11 Feb
2013
11 Feb
'13
10:28 p.m.
Greetings,
I have an old track that needs brightened up a bit. It was recorded on a
mixing board cassette deck (I said it was old, didn't I ?), a direct
feed I think, and the sound quality is, shall we say, unlovely.
So how do I deal with such material ? Is an exciter useful in this
scenario ? Or ... ?
Anyone who wants to take a swing at it, here 'tis :
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale.flac
Recorded at a local festival, probably some time in the late 80s.
Best,
dp
11 Feb
11 Feb
10:45 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com>wrote;wrote:
So how do I deal with such material ? Is an exciter
useful in this
scenario ? Or ... ?
I've no experience here, but some gentle (& not so gentle) EQ-ing makes
the
listening experience quite a bit better here.
This link shows my settings for the 8 band eq from the calf plugins. No
other processing done..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8n7flw5ucz8741j/calf_eq_whiter_shade_of_pale.png
Toggling parametric III in the middle will take lots of the very highs out.
Makes it feel "cleaner" to me, but I don't think
it suits this song, so I de-activated it. I'm sure you've done some EQing
like this yourself with similar results.
I'm in the mood to play with some plugins though :) -H
11:42 p.m.
On 02/11/2013 04:45 PM, Harry van Haaren wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Dave Phillips
<dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com
<mailto:dlphillips@woh.rr.com>> wrote:
So how do I deal with such material ? Is an exciter useful in this
scenario ? Or ... ?
I've no experience here, but some gentle (& not so gentle) EQ-ing
makes the listening experience quite a bit better here.
This link shows my settings for the 8 band eq from the calf plugins.
No other processing done..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8n7flw5ucz8741j/calf_eq_whiter_shade_of_pale.png
Toggling parametric III in the middle will take lots of the very highs
out. Makes it feel "cleaner" to me, but I don't think
it suits this song, so I de-activated it. I'm sure you've done some
EQing like this yourself with similar results.
I'm in the mood to play with some plugins though :) -H
Hey Harry, thanks a lot for the settings, they work a wonder on the
track. I prefer parametric III to be active, through my monitors the
track sounds clearer with III in. And I replaced the speakers in those
monitors recently, they're a long way from tired out. :)
Best,
dp
11:02 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 04:28:17PM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
I have an old track that needs brightened up a bit. It
was recorded
on a mixing board cassette deck (I said it was old, didn't I ?), a
direct feed I think, and the sound quality is, shall we say,
unlovely.
So how do I deal with such material ? Is an exciter useful in this
scenario ? Or ... ?
It needs quite a bit of EQ, but there are some other issues.
* Did you try and adjust the head azimuth of the casestte
player ? It could make a huge difference.
* The file seems to be 'perfect mono' which makes me suspect
it was mixed to mono after playback - I can't imagine a
recording damaged like this one producing two exactly
equal tracks even if the original was mono. In that case
it could help to have the L and R outputs of the player
separately.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
11:39 p.m.
On 02/11/2013 05:02 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 04:28:17PM -0500, Dave
Phillips wrote:
Alas, that player has gone the way of the dodo. The owner sold the board
and all long ago.
I have an old track that needs brightened up a
bit. It was recorded
on a mixing board cassette deck (I said it was old, didn't I ?), a
direct feed I think, and the sound quality is, shall we say,
unlovely.
It needs quite a bit of EQ, but there are some other issues.
* Did you try and adjust the head azimuth of the casestte
player ? It could make a huge difference. * The file seems to be 'perfect mono' which
makes me suspect
it was mixed to mono after playback - I can't imagine a
recording damaged like this one producing two exactly
equal tracks even if the original was mono. In that case
it could help to have the L and R outputs of the player
separately.
See above. But thanks, Fons, I was hoping you'd weigh in on the
question. Harry's suggested EQ settings make a great difference, I'll
continue to play with the equalizer and hope to come up with a passable
track. I'm doing it for the keyboardist, he'd like to hear the track
again after so many years.
Best,
dp
11:43 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:39:23PM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
I mean the player used to transfer the recording to the PC.
But maybe that was done long ago.
* Did you try
and adjust the head azimuth of the casestte
player ? It could make a huge difference.
