21 May
2012
21 May
'12
12:04 p.m.
Hello lau-sters,
Does anyone have a recommendation for de-noising software on linux? I'd
like to remove distant traffic noise from 96kHz/24bit recordings of
voice. Is this something better handled on Windows/wine?
Thanks,
Iain
21 May
21 May
12:08 p.m.
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Iain Mott wrote:
Hello lau-sters,
Does anyone have a recommendation for de-noising software on linux? I'd
like to remove distant traffic noise from 96kHz/24bit recordings of
voice. Is this something better handled on Windows/wine?
http://wiki.audacityteam.org/index.php?title=Noise_Removal
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
7:17 p.m.
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine <
alexandre.prokoudine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Please no. Unless they have had a giant jump up in quality in recent
months, this just doesn't cut it.
Tools on linux are audacity or gnome wave cleaner (
http://gwc.sourceforge.net/) - or you can also try our
new noise
reduction algorithms with auphonic:
http://auphonic.com/blog/2012/05/11/experimental-noise-reduction-and-algori…
GWC last I checked hadn't been developed in some time. Hadn't heard of
auphonic, will have to take a look right now.
Others have given good comments as chances are for traffic noise which can
be variable can be difficult to filter out of a recording. Note that I
didn't say remove, or even denoise, as neither of those are accurate and
you will never end up with an identical quality recording as if it wasn't
there, or really even close in many cases.
Personally at the moment I am using Festige combined with WaveARTs MR Noise
for realtime noise reduction on Linux. This was extensively used on the
recent video that was part of the Tube Kickstarter campaign (ABout 16
instances of thise IIRC combined with other tools that were suggested
elsewhere in this thread). But Ricardus is completely correct, I have yet
to find quality noise reduction tools on Linux. I do need to check out the
aforementioned auphonic however, hadn't heard that.
Seablade
23 May
23 May
2:22 a.m.
On 21 May 2012 at 13:17, Thomas Vecchione <seablaede(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Please no. Unless they have had a giant jump up in quality in recent
months, this just doesn't cut it.
My noise must be more appropriate to what's possible with that
algorithm as I have frequent experience with good results.
Seems like YMMV...
--
Kevin
21 May
21 May
12:11 p.m.
Hallo!
Does anyone have a recommendation for de-noising
software on linux? I'd
like to remove distant traffic noise from 96kHz/24bit recordings of
voice. Is this something better handled on Windows/wine?
It always depends on the noise:
if your traffic noise is quite constant, then it's easier to remove.
If it changes all the time, it will be difficult ...
Tools on linux are audacity or gnome wave cleaner
(http://gwc.sourceforge.net/) - or you can also try our new noise
reduction algorithms with auphonic:
http://auphonic.com/blog/2012/05/11/experimental-noise-reduction-and-algori…
LG
Georg
Thanks,
Iain
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
auphonic - automatic audio post production
http://auphonic.com
audio development, machine learning, open source and more
12:14 p.m.
Hi Iain!
You should be able to handle that in Linux. Seeing, that it's traffic noise,
a typical fft-based denoising tool is out. Your tools of choice should be EQ
and filters.
You can of course remove the very low end regardless. You could try to find
the bass frequency of the voice and set the low end even higher than 50Hz, not
too close though, since no filter is perfect.
Then put an EQ on your recording, Activate only one band, set it as narrow
as possible and the gain about 12Db or even higher. Then sweep the bands
frequency slowly. You will find the first point where it hurts. Just lower the
gain drastically below 0Db.
Another idea: If it's a stereo recording with the voice bang centre, you
might perhaps go a stranger route. There was a sort of karaoke LADSPA plugin,
which tried to lower something in the centre and only leave the rest. If that
works, leaving mostly the traffic, you can use some graphical wave-editor or
display to line the two files up, in case, that there is some delay introduced
by the plugin. that done, you can use csound, PD or some other allround synth
to subtract the mainly traffic only signal from the original. This is an
outside chance, but it may end up giving a good result.
Kind regards
Julien
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Such Is Life: Very Intensely Adorable;
Free And Jubilating Amazement Revels, Dancing On - FLOWERS!
