RE: naming controls with VoiceOver
Scripts/macros will be a better solution. They'll be able to count tracks. Bryan -Original Message- From: ptaccess@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptacc...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Slau Halatyn Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2010 4:09 PM To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: naming controls with VoiceOver I guess I need to clarify something because at least one person misunderstood and I might not have made myself clear. So, VoiceOver will not assign a custom label for controls like record buttons automatically, based on track name. This is, of course, how it should be. However, if one wanted to specifically rename a particular record button on a particular track to be named something specific, one could do that. Of course, this would have to be done for every button in every track if one wanted to rename each button. Ultimately, the database for VoiceOver would grow and well, that wouldn't be very clever. Anyway, Hope that makes it clearer. And if that's not clear enough, Control-Option-slash is your friend and experimentation is fun and informative. :) Slau On Jul 10, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Chuck Reichel wrote: Hi Slau, That is extremely cool! Knowing my self a PT template with my track lay out mite be in order! LOL Good work Man! Chuckles On Jul 10, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: As Popeye used to say, Well, blow me down! I never expected this behavior but, apparently, it is possible to label controls like the record button to a custom name to differentiate them when using an Item Chooser list. In other words, if one were so inclined, one could label each record button something like Kick Record Button or Snare Record Button or whatever. In the Item Chooser menu the buttons are described as Kick record Button or Armed Kick record Button. VoiceOver does say the word custom to point out that the label is not the default but a custom label. Interesting, I wouldn't have guessed that it would work this way but, there you go. Slau Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com
Re: rec issues continue. Also FW800 to FW400
Hi Karen, I don't know what the current crop of Apple computers have but any drive that has both an 800 and a 400 port is capable of interfacing with a Mac and any FW 400 device. Slau On Jul 11, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote: Actually that brings up a question. Is there therefore no currently support apple desktop or laptop that has fw 400 built in? meaning that some kind of conversion is absolutely required if you are going to use a digi 002 for example? Karen On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, Chuck Reichel wrote: Hi clarence, I just went through the FW 800 conversion to FW 400 with my Mbox pro 2 and let me tell you the Lacie drive did not work with that combo!!! I ended up getting a 800 to 400 fw pcie card for my Mac pro quad core and then PT saw the Mbox 2 pro finally. If I had to do it over I would have went with a FW 800 to FW 400 conversion cable! No telling if that would have worked either! LOL Now that I have installed my PT HD3 which by the way is just purring along, the pceie 800 to 400 fw card is sitting here in the box!! Any body need a conversion card its on sale! GROWLLL. It may work for you but no guarantee. The $29 800 to 400 cable would probably be your most cost effective solution if you only have a 800 port. talk soon Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com On Jul 10, 2010, at 5:45 PM, clarence griffin wrote: oh yeah, and it only has 1 fw 800 port, its the 13 inch model. GF On Jul 10, 2010, at 1:58 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: I don't recall whether you're using a laptop or Mac Pro but, whatever the case is, if there's only one FireWire port available on the laptop, you absolutely need a chassis with at least 2 FireWire ports and hang the control surface off the drive. With FireWire stuff and Pro Tools, the interface is always last in the chain. Otherwise, yeah, if it's a MacBook Pro with 400 and 800 ports, it's possible to just keep the drive and interface on separate busses. Whatever configuration you're using, it should be way more than powerful enough to handle a ton of tracks. Years ago, I did a remote session with an iBook which was only a 600 MHz processor and recorded 16 tracks live without any hiccups at all. Slau On Jul 10, 2010, at 12:03 PM, clarence griffin wrote: ah! thanks. this sounds good. I didn't even think of that. so I need to get a caddy with 2 fw ports on it, then I can connect that to the mac, and the project mix to the drive. Is this correct? I just want to make sure I am understanding you correctly. I think that's