Alas, that player has gone the way of the dodo. The owner sold the
board and all long ago. See above. But thanks, Fons, I was hoping you'd
weigh in on the
question. Harry's suggested EQ settings make a great difference,
I'll continue to play with the equalizer and hope to come up with a
passable track. I'm doing it for the keyboardist, he'd like to hear
the track again after so many years.
I'll have a go at it anyway...
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
13 Feb
13 Feb
5 p.m.
On 02/11/2013 04:28 PM, Dave Phillips wrote:
I have an old track that needs brightened up a bit...
Many thanks to Harry, Gabbe, and Fons for your help with this
assignment. Harry's suggested settings worked nicely, and Gabbe's
version sounds as though it was EQ'd with similar settings.
But I gotta give the prize to Fons. @FA: How did you do that ? The mix
is much clearer, despite a fair amount of hiss in the high-end, and it's
definitely going to be the track I'll send to the keyboardist.
Best regards to all,
dp
5:02 p.m.
Nice! Out of curiousity, any chance to hear what Fons was able to do with
it? It didn't get posted to the list.
Cheers!
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com>wrote;wrote:
On 02/11/2013 04:28 PM, Dave Phillips wrote:
I have an old track that needs brightened up a
bit...
Many thanks to Harry, Gabbe, and Fons for your help with this assignment.
Harry's suggested settings worked nicely, and Gabbe's version sounds as
though it was EQ'd with similar settings.
But I gotta give the prize to Fons. @FA: How did you do that ? The mix is
much clearer, despite a fair amount of hiss in the high-end, and it's
definitely going to be the track I'll send to the keyboardist.
Best regards to all,
dp
______________________________**_________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.**linuxaudio.org<Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org>
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/**listinfo/linux-audio-user<http://lists.lin…
5:24 p.m.
On 02/13/2013 11:02 AM, Gabbe Nord wrote:
Nice! Out of curiousity, any chance to hear what Fons
was able to do
with it? It didn't get posted to the list.
You can download all versions from linux-sound.org.
The original mix:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale.flac
With Harry's settings for the Calf 8-band EQ :
http://linux-sound.org/audio/whitershade-HH-EQ.flac
Gabbe's remix:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_r1_GN.flac
Fons's restoration:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_EQ_FA.flac
I didn't think the original would survive compression to MP3 or OGG,
hence the Flac encoding.
Best,
dp
5:40 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com>wrote;wrote:
Fons's restoration:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/**Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_EQ_FA.**flac<http://…
404
5:51 p.m.
Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:40:13AM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Dave Phillips
<dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com>wrote;wrote:
Same for Gabbe's.
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
Fons's restoration:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/**Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_EQ_FA.**flac<http://…
404
6:19 p.m.
Ooops:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_r1-GN.flac
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale-EQ-FA.flac
That should fix it.
Best,
dp
8:48 p.m.
On 13/02/13 17:19, Dave Phillips wrote:
Ooops:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_r1-GN.flac
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale-EQ-FA.flac
That should fix it.
Best,
dp
It's been interesting listening to all the different versions.
It's been ages since I last heard this, although I have it in my
collection somewhere. It's a good cover: your voice has a touch of Gary
Brooker about it so sounds just right and the drummer nicely captured
the feel of the original as well.
With the length you made it, it's a shame you didn't resurrect the
missing two verses but in pre-internet days they'd be difficult to find.
Out of synth-geek interest, what was the string machine that the
keyboard player was using?
Thanks
Q
14 Feb
14 Feb
12:23 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 07:48:47PM +0000, Q wrote:
It's been ages since I last heard this, although I
have it in my
collection somewhere. It's a good cover: your voice has a touch of
Gary Brooker about it so sounds just right and the drummer nicely
captured the feel of the original as well.
Yes, it's a very nice rendering of this song, which is also one
of my early childhood memories: I clearly remember hearing it for
the first time on a warm early summer day at the swimming pool in
Turnhout, a small town 17 km from where I was living.
And indeed, the voice sounds very much like the original.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
1:40 p.m.
On 02/13/2013 06:19 PM, Dave Phillips wrote:
Ooops:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale_r1-GN.flac
http://linux-sound.org/audio/Whiter_Shade_Of_Pale-EQ-FA.flac
That should fix it.
