Audacity Forum

Topic split from: http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic ... 47&t=75011

steve wrote:

solkar wrote:I have two mono tracks that I want to merge in one stereo track.

* Change track A from mono to "Right channel"
* Change track B from mono to "Left channel"
* Select "Make stereo track" in track A

Then I have an stereo track. The issue is that track A is in the left channel and track B is in the right one.

I know how to get the track in the channels I want but I wander if this the expected behavior. Shall I report it as a bug?

No, it's not a bug. It is behaving as designed and as described in the manual: http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/tr ... html#split

At the very least it's a feature request. As you know I think that reversal of channels is poor behaviour.


Gale

Gale Andrews wrote:At the very least it's a feature request

What would the feature request be? If it is that "Track drop down menu > make stereo tracks" honours the track channel settings, then is that not already provided by "Tracks menu > Mix and Render"?

Or it could be "Swap Channels" in the track drop down menu.
Personally, I'd find it nice if the channels could be treated separately without first splitting the stereo track. Either by selecting them through additional menu entries or by a very basic group/tree functionality. This means that stereo tracks (or any multi channel tracks, for that matter) would normally be accessed as a group (i.e. reduced) and could be expanded to access the individual channels. They could thus be treated as individual mono tracks. Moving them around would change the order and effects could be applied to one channel only, if so desired.
It isn't much of a difference , it is more a visual and conceptional change.

Robert J. H. wrote:It isn't much of a difference , it is more a visual and conceptional change.

but it would require a lot of changes to the code, so I don't see that happening any time soon.

steve wrote:

Robert J. H. wrote:It isn't much of a difference , it is more a visual and conceptional change.

but it would require a lot of changes to the code, so I don't see that happening any time soon.

Steve suggested something similar for grouping (unsplit) tracks: http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic ... 21#p213221 so the concept of grouping / splitting tracks fits in with this but adds complication.

I agree splitting stereo tracks to edit just one channel is a tedium, and having split the track to stereo it's too easy to accidentally apply an effect you want in both channels to only one channel.

"Swap channels" in the Track Drop-Down Menu has been asked for before. It might help some users realise that "Make Stereo Track" is only like removing a divider between two entities to make them into one. But I don't see why Audacity just doesn't do that swap itself when the right channel is on top, instead of asking for extra steps.


Gale

Gale Andrews wrote:But I don't see why Audacity just doesn't do that swap itself when the right channel is on top, instead of asking for extra steps.

In effect, that is what happens with "Mix and Render".

If "Make Stereo Track" takes account of the channel allocation of the two mono tracks, then how should it behave if both tracks are set to "Left Channel"? The logical behaviour would surely be to create a stereo track containing a mix of both mono tracks in the left channel and silence in the right channel, but then it is just duplicating what can be done with Mix and Render.

Currently the behaviour of "Make Stereo Track" is simple and consistent - it just "sticks the tracks together" in their current order. Creating "special cases" depending on channel allocations adds unnecessary complication imho.

steve wrote: No, it's not a bug. It is behaving as designed and as described in the manual: http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/tr ... html#split

Note that there is no need for your first two steps.
If you want Track B to be the left channel, simply drag the tracks into the correct order by clicking on the track control panel (left end of the track - taking care not to click on the sliders or buttons) and drag up or down.

There is also an overview of splitting and joining stereo tracks in the manual: http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/sp ... racks.html

I couldn't find that page of the documentation. The behavior is illustrated pretty clear.

thanks

steve wrote:

Gale Andrews wrote:But I don't see why Audacity just doesn't do that swap itself when the right channel is on top, instead of asking for extra steps.

In effect, that is what happens with "Mix and Render".

If "Make Stereo Track" takes account of the channel allocation of the two mono tracks, then how should it behave if both tracks are set to "Left Channel"? The logical behaviour would surely be to create a stereo track containing a mix of both mono tracks in the left channel and silence in the right channel, but then it is just duplicating what can be done with Mix and Render.

Currently the behaviour of "Make Stereo Track" is simple and consistent - it just "sticks the tracks together" in their current order. Creating "special cases" depending on channel allocations adds unnecessary complication imho.

It is not consistent in one sense:
It is one of the rare commands that do not work with the selected tracks but rather with the track in focus and that one beneath it.
That may be fine for stereo tracks, but it won't work with multi-channel (if this will ever be implemented.
In general, the command is very useful and makes--in combination with the split and move commands--the left/right/mono choices actually obsolete.

steve wrote:If "Make Stereo Track" takes account of the channel allocation of the two mono tracks, then how should it behave if both tracks are set to "Left Channel"? The logical behaviour would surely be to create a stereo track containing a mix of both mono tracks in the left channel and silence in the right channel, but then it is just duplicating what can be done with Mix and Render.

Same answer I gave before to that - it does what it does now, because there is no choice but to reverse one of the channels. Reversing both is what annoys me...


Gale

Gale Andrews wrote:it does what it does now, because there is no choice but to reverse one of the channels.

I've just described what I think is the more logical "choice" if we say that "Make Stereo Track" takes account of the channel allocation.

A practical point: What is the use case for having a mono track set to the right channel above a mono track set to the left channel and wanting to make them into a stereo track with the (upper) right channel moving below the (lower) left channel to create the stereo track?