Small Request

[Will.]

The current workflow to this, works 100% flawless. It's one of those second nature editing process in production.  

BUT . . .

What if we can do our gain reduction with the smart tool in clip view, without having to do cuts to the waveform | or | by going into the automation view? Having the crossfades automatically built-in (or with NO visible crossfades) without slicing the clips on the selected region? 

 

Edited August 19, 2021 by Will_Kaydo

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

Hi Will ☺️

You can actually kind of do this already without splitting the clips - think  I may have  got the info from an older thread but it's super handy

1. Press C  - this will place the track in "clip automation" mode ( I think this is default binding ??  ) 

2. Make your selection as normal

3. Click and drag down from the  header bar

 

Bingo !..no need to split the clips - I hope you like it and this helps you out ☺️

 

[Will.]

1 hour ago, chimkin2 said:

Hi Will ☺️

You can actually kind of do this already without splitting the clips - think  I may have  got the info from an older thread but it's super handy

1. Press C  - this will place the track in "clip automation" mode ( I think this is default binding ??  ) 

2. Make your selection as normal

3. Click and drag down from the  header bar

 

Bingo !..no need to split the clips - I hope you like it and this helps you out ☺️

 

Lol, Hi @chimkin2 Thanks, I'm aware of that. I use it it from time-to-time when I do compression with custom shortcut keys. = SHIFT+"PLUS symbol."  I believe the default shortcut key of "C" is for the control panel - hence the letter "C."

No, my request is on the workflow as seen in the video without toggling between the clip view and automation view. What I forgot to mention is to say this to be with the smart tool. I better fix that right now. This is not a huge request. I was just thinking "Smart Tool" while editing, so why not ask for a request and see who like this quick workflow suggestion without that extra steps? 

Edited August 19, 2021 by Will_Kaydo

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

6 hours ago, Will_Kaydo said:

No, my request is on the workflow as seen in the video without toggling between the clip view and automation view.

No worries W_K - I think I probably have swopped some bindings around at another point in time ☺️ !  But it does work if you know the keys and what order to press.

Pro Tools is better at this sort of workflow - very fast & easy without jumping between "modes" -  I think Cakewalk would have to do away with all these different modes if they wanted it to be more fluid. I would personally be in favour. 

So a small request turns into a major re-write. How do you square that circle ? Maybe a new mode !?? ?

We have the Smart Tool so we don't have to switch from one to another all the time ( unless we want to )  - so why not have a " Smart Track Mode " to go with it  ?  One that lets you do all the common tasks without switching.  But retain switching for the ones who don't like change.

[Will.]

3 hours ago, chimkin2 said:

So a small request turns into a major re-write. How do you square that circle ? Maybe a new mode !?? 

We have the Smart Tool so we don't have to switch from one to another all the time ( unless we want to )  - so why not have a " Smart Track Mode " to go with it  ?  One that lets you do all the common tasks without switching.  But retain switching for the ones who don't like change.

☺ I don't think it would be a major re-write. Like you said: We can do this already, so no re-write needed - just an add-on perhaps? Copy those codes over to the Smart Tool, add the commands of Ctrl+Alt | Ctrl+Shift or Shift+Alt to activate the feature (Whatever the ingredients would be to cook this up ?) without sitting with a massive headache when doing it. 

3 hours ago, chimkin2 said:

I would personally be in favour. 

Like this response.  Yes, it would be a speedy editing edition during production. I'll be keeping my fingers cross that this gets noticed by the developers. 

[Will.]

51 minutes ago, pwalpwal said:

good request, but i don't think anyone  but the dev team can say how "major" the code changes might be

Thanks. Although: ? Let's not take what was said out of context by reading too much into it. After all, I did say whatever the ingredients will be without giving themselves a headache when doing this (or something like that.) 

Edited August 19, 2021 by Will_Kaydo

[Will.]

1 hour ago, pwalpwal said:

furry muff

Lol! Language please. 

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

1 hour ago, pwalpwal said:

furry muff

I prefer a Big Muff ?