Best,
dp
Just personal preference, but I think both of these have an unacceptable
amount of hissing that is not present in the original.
Can you explain what you did exactly>
2:14 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
Just personal preference, but I think both of these
have an
unacceptable amount of hissing that is not present in the original.
The original had most of the signal above 2kHz or so almost gone, so
this had to be boosted. Tape hiss gets amplified in the same way (this
was a _casette_ recording). It's probably possible to remove some of
the hiss using an FFT-based multiband expander.
Can you explain what you did exactly
Second order shelf filter, +12 dB or so at 4 kHz and above. There were
some faint traces of signal around 8 kHz, so a very narrow band around
that frequency was boosted a few dB more.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
2:44 p.m.
On 02/14/2013 02:14 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Brendan
Jones wrote:
BTW: Do there exist noise removal tools building on the Independent
Component Analysis or similar approaches? Basically using statistics to
separate signal and uncorrelated noise.. Any open source tools?
Flo
--
Florian Paul Schmidt
http://fps.io
Just personal preference, but I think both of
these have an
unacceptable amount of hissing that is not present in the original.
The original
had most of the signal above 2kHz or so almost gone, so
this had to be boosted. Tape hiss gets amplified in the same way (this
was a _casette_ recording). It's probably possible to remove some of
the hiss using an FFT-based multiband expander.
Can you explain what you did exactly
Second order shelf filter, +12 dB or so at 4 kHz and above. There were
some faint traces of signal around 8 kHz, so a very narrow band around
that frequency was boosted a few dB more.
2:53 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Florian Paul Schmidt
<mista.tapas(a)gmx.net>wrote;wrote:
BTW: Do there exist noise removal tools building on the Independent
Component Analysis or similar approaches? Basically using statistics to
separate signal and uncorrelated noise.. Any open source tools?
Open source no. Closed source, not sure if it uses the exact technique you
describe, but Izotope RX2 does have controls that at least convey a similar
workflow.
Seablade
10:31 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 02:44:35PM +0100, Florian Paul Schmidt wrote:
BTW: Do there exist noise removal tools building on
the Independent
Component Analysis or similar approaches? Basically using statistics
to separate signal and uncorrelated noise.. Any open source tools?
I'm not aware of any open-source software using ICA for audio,
and I'm not convinced it's a good approach. Audio signals tend
to be quite complex, and valid signals may look Gaussian.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
2:57 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>wrote;wrote:
Heh it is very interesting to hear you describe it, as I didn't look at the
signal analysis at all when I did mine, but also put in a fairly sharp
lowpass filter at 12k as I didn't hear anything usable above that when I
boosted. Now I am curious to go back and try out what you describe as well
as look at the statistical analysis and see if it can be improved a bit
more or not, I just don't have time these days sadly. This was a quick 15
minute project or so to see what I could do out of my own curiosity while I
had some spare time before a meeting.
Seablade
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Brendan
Jones wrote:
Which is pretty much exactly what I did. I used WaveARTs MRNoise for this
purpose, I have access to Izotope RX2 as well, but given that the signal
there is so weak, I didn't use that in a destructive manner, and I am
finding I prefer wavearts for primarily high frequency noise. However
since RX2 is a new acquisition for me I am still learning their strengths
and weaknesses.
Just personal preference, but I think both of
these have an
unacceptable amount of hissing that is not present in the original.
The original had most of the signal above 2kHz or so almost gone, so
this had to be boosted. Tape hiss gets amplified in the same way (this
was a _casette_ recording). It's probably possible to remove some of
the hiss using an FFT-based multiband expander.
Can you
explain what you did exactly
Second order shelf filter, +12 dB or so at 4 kHz and above. There were
some faint traces of signal around 8 kHz, so a very narrow band around
that frequency was boosted a few dB more.
3:14 p.m.
On 02/14/2013 02:57 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org
<mailto:fons@linuxaudio.org>> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
I listened to yours as well, and I'd say it is the cleaner of the three,
however it still does exhibit the same problems as the original (namely
the highs need to be boosted)
Just personal preference, but I think both of
these have an
unacceptable amount of hissing that is not present in the original.
The original had most of the signal above 2kHz or so almost gone, so
this had to be boosted. Tape hiss gets amplified in the same way (this
was a _casette_ recording). It's probably possible to remove some of
the hiss using an FFT-based multiband expander.
