Use as a WAV editor

[ojw]

Hi. I use audacity a lot for editing WAV files; I'm wondering if this process isn't as smooth as it could be

1: If you open a WAV file in audacity, do something, and press 'save', it prompts you to save as an audacity project. I want to save as a WAV file. If you only have one track open, and you haven't previously saved it as an audacity project, then 'save menu'/ctrl-S should export the WAV file.

2: When you load a WAV file then "export as WAV" [in Windows] it doesn't default to the directory where the file originally came from, it defaults to the directory where you most recently exported other WAV files. This makes it very difficult to save the file in or near its original location since you need to browse around to find the directory.

3: If you have a WAV file open and you try to open another one by double-clicking on it in the file manager, audacity will refuse to open it ("audacity is already running"), and tell you to load it via the file menu (not sure if this is fixed in recent versions?)

[kozikowski]

1. Yes, I've said so loudly and at great length. Audacity is not a WAV editor. Audacity produces Editorial Production Environments and almost as an afterthought allows you to export a WAV (or other) file format.

2. There are quite a large number of other programs with this annoying habit, so Audacity is in good company.

3. You should get another project window overlayed on top of the first one. You can cut and paste from there. This is the down side of posting in a "generic" forum instead of one of the more specific ones. Which Audacity and which OS?

Koz

[ojw]

"Yes, I've said so loudly and at great length. Audacity is not a WAV editor." -- are you saying it's desirable that Audacity is not a WAV editor, or that this is a duplicate of some other bug report?

"Audacity produces Editorial Production Environments" - what's one of those? is it like a sound file editor that requires you to have multiple tracks open at once?

[kozikowski]

<<<this is a duplicate of some other bug report?>>>

It's not a bug. It was intended to be a Project editor, it was designed and coded to be a Project editor, and it works perfectly as a Project editor. No bug there.

<<<like a sound file editor that requires you to have multiple tracks open at once?>>>

No. A Project doesn't require you to do anything. A WAV editor opens up a sound file, cuts it up, adds effects, and saves it either as a new version of itself or a new stand-alone sound file.

A Project is a large collection of files, some sound, some not, managed by an XML programming language. A Project is much more efficient than a WAV editor-especially if you have a very large show with hundreds of bits, clips, and sound segments. Audacity doesn't try to keep everything open and loaded at once like a WAV editor does. Instead, it opens up fragments of the show as they are needed and closes them when they're not.

Because of its XML heritage, you can write your own filters and effects and several people on the forum do exactly that. I've even done simple filters.

On a large enough computer, there is no limit to the size of show you can efficiently and quickly manage. A WAV editor would have choked on the show a long time ago. Audacity will efficiently and quickly manage 16 different tracks of sound at the same time and apply effects and editing to any one of them at will. The lower limit is one mono track.

You can Force Audacity to work as a WAV editor, but the steps are a little strange compared to other software because that's a secondary task.

And sometimes the software versions do act a little odd which explains the Mac 1.3.7 problems we're having over on the 1.3 forum.

It's not a corporation. It's a collection of volunteers all over the world.

Koz

[ojw]

Given that 4 out of the 5 primary features of audacity[1] involve editing a single file, would it not be worth making that process easier? e.g. if you load a file, modify something, and press control-S, it should save the file, instead of prompting you to create a project?

[1] http://audacityteam.org/about/

Equally, if you record something and press control-S, shouldn't it save the recording, instead of prompting you to create a project?

"Convert tapes and records into digital recordings or CDs." - why would anyone want an AUP file to be generated for that? they just want the MP3.

"Edit Ogg Vorbis, MP3, WAV or AIFF sound files." - why would you care about AUP at all, you just want to save the file without having to "export", select the same file format and options as it had before, select the location it was at before, and go through the prompting about "overrwriting" the file?

"Change the speed or pitch of a recording." - again, surely you just want to save it afterwards instead of fiddling with AUP files.

"Record live audio." - OK I can see multitrack would be useful here. But the simplest case (which should be simple to do) is to record something and save it. Most people will want their recording in MP3 etc, and would rightly be confused why control-S is asking them to save as AUP.

Save is preferred to Export in these situations because it remembers what your file is called, what type it is, and where it's located, so you can press ctrl-S without having to enter all these details again. But Audacity's Save function doesn't work unless you have defined a project, where most people don't care about defining a project

[kozikowski]

<<<Given that 4 out of the 5 primary features of audacity[1] involve editing a single file, would it not be worth making that process easier?>>>

I have asked that question with these fingers multiple times. I've even posted examples of software packages that cover both worlds--Save in either native format or internal format, completely your option.

But where would the help forum be if everybody got that Export thing right the first time? We'd all be out of work.

http://audacityteam.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=20

Koz

[steve]

Do you think this would help?
http://audacityteam.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8599

[kozikowski]

No.

http://audacityteam.org/forum/viewtopic ... 057#p35057

Koz

[ou81aswell]

Bye bye Audacity. I thought it could be used as a simple WAV editor. I could have sworn I used to be able to double-click a WAV file, edit it and then save it back to disc. I must be confusing it with an old copy of Sound Forge. My Cubase and Reaper are overkill for what I want to do. So apparently is Audacity. I will now start looking for a WAV editor.

Cheers.

BTW: A Google search for "free audio wav editor" or "audio wav editor" returns Audacity at the top of the list so please forgive me if I assumed it would be a straightforward process to open, edit and then save a WAV file using Audacity.

[steve]

Bye bye Audacity. I thought it could be used as a simple WAV editor.

It can.

I could have sworn I used to be able to double-click a WAV file, edit it and then save it back to disc.

If you associate WAV files with Audacity, you can open them in Audacity with a double click.
You must EXPORT audio files from Audacity (WAV, or any other supported audio format).
SAVE will SAVE in Audacity's native format. This has not changed - Audacity has always done this.

My Cubase and Reaper are overkill for what I want to do. So apparently is Audacity.

Try FlexiMusic Kids Composer - it's not free ($15) but they claim that it is "a fun, easy way for kids to learn the basics of music-making and recording."
http://www.fleximusic.com/kidscomposer/overview.htm
They also do a more advanced version called "FlexiMusic Wave Editor" for $20 (7 Day free trial available), but that may also be too difficult for your needs.