Hi Jeremy, You're correct, I didn't give enough information. I'm using Windows 10. I'm not at a very proficient level with scripting. I see the potential of it, but am not confident with a scripting language yet. I'm assuming batch script would be fine for my needs, but right now I'm just trying to learn some basics, so that I have a better idea of what I'll be scripting when I get there. I totally understand what you're saying about making sure the processing is easy to follow and adjust, rather than trying to make it run as efficiently as possible. I tend to agree with that mindset, but I feel like there's a line between an easy-to-follow way, and a way that's hacked together because you don't understand the basic tools which make certain things a hundred times easier. I sometimes feel like I'm on the wrong side of that, So I'm a bit paranoid that I'm doing things in a stupid way haha A simple example follows. Not sure if I'd actually use this, I was just trying to think of a situation which illustrates my uncertainties. Step 1. I have a file called test.wav and I want to pitch shift it. sox test.wav temp.wav pitch -500 Step 2. Then I should mix the pitch shift copy with the original, and apply reverb to the mix. sox -m test.wav temp.wav test_processed.wav reverb File/directory structure should be simple. Basically, the original file and the _processed version should be in the same folder, at least for now. Temp.wav is not needed. It would be useful to hear intermediate results, but assuming I don't need to check those, I really don't need it. So my question is twofold. Is it common practice to launch sox once for some processing and then again for other stuff? I know you can chain effects in one sox instance, but mixing is not an effect as I understand, which is why I came to the conclusion that you needed to use a separate instance for mixing. But for all I know, I'm missing something. Secondly, is it a good idea to use a temporary output file on the hard drive as I have done for intermediate processing steps? On 11/16/20, Jeremy Nicoll - ml sox users <jn.ml.sxu.88@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2020-11-16 10:04, raymond grote wrote: > >> As someone who is generally good at putting pieces together, I can >> work out how to do this in a messy way. Basically I would manually >> mix/process each file. But I unfortunately struggle with efficiency >> sometimes, so it would be quite tedious to do this to multiple files. > >> So, I'm primarily trying to work out how much I can do with one >> instance of sox, and if multiple instances are required, where would >> they split? > > I think your question's a bit too vague to answer easily. > > What OS are you using, and what scripting language (or shell?) are you > comfortable with? > > Do you have an idea yet of what directories/folders you're planning to > keep files in? > > Do you know how you plan to name them? (Eg, are you going to have base > leafnames and add words to imply what changes you've made, so that eg > > mysong.wav > > might end up with modified versions named eg > > mysong (shifted 2khz).wav > > mysong (shifted 2khz) (reverb).wav > > or could it be ...mysong\file001.wav (the original) > and ...mysong\filennn.wav (the n'th variant)? > > > Do all the files you want to process have a similar naming style? > > > As far as sox goes, I am not personally in favour of trying to use > chains > of commands, because although efficiency may be a problem, stuff can run > while I look for food, have a shower, sleep etc... and simplicity in the > scripts wins over for me. (I'm a retired professional programmer, so my > "simple" might be more complex than yours. And my scripts are written in > ooREXX and run under Windows.) > > It's also (I think) a great deal easier (if you realise later on that a > sequence of effects didn't do quite what you wanted) that you can go > back > and redo (say) the third change taking the output from the second one. > You can't do that if you no longer have the intermediate files. > > Also at the start when you are experimenting, I think you'd want to test > each stage separately. > > > -- > Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own > > > _______________________________________________ > Sox-users mailing list > Sox-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-users > _______________________________________________ Sox-users mailing list Sox-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-users