Which is pretty much exactly what I did. I used WaveARTs MRNoise for
this purpose, I have access to Izotope RX2 as well, but given that the
signal there is so weak, I didn't use that in a destructive manner, and
I am finding I prefer wavearts for primarily high frequency noise.
However since RX2 is a new acquisition for me I am still learning their
strengths and weaknesses.
Can you explain what you did exactly
Second order shelf filter, +12 dB or so at 4 kHz and above. There were
some faint traces of signal around 8 kHz, so a very narrow band around
that frequency was boosted a few dB more.
Heh it is very interesting to hear you describe it, as I didn't look at
the signal analysis at all when I did mine, but also put in a fairly
sharp lowpass filter at 12k as I didn't hear anything usable above that
when I boosted. Now I am curious to go back and try out what you
describe as well as look at the statistical analysis and see if it can
be improved a bit more or not, I just don't have time these days sadly.
This was a quick 15 minute project or so to see what I could do out of
my own curiosity while I had some spare time before a meeting.
4:03 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Brendan Jones
<brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
I listened to yours as well, and I'd say it is the
cleaner of the three,
however it still does exhibit the same problems as the original (namely the
highs need to be boosted)
While I am not really out to defend or otherwise what I did in 15 minutes,
I will say two things on this. This does come down to personal preference
to an extent, while I obviously boosted the highs, and I thought Fon's was
an improvement, I also thought that Fon's highs were a bit too harsh from
being boosted so much personally. As I said, a lot comes down to personal
opinion and for something that was done in a relatively short timespan, for
I am certain all of us, there is a lot of subjectiveness going on:)
The other thing I will say is that part of why I chose not to boost the
highs any stronger is there is already evidence of something undesired
going on in that section I needed to track down, and boosting them farther
just brought that out more. This is not the same thing that led to what I
believe to be the harshness in Fon's version, most likely this is related
to a phase problem introduced by the amount of EQ used or specific EQs I
did use as I used several different filters (Ranging from Harrison, to
Glame, to LinuxDSP), or it is possible it is artifacts from the multiband
gating I used to clean up the hiss, or possibly one of those accentuated by
the other. The end result is that with that going on I felt it better not
to boost any more;)
All that being said I do like several things about Fon's and was tempted to
just see how it sounded if I merely cleaned it up a bit. But decided not
to in my case for a variety of reasons:)
Seablade
10:24 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 08:57:41AM -0500, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
Heh it is very interesting to hear you describe it, as
I didn't look at the
signal analysis at all when I did mine, but also put in a fairly sharp
lowpass filter at 12k as I didn't hear anything usable above that when I
boosted.
I probably should have done that as well, there was really no usable
signal above 12 kHz. But the extra boost around 8 kHz made a lot of
difference.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
13 Feb
13 Feb
6:33 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:00:57AM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
How did you do that ?
Two sections of parametric EQ and a few dB of lookahead peak limiting.
The equaliser is the (yet unreleased) one with the higher order shelf
filters (the HF shelf did most of the work), the limiter is dpl1.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
7:07 p.m.
Figured I would give it a quick stab before a meeting, but didn't quite
finish it before I had to leave, here is the incomplete result. Still
something going on in the high end I need to track down though...
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lvavc_public/.temp/WhiterShadeofPale.wav
Sadly I just don't have time to do a great job with it, I went for the
quickest way I could to get it this far, rather than the best quality.
Seablade
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>wrote;wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:00:57AM -0500, Dave
Phillips wrote:
How did you do that ?
Two sections of parametric EQ and a few dB of lookahead peak limiting.
The equaliser is the (yet unreleased) one with the higher order shelf
filters (the HF shelf did most of the work), the limiter is dpl1.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
7:45 p.m.
On 02/13/2013 01:07 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
Figured I would give it a quick stab before a meeting,
but didn't
quite finish it before I had to leave, here is the incomplete result.
Still something going on in the high end I need to track down though...
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lvavc_public/.temp/WhiterShadeofPale.wav
Sadly I just don't have time to do a great job with it, I went for the
quickest way I could to get it this far, rather than the best quality.
Wow, that's another nice one. Thanks a lot, Thomas.
