', as though there were
> other things i might want to do with it instead.
> So i right click on the name of the file [?] and then choose 'edit', which
> brings up the waveform view.
>
> And the waveform view is nothing to smile about - black and white is a bad
> choice of rendering. High contrast schemes like this make a 10 hour session
> in the editor a strain, though the wearing of sunglasses indoors is
> particular to this field.
>
> At this stage I realise that I loaded the wrong file[s], to get rid of it
> from the project list i have to [delete] [as opposed to the inuitive,
> 'close'] and then 'empty the
> trash' [what trash? and why should i [?] - implying that i have the option
> to revoke my decision once it's in the trash].
>
> Back in the edit mode with the right file I look first for my peak values,
> trying to get a sense of how i should attentuate the file.
> Also because i have to, say, make a file exactly 10.253 seconds in length i
> look for the time [this probably sounds ridiculaous but it happens often
> when making sound for film or games]. also accuracy is a kind of confidence.
> I find that there aren't even samples, rms, or 'beats' as alternative timing
> schemes - many other media packages require these time scalings for sync
> up - in this way glame further rarifies it's position as a stand-alone-tool.
>
> Most importantly however, there is no means of evaluating peak values short
> of a loose grid in the background. Options like these can be immediately
> altered using left or right clicks in cool edit pro.
> The studio editor needs to contain multiple different means of visualising
> audio-data the bare essentials are:
> for time:
> hms, sample, frames per second, SMPTE drop, bar [beats].
> amplitude:
> normlized values, percentage values [where 100% = 0dB]
> other:
> spectral analysis, with a couple of windowing options for comparison.
>
> There needs to be an option for resampling file in conjunction with shifitng
> bit-rates.
> eg: 48khz / 24bit > 22.05khz / 8bit. preferably with dithering and
> noise-shaping in order to maintain the integrity of the signal.
> this would enable the multimedia community to use glame for web and cdrom
> without fscking around in other apps.
>
>
> One of the most common requirements in an editor is that it allow selection
> of an area to be previewed as a loop - a small area for close-up work. Drag
> selectable editors right back to soundedit16 have this function. Instead in
> glame there is an icon
> [looks like a recycle symbol] that I assumed probably meant 'loop' - that
> strangely means 'view all'. I couldn't and still can't find how to loop on a
> selection in glame...
Isnt possible.
> I can't do it in either install of glame. For this reason i can't really use
> it at all. Similarly all editors have a key-bind for play and stop!!! Why
> doesn't glame??
> Normally they manifest as <space>, <p> or <enter>. None of these work.
Ok, adding these is easy. <space> for play - hitting it again to stop?
> Instead i have to actually click play which really slows work down.
>
> All the edit preferences are in a good place [right click] in waveform view
> but the menu is unecessarily deep. Absolutely basic functions like cut and
> paste are instead hiding behind the edit submenu!! They need to be ready at
> hand at all times.Similarly the fundamental 'undo' is hiding in a submenu
> inside 'edit'.
I shoved them into submenus because the menu was getting long - so a long
menu is better? Probably we'll need to add stuff like undo/redo, select
all/none to the toolbar.
> If i simply want to select an area and play it i have to select the area and
> right click on that area and then choose play selection. And if that's not
> enough i have to then hit a second play button in a strange play control
> that pops up!!! That i found really frustrating.
Err, ok :) Thats an issue we're going to fix... sometimes :) Would it be
ok to have the play button in the toolbar playing the selection, if there
is one, else playing from the marker? Or is this counter-intuitive?
> Any digital audio practitioner requires to be able to select an area for
> play many times a minute - this also makes glame to hard to use
> prolifically. Strangely this excessive 'play control' disappears as soon as
> it had finishes playing the sample like it's pissed off with you.
>
>
> So i've selected the area i want to fade, sadly here glame makes all the
> decisions for me as my fade is a linear fade. There needs to be
> representation of commonly expected envelope based amplitude fade, with
> presets for bell, curved and the requisite attack/decay.
>
> Many of your filter gui's are without legend [unit values], and so are
> useless. The worst case here is 'volume adjust', which uses [instead of
> 'dB', or 'percent'!!] 'factor' whatever that is. Here information is use
> with confidence.
>
>
>
> That's all i can do for tonight [though there's plenty more i could write
> about]. If you get a chance check out both SoundEdit [functional but v basic
> editor] and the excellent Cool Edit Pro [not cool edit which is shareware].
Hey - thats the kind of comments a programmer wants to have - experiences
from joe professional user! Thank you very much.
> next i'll write about my experiences with multitracking in glame.
Which is very basic and non-functional at the moment (if you're going to
use the timeline).
Richard.
-- Richard Guenther <richard.guenther_AT_uni-tuebingen.de> WWW: http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de/~rguenth/ The GLAME Project: http://www.glame.de/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jul 26 2001 - 16:33:24 EEST