22 May
2012
22 May
'12
9:53 p.m.
On Tue, 22 May 2012 09:43:35 -1000
david <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
On 05/22/2012 12:36 AM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
Horses for courses...
I find Audacity works perfectly well for noise reduction on vocal or
non-distorted guitar tracks. Anything with a lot of treble content seems
to develop a background 'mush' underneath the audio, but not there in the
silences.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:36 AM, david
<gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
<mailto:gnome@hawaii.rr.com>> wrote:
Audacity has a noise removal feature that lets you select a few
seconds of what you consider noise, and identify that to the program
as noise. A good spot for me is areas in a recording that are
supposed to be silent but generally aren't if you're recording mic
input live. Then you select the whole track and run the noise
removal on it. Works well enough for me.
As I mentioned above, unless they have made sudden huge leaps in quality
of their noise reduction process it isn't really a good quality tool. I
know from conversations with Ricardus some of his uses and they are
similar to what I have done in the past as well, for example restoring
old analog recordings, etc. Where depending on the source material you
have to have a pretty dang minimal artifact experience(Recordings of
high dynamic range classical music for example), and also depending on
the source material the exact needs may change over time, requiring
automation to use effectively. Neither of these applied in my
experience with Audacity's tool.
High dynamic range classical music was exactly what a friend of mine was
working with. First step was extremely-well-cleaned vinyl. He recorded
them from a high-end turntable through an Audiophile 2496. Then cleaned
in gnome wave cleaner. I've heard the digitized versions, and there is
no noise in them ...