Btw, a little background: The performance was a one-shot by a group I
put together specifically for the festival. We had exactly one rehearsal
before the show, and we had never played together as a band before the
show. We were all good friends though, and over the years we'd all
played with one another in various groups. Players were Charles Thaxton
(aka Char-El) on keys, Paul Sanders (RIP) on guitar, Dave Nalle on
drums, and myself on bass and vocal. When I got the guys together it was
with the understanding that whatever we decided to do, it had to be
achievable in a single rehearsal. Suffice to say, we had a ball.
I wish I had the recording of us doing Zeplin's Rain Song, it was
awesome. The keys player had a Mellotron that made the song.
Thanks again, guys, I really appreciate the time & effort. I owe you all
a few tall ones.
Best,
dp
10 Apr
10 Apr
5:57 p.m.
2013/2/13 Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com>om>:
On 02/13/2013 01:07 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
I have to say that, for one rehearsal, it's quite good.I like that
bassy sound, as a R&B old vinyl, that mellows the voice and the
brightness the band would have. Nice interpretation and good voice,
Dave.
Regards.
--
Carlos sanchiavedraz
* Musix GNU+Linux
http://www.musix.es
Figured I would give it a quick stab before a
meeting, but didn't quite
finish it before I had to leave, here is the incomplete result. Still
something going on in the high end I need to track down though...
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lvavc_public/.temp/WhiterShadeofPale.wav
Sadly I just don't have time to do a great job with it, I went for the
quickest way I could to get it this far, rather than the best quality.
Wow, that's another nice one. Thanks a lot, Thomas.
Btw, a little background: The performance was a one-shot by a group I put
together specifically for the festival. We had exactly one rehearsal before
the show, and we had never played together as a band before the show. We
were all good friends though, and over the years we'd all played with one
another in various groups. Players were Charles Thaxton (aka Char-El) on
keys, Paul Sanders (RIP) on guitar, Dave Nalle on drums, and myself on bass
and vocal. When I got the guys together it was with the understanding that
whatever we decided to do, it had to be achievable in a single rehearsal.
Suffice to say, we had a ball.
I wish I had the recording of us doing Zeplin's Rain Song, it was awesome.
The keys player had a Mellotron that made the song.
Thanks again, guys, I really appreciate the time & effort. I owe you all a
few tall ones.
Best,
dp
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
13 Feb
13 Feb
9:01 p.m.
Nice work Fons! I hope you release that EQ sometime, especially now that
you've shown what it can do too.
Cheers.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>wrote;wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:00:57AM -0500, Dave
Phillips wrote:
How did you do that ?
Two sections of parametric EQ and a few dB of lookahead peak limiting.
The equaliser is the (yet unreleased) one with the higher order shelf
filters (the HF shelf did most of the work), the limiter is dpl1.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
16 Feb
16 Feb
11:18 p.m.
[Dave Phillips]
My take is perhaps a bit late, but in my defense it appears I cannot
send you direct mail, Dave, as the server logs indicate nobody ever
accessed the link I sent you a few days ago:
http://quitte.de/dsp/wsop.ogg
Do you recall what pitch you tuned to? I took the liberty of moving
it 40.4 cents closer to 440.
I rather like the singing, cheers,
Tim
20 Feb
20 Feb
12:51 p.m.
On 02/16/2013 05:19 PM, Tim Goetze wrote:
My take is perhaps a bit late, but in my defense it
appears I cannot
send you direct mail, Dave, as the server logs indicate nobody ever
accessed the link I sent you a few days ago:
http://quitte.de/dsp/wsop.ogg
Do you recall what pitch you tuned to? I took the liberty of moving
it 40.4 cents closer to 440.
Nicely done, Tim, thank you very much. Sounds clear and distinct through
the Sony MDR7506 phones.
Not sure whether we did anything special to accommodate the Mellotron
tuning-wise.
I rather like the singing, cheers,
:)
Best,
dp
4177
days inactive
4235
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
29 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Brendan Jones -
Carlos sanchiavedraz -
Dave Phillips -
Florian Paul Schmidt -
Fons Adriaensen -
Gabbe Nord -
Harry van Haaren -
Paul Davis -
Q -
Thomas Vecchione -
Tim Goetze