====== Find my music at ======
http://juliencoder.de/nama/music.html
.....................................
"If you live to be 100, I hope I live to be 100 minus 1 day,
so I never have to live without you." (Winnie the Pooh)
1:42 p.m.
On 21/05/12 12:05, Iain Mott wrote:
Hello lau-sters,
Does anyone have a recommendation for de-noising
Yes: your ears... Seriously..
'denoising' is as vague and blurry as
'enhancing'. As people have already suggested there are many different
approaches and consequently tools. Experiment a lot and see what gives
the best result for what you need.
'Cleaning' aim is, in my humble opinion, #1 to consider: e.g. do you
want to make the voice simply as intelligible as possible (in this case
you don't care about possibly destroying its timbre with funky EQ) or do
you want to maintain its character as much as possible (in this case you
have very low room for extreem EQ..)?
on linux?
Yes. There are many powerful tools, but first try and decide which
routes you'd like to try (e.g. if you need a noise-gate, an eq, a
(fft-based) denoiser, etc.)
Lorenzo.
I'd
like to remove distant traffic noise from 96kHz/24bit recordings of
voice. Is this something better handled on Windows/wine?
Thanks,
Iain
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
4:04 p.m.
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 07:05 -0300, Iain Mott wrote:
The lack of quality noise-reduction software for linux has been on my
mind quite a bit lately. I thought it might be a cool idea to create a
Kickstarter project to fund the development for this. Mike from
linuxDSP or Fons would be the best choices (I think) to write the plugs.
Just throwing it out there...
Hello lau-sters,
Does anyone have a recommendation for de-noising software on linux? I'd
like to remove distant traffic noise from 96kHz/24bit recordings of
voice. Is this something better handled on Windows/wine?
Thanks,
Iain
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
11:48 p.m.
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:04:13AM -0400, Ricardus Vincente wrote:
The lack of quality noise-reduction software for
linux has been on my
mind quite a bit lately. I thought it might be a cool idea to create a
Kickstarter project to fund the development for this. Mike from
linuxDSP or Fons would be the best choices (I think) to write the plugs.
:-) Very flattering, but don't expect a single-click solution for
something as volatile as removing unwanted noises from a recording.
In some cases (and more often than one would think) it's just a
matter of some EQ, in other cases a simple noise gate can do the
trick, and sometimes you'll need a multiband expander using pre-
measured statistics. It also depends on how the result is going
to be used afterwards.
As in many cases, it's going to be the skills of the user rather
than the tools that are going to determine success or failure.
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)
11:57 p.m.
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 21:48 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Yes, and I have used those things effectively in the past. But
sometimes real NR software is needed.
I think if it wasn't needed, we wouldn't see so many good choices in the
Protools world (like the Sonnox plugs, they're very good.)
Anyway, I am just floating the idea. So far, a bunch of people have
committed to contributing to such a Kickstarter campaign, were we to
start one.
Rich...
The lack of
quality noise-reduction software for linux has been on my
mind quite a bit lately. I thought it might be a cool idea to create a
Kickstarter project to fund the development for this. Mike from
linuxDSP or Fons would be the best choices (I think) to write the plugs.
:-) Very flattering, but don't expect a single-click solution for
something as volatile as removing unwanted noises from a recording.
In some cases (and more often than one would think) it's just a
matter of some EQ, in other cases a simple noise gate can do the
trick, and sometimes you'll need a multiband expander using pre-
measured statistics. It also depends on how the result is going
to be used afterwards.
As in many cases, it's going to be the skills of the user rather
than the tools that are going to determine success or failure.
22 May
22 May
9:22 a.m.
On 21/05/12 23:57, Ricardus Vincente wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 21:48 +0000, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
>> The lack of quality noise-reduction software
for linux has been on my
>> mind quite a bit lately.
[...]
> As in many cases, it's going to be the skills
of the user rather
> than the tools that are going to determine success or failure.
