Support |
i have nero v5 and i was pretty sure i had done this, so i just did it again and this works: -leave the file you want whole (don't cut it into separate wavs) -add it to nero -double click the track and click the "idexes, limits, split" tab -find each point you want to have a track index and click the "split" button (note: the split does not happen until you click "ok") -make sure all tracks have 0 sec. pause (set in "track properties" tab) (except track one - redbook spec won't allow this) -burn with disc-at-once i did this and cannot hear clicks between tracks. try it and let me know, it could very well be my ears are more damaged than yours. mine have been subjected to lotsa loud-ass monitors and such... (getting in-ear monitors next week as well as a hearing check, but i'm not sure i want to know...) ----- Original Message ----- From: <SoundFNR@aol.com> To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 3:49 PM Subject: Re: CD Mastering Conundrum Continues > Thanks to all replies. > But still much remains unexplained. > I used Nero to burn the CD, so could set the gap to 0s. > I used "disk at once" > I did edit at zero crossing. > ..but there's still the issue of the transfer changing the length of the >file. > which makes editing at zero crossing a waste of time. > > Cliffs WaveLab looks like it may be an option, but > ...hey Cliff, didn't you do that with tracks that were separated by >silence > anyway > ( well that's how it looked to me when I read your post) > > Per's Jam software looks like it could do the business, > as it does crossfades it must deal with the problem. > (if only it ran on PC) > > So I'm still asking :- > 1) How can you know in advance what the transfer from .wav to CD is >going to > do to the length of the file. > > I notice that commercial CDs that segue don't have the track changeover >at > the zero crossing point (so they click if you just play one track, at >the > start and end), and can only assume that it wouldn't be possible to >achieve > this. > > Well thanks again each of the replies > > andy butler >