right. GF On Jul 10, 2010, at 10:19 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: OK, yeah, I see what other people have since commented and, certainly, stay away from USB and I woldn't at all recommend recording to your internal drive. Yes, it will work and it'll workfor a while but you're asking for trouble. The way the interfaceconnects is by being the last item in the FireWire chain. Get a drivewith two FireWire ports and connect computer to drive and drive tointerface. The smaller compact bus-powered drives have fewer optionsin terms of multiple You'll want to go with something a bit more substantial. If the computer has a FW 800 port, you can record tothat bus and use the 400 bus just for the interface. HTH, Slau ports. On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:19 PM, clarence griffin wrote: I disabled the drive I was recording to from the spot light settings. Maybe I can't use an external drive? Its USB 2.0. I would think that's fast enough. Maybe I need to record to my hard drive? If so. I have a lot of clearing out of stuff to do. Any suggestions?? GF Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com
Re: rec issues continue. Also FW800 to FW400
you are suggesting connecting a drive to the digi, which I understood is also an fw 400 device, instead of to the mac itself? I am thinking more of the control surface needs than the drive. On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, Slau Halatyn wrote: Hi Karen, I don't know what the current crop of Apple computers have but any drive that has both an 800 and a 400 port is capable of interfacing with a Mac and any FW 400 device. Slau On Jul 11, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote: Actually that brings up a question. Is there therefore no currently support apple desktop or laptop that has fw 400 built in? meaning that some kind of conversion is absolutely required if you are going to use a digi 002 for example? Karen On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, Chuck Reichel wrote: Hi clarence, I just went through the FW 800 conversion to FW 400 with my Mbox pro 2 and let me tell you the Lacie drive did not work with that combo!!! I ended up getting a 800 to 400 fw pcie card for my Mac pro quad core and then PT saw the Mbox 2 pro finally. If I had to do it over I would have went with a FW 800 to FW 400 conversion cable! No telling if that would have worked either! LOL Now that I have installed my PT HD3 which by the way is just purring along, the pceie 800 to 400 fw card is sitting here in the box!! Any body need a conversion card its on sale! GROWLLL. It may work for you but no guarantee. The $29 800 to 400 cable would probably be your most cost effective solution if you only have a 800 port. talk soon Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com On Jul 10, 2010, at 5:45 PM, clarence griffin wrote: oh yeah, and it only has 1 fw 800 port, its the 13 inch model. GF On Jul 10, 2010, at 1:58 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: I don't recall whether you're using a laptop or Mac Pro but, whatever the case is, if there's only one FireWire port available on the laptop, you absolutely need a chassis with at least 2 FireWire ports and hang the control surface off the drive. With FireWire stuff and Pro Tools, the interface is always last in the chain. Otherwise, yeah, if it's a MacBook Pro with 400 and 800 ports, it's possible to just keep the drive and interface on separate busses. Whatever configuration you're using, it should be way more than powerful enough to handle a ton of tracks. Years ago, I did a remote session with an iBook which was only a 600 MHz processor and recorded 16 tracks live without any hiccups at all. Slau On Jul 10, 2010, at 12:03 PM, clarence griffin wrote: ah! thanks. this sounds good. I didn't even think of that. so I need to get a caddy with 2 fw ports on it, then I can connect that to the mac, and the project mix to the drive. Is this correct? I just want to make sure I am understanding you correctly. I think that's right. GF On Jul 10, 2010, at 10:19 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: OK, yeah, I see what other people have since commented and,certainly, stay away from USB and I woldn't at all recommendrecording to your internal drive. Yes, it will work and it'll workfor a while but you're asking for trouble. The way the interfaceconnects is by being the last item in the FireWire chain. Get a drivewith two FireWire ports and connect computer to drive and drive to interface. The smaller compact bus-powered drives have fewer optionsin terms of multiple You'll want to go with something a bit more substantial. If the computer has a FW 800 port, you can record tothat bus and use the 400 bus just for the interface. HTH, Slau ports. On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:19 PM, clarence griffin wrote: I disabled the drive I was recording to from the spot light settings. Maybe I can't use an external drive? Its USB 2.0. I would think that's fast enough. Maybe I need to record to my hard drive? If so. I have a lot of clearing out of stuff to do. Any suggestions?? GF Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com
