As far as I know, you can't punch a section in directly in Audacity. What you can do is zero out the section of the old track you want to replace, then set up a new mono (or stereo) track to record. Hit Record. The old track plays, and when the punch-in section comes, record the new material, stopping any time after the punch-out. It's a simple matter to lift the new section vertically and drop it in the zeroed-out section of the old track. If you haven't got delay compensation set, you will have to time-align the new section first. Tedious, but what can you expect for the price?

Bos .... thanks,that's what i thought. i have been doing just that but it's kludgy. i can live. like you said, "whadda expect fer free?"
this computer is a POS ... if it wasn't i would just d load StudioOne. thanks.

Why don't you just use Reaper? It is full featured and the trial lasts until you feel guilty enough to pay the $60. Just sayin.

i don't have any guilt trips ... i'll check it out. thanks

The pdf file is great and actually useful. I even bought the spiral bound version I liked it so much. Audition CS6 is still my main DAW but I have a lot of respect for the Reaper.

Reaper doesn't work on Linux does it? There is also Ardour.

Reaper doesn't work on Linux does it? There is also Ardour.

i would run it with the wine wrapper ... it might work or not . it's not that big of a deal i can kludge around with audacity just fine. i'm actually pretty impressed with the program ... this punch in thing is the only stumbling block i have come across ...

I visited my daughter's 5th grade class yesterday for an open house. She showed me a computer-based presentation that she's been working on. They use Audacity to record the voice-overs. Couldn't help but chuckle when I saw it mentioned here just now.

vttom, post: 403390 wrote: I visited my daughter's 5th grade class yesterday for an open house. She showed me a computer-based presentation that she's been working on. They use Audacity to record the voice-overs. Couldn't help but chuckle when I saw it mentioned here just now.

that is exactly what i am doing. it's a podcast thing i'm cooking up just for rucks and chuckles (too much time on my hands here).

audacity is all i really need. if i was to get any more serious, a new computer would be the first thing i would look to. then i would just get a copy of Studio One free ...

i just have to create a new track each time i want to record the vocal. to add insult to injury, i'm using the internal sound card ... ha ha ha ha. i ordered an XLR to 1/8' cable the other day and i'm waiting for it to come in the mail. i'm going to see if the mic input on this old beater i have will have enough guts to take my SM7a ... should be interesting. if it doesn't, i have this beerslinger pos usb interface (oooouu! it's red!) i can use it to hook up a crappy mackie 1202 i have to pre amp the mic ... but even that is more than i want to go through.

i am going to say that dispite having to render anything i want to use effects on and the lack of punch in ability, i am impressed with how Audacity actually sounds. the plugs included are pretty decent sounding and i have already discovered some cool work-arounds to "automate" my mixes .. all of these limitations are what makes this program function on resource hungry computer like mine i guess. i had to use an 8 gig USB memory stick and set up Audacity to use it as RAM in order to get the darn thing to record without glitching in the playback ... fun fun fun.

How retro.

.. thanks for the helpful comment ..

TheJackAttack, post: 403372 wrote: Why don't you just use Reaper? It is full featured and the trial lasts until you feel guilty enough to pay the $60. Just sayin.

Is "Reaper" better? I'm just in the beginning stages of developing a one hour radio show & was given audacity as what the station recommended I use. I've never mixed a thing in my life but have been able to figure out this program. I'm here to figure out how to improve the sound of my voice (may be impossible lol) and my song/vocal transition with background. I'm really enjoying it mind you, hours feel like a minute. What program would you recommend to offer the best quality for the recording simpleton? What does kludgy mean? & hope you can bare with my million questions that are yet to come.

Either will work. Reaper has more potential.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

audacity = free
reaper = $60 (unless you don't pay your bills).

Kurt Foster, post: 403534 wrote: audacity = free
reaper = $60 (unless you don't pay your bills).

Reaper is Nagware. It will continue to work at full capacity but you will get that nag screen at start up if you don't pay. $60 isn't much to pay when you consider the alternatives.

Reaper has so many benefits over Audacity. It's designed as a multitrack DAW whereas Audacity is more of an editor. Reaper has real time effects, flexible routing, VST suppport, multi-input ASIO support. I'm sure I could go on but I think that real time effects is enough in itself isn't it?

i'm not arguing . reaper is better. audacity's free .. what do you expect? intellectual property has value and if i commit to paying for it i will pay. this includes software / music / whatever.

as for real time effects, i own compressors, 3 or 4 lexicons an eventide so i am covered with hardware which i fell sounds so much better anyhow. i pretty much dislike plug ins.

i checked out reaper and it looks like a perfectly adequate program. it's getting to the point (do i hear a high vocal? thanks Graham) where all DAWs have the same features and besides which keystrokes are used for shortcuts, perform much in the same way just like a word processor.

Reaper seems just fine. i won't argue that BUT audacity works well even on older computers like mine which has a 5200 rpm drive and about 256 memory and what i am really using it for at the moment is an editor.

after figuring out audacity, i am considering getting a Zoom thing maybe the 16 track oneor perhaps some other kind of "potty studio" to capture and mix and just using audacity to edit .. seems like a decent solution to me and i won't have to deal with the constant upgrade cycle thing we get from most DAW manufacturers. i hate it when just get something figured out and then they change it.

I was only responding with this post in mind. It wasn't really directed toward you necessarily.

imoss, post: 403523 wrote: Is "Reaper" better? I'm just in the beginning stages of developing a one hour radio show & was given audacity as what the station recommended I use. I've never mixed a thing in my life but have been able to figure out this program. I'm here to figure out how to improve the sound of my voice (may be impossible lol) and my song/vocal transition with background. I'm really enjoying it mind you, hours feel like a minute. What program would you recommend to offer the best quality for the recording simpleton? What does kludgy mean? & hope you can bare with my million questions that are yet to come.

I'm just in the beginning stages of developing a one hour radio show & was given audacity as what the station recommended I use

and this is why i keep saying audacity. the station may not have reaper ..???

imoss when i say kludgy i am referring to how it works. you have to go to pull down menus and audition effects and the apply the effects and then wait a minute or two for them to render ... where as with reaper and other DAWs (that you have to pay for) you can just pull a plug in and apply it then listen in real time and adjust. this is what Hueseph was saying when he posted

Reaper has so many benefits over Audacity. It's designed as a multitrack DAW whereas Audacity is more of an editor. Reaper has real time effects, flexible routing, VST suppport, multi-input ASIO support. I'm sure I could go on but I think that real time effects is enough in itself isn't it?

another solution is Studio One free (which is coincidentally free) but you need a computer that will meet the running requirements ...

adobe audition 3 is free now, and while it has questionable workflow issues, like menu surfing, it has pleasant sounding stock plugins, and even a mastering pluggin in section powered by izotope. It runs very efficiently as it was designed for computers from the early 2000's. I feel that audacity is limited, reaper is the best 'cheap' program, And studio one, or audition, are best free, it only depends on your computer.