Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2 track mono to "real" mono transfer?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2 track mono to "real" mono transfer?

    Hi,

    I have a lot of "mono" AM radio airchecks on "stereo" cassettes. Over time, maybe one channel has developed a "drop-out". To correct this, using DC-Art, I try using a file conversion from stereo to mono, but what I get is mostly the sound of the tape alternating "out-of-phase" and "in-phase". What I am trying to do is for one track without drop-outs to "fill-in" the other track which has dropouts. I have been able to do this in the past, with some success, with a "Y" patch, from stereo to mono, but it tends to decrease fidelity. Any ideas?

    Thanks again!
    Warren


  • #2
    Re: 2 track mono to \"real\" mono transfer?

    Since the recording is two track mono, just use the better track by itself and convert it to "stereo" (dual mono, unless you use apply stereo simulation effects) when you're done with your processing. Don't blend the good one with the bad one.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2 track mono to \"real\" mono transfer?

      I am not on my own computer, so I don't have the program in front of me, thus this is from memory.

      I am assuming that drop-outs occur in both channels, just not (usually) at the same spot. In a similar case I found that the best (albeit somewhat fiddley) thing is to split the file, with a source holding the left channel and the destination the right. Then you can cut-and-paste "good" bits from one channel over the drop-outs in the other.

      Obviously, this is only in one direction, building the final wave file from the channel with the fewest drop-outs.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2 track mono to \"real\" mono transfer?

        Hey! This sounds interesting. Just what I want to accomplish. But just how does one go about "splitting" a file? I can't seem to find how this is done.
        Thanks! Warren

        <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by calberga:
        I am not on my own computer, so I don't have the program in front of me, thus this is from memory.

        I am assuming that drop-outs occur in both channels, just not (usually) at the same spot. In a similar case I found that the best (albeit somewhat fiddley) thing is to split the file, with a source holding the left channel and the destination the right. Then you can cut-and-paste "good" bits from one channel over the drop-outs in the other.

        Obviously, this is only in one direction, building the final wave file from the channel with the fewest drop-outs.
        <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 2 track mono to \"real\" mono transfer?

          From Memory: somewhere there is a drop-down (under filters???) with choices including stereo to mono, L+R, L-R, L, R. Run this twice, once to create a mono file from the left channel, once from the right. Then load one as source and one a destination and --

          can someone else tell how to set it up so the files are in sync? As I said, I'm on the road and can't look at the program.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 2 track mono to \"real\" mono transfer?

            When a file has been opened, click on the View button and make sure "sync files" is checked. That way, you highlight the part of your "source file" you need to work on and do whatever action you need to do and it will do it to the "destination" file.

            You have to fool around for a while to get the hang of it. I just found out about this about a month ago, and use it all the time now.

            Dan McDonald
            Dan McDonald

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 2 track mono to \"real\" mono transfer?

              Edsel -

              I am dealing with a similar problem lately, and came up with what I believe to be a better way to deal with it. See the post on the millenium board. If that doesn't make sense to you, you can email me and I can explain it better. It's hard to explain in a post.

              Dan
              Dan McDonald

              Comment

              Working...
              X