Re: rec issues continue. Also FW800 to FW400
Hey Karen, No matter what, the standard configuration is to connect a drive to the computer and the interface to the drive. The interface (or control surface) is the last in the chain so even if you have an 800 port, a drive with both ports can accommodate a 400 device. HTH, Slau On Jul 11, 2010, at 7:02 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote: you are suggesting connecting a drive to the digi, which I understood is also an fw 400 device, instead of to the mac itself? I am thinking more of the control surface needs than the drive. On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, Slau Halatyn wrote: Hi Karen, I don't know what the current crop of Apple computers have but any drive that has both an 800 and a 400 port is capable of interfacing with a Mac and any FW 400 device. Slau On Jul 11, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote: Actually that brings up a question. Is there therefore no currently support apple desktop or laptop that has fw 400 built in? meaning that some kind of conversion is absolutely required if you are going to use a digi 002 for example? Karen On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, Chuck Reichel wrote: Hi clarence, I just went through the FW 800 conversion to FW 400 with my Mbox pro 2 and let me tell you the Lacie drive did not work with that combo!!! I ended up getting a 800 to 400 fw pcie card for my Mac pro quad core and then PT saw the Mbox 2 pro finally. If I had to do it over I would have went with a FW 800 to FW 400 conversion cable! No telling if that would have worked either! LOL Now that I have installed my PT HD3 which by the way is just purring along, the pceie 800 to 400 fw card is sitting here in the box!! Any body need a conversion card its on sale! GROWLLL. It may work for you but no guarantee. The $29 800 to 400 cable would probably be your most cost effective solution if you only have a 800 port. talk soon Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com On Jul 10, 2010, at 5:45 PM, clarence griffin wrote: oh yeah, and it only has 1 fw 800 port, its the 13 inch model. GF On Jul 10, 2010, at 1:58 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: I don't recall whether you're using a laptop or Mac Pro but, whatever the case is, if there's only one FireWire port available on the laptop, you absolutely need a chassis with at least 2 FireWire ports and hang the control surface off the drive. With FireWire stuff and Pro Tools, the interface is always last in the chain. Otherwise, yeah, if it's a MacBook Pro with 400 and 800 ports, it's possible to just keep the drive and interface on separate busses. Whatever configuration you're using, it should be way more than powerful enough to handle a ton of tracks. Years ago, I did a remote session with an iBook which was only a 600 MHz processor and recorded 16 tracks live without any hiccups at all. Slau On Jul 10, 2010, at 12:03 PM, clarence griffin wrote: ah! thanks. this sounds good. I didn't even think of that. so I need to get a caddy with 2 fw ports on it, then I can connect that to the mac, and the project mix to the drive. Is this correct? I just want to make sure I am understanding you correctly. I think that's right. GF On Jul 10, 2010, at 10:19 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: OK, yeah, I see what other people have since commented and, certainly, stay away from USB and I woldn't at all recommend recording to your internal drive. Yes, it will work and it'll work for a while but you're asking for trouble. The way the interface connects is by being the last item in the FireWire chain. Get a drivewith two FireWire ports and connect computer to drive and drive tointerface. The smaller compact bus-powered drives have fewer optionsin terms of multiple You'll want to go with something a bit moresubstantial. If the computer has a FW 800 port, you can record tothat bus and use the 400 bus just for the interface. HTH, Slau ports. On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:19 PM, clarence griffin wrote: I disabled the drive I was recording to from the spot light settings. Maybe I can't use an external drive? Its USB 2.0. I would think that's fast enough. Maybe I need to record to my hard drive? If so. I have a lot of clearing out of stuff to do. Any suggestions?? GF Chuck Reichel 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com