[...]
real NR software
There is no such thing. As I was trying to explain (and I think if I
interpret correctly, Fons's point was also on the same lines) it would
make more sense to speak of *noise reduction strategies*. Think of it like
restoration of an old (ancient) 'something': is it a 1600s painting
where you
would like to have colours as similar as possible as the painter made
it? Is it
a sculpture which lost an arm which you want to reconstruct? Is it
simply an old
dampened document you need to read the rare historical content from,
where the
aesthetics of the paper and ink aren't so much relevant?
Once you have these aspects clear you can try experimenting with different
strategies.
Only then, after much experimentation, you can come back to the list and
say: "my research outcomes seem to prove that noise-gate plugins on
linux perform worst than noise gate plugins on XXX", and start a real,
entertaining flame about it :)
Lorenzo.
12:33 p.m.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Lorenzo Sutton <lorenzofsutton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
On 21/05/12 23:57, Ricardus Vincente wrote:
[...]
There is no such thing. As I was trying to explain (and I think if I
interpret correctly, Fons's point was also on the same lines) it would
make more sense to speak of *noise reduction strategies*.
Sorry but there are plugins intended specifically to filter out specific
types of noise. These are much more purpose specific then general purpose
tools like EQ and Gates, but I would once again clarify they are examples
of 'noise reduction software' as that is specifically their intended
purpose.
Does that mean you don't have to know how to apply them? Not at all. But
it does mean you can generally get better results with them than a standard
gate, eq, or other general purpose tool, though in some cases they are
modifications of the basic concepts of those general purpose tools. Fons
has given several great examples of such tools in his post as well.
Seablade
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 21:48 +0000, Fons
Adriaensen wrote:
The lack
of quality noise-reduction software for linux has been on my
> mind quite a bit lately.
As in many cases, it's going to be the skills
of the user rather
[...]
real NR software
than the tools that are going to determine
success or failure.
5:03 a.m.
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 21:48 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:04:13AM -0400, Ricardus
Vincente wrote:
BTW, two clicks would be fine. ;-)
Rich...
The lack of quality noise-reduction software for
linux has been on my
mind quite a bit lately. I thought it might be a cool idea to create a
Kickstarter project to fund the development for this. Mike from
linuxDSP or Fons would be the best choices (I think) to write the plugs.
:-) Very flattering, but don't expect a single-click solution for
something as volatile as removing unwanted noises from a recording. 
10:36 a.m.
On 05/21/2012 05:03 PM, Ricardus Vincente wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 21:48 +0000, Fons Adriaensen
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.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:04:13AM -0400,
Ricardus Vincente wrote:
BTW, two clicks would be fine. ;-)
Rich... The lack of quality noise-reduction software
for linux has been on my
mind quite a bit lately. I thought it might be a cool idea to create a
Kickstarter project to fund the development for this. Mike from
linuxDSP or Fons would be the best choices (I think) to write the plugs.
:-) Very flattering, but don't expect a single-click solution for
something as volatile as removing unwanted noises from a recording.
12:36 p.m.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:36 AM, david <gnome(a)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.
Seablade
3:57 p.m.
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 06:36 -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:36 AM, david
<gnome(a)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.
Yes. Thank you.
I mentioned the idea of a Kickstarter campaign to fund development of
some decent plugins a few weeks ago in the Open Source Musicians forum,
and on linuxDSP's KVR forum, and it had some traction.
I have no idea if any of the DSP programmers qualified to develop such
plugs are interested, but it would be useful to know how much money we
would have to raise on Kickstarter, to make it viable for them.
Rich...
4:29 p.m.
Am Dienstag, den 22.05.2012, 09:57 -0400 schrieb Ricardus Vincente:
I mentioned the idea of a Kickstarter campaign to
fund development of
some decent plugins a few weeks ago in the Open Source Musicians
forum,
Open Source Musicians forum? I search for some time now for a
Open Source Musicians forum in the web,
could you give me a link were it is?
5:15 p.m.
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 16:29 +0200, hermann wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 22.05.2012, 09:57 -0400 schrieb
Ricardus Vincente:
Oh, sorry, bad choice of words We do have a Wiki site, but when I said
forum, I meant IRC.
Freenode.com #opensourcemusicians
It was being discussed about two weeks ago when I pitched the idea to
the channel, and to some people in the #ardour channel. I also started
a thread on linuxDSP's KVR forum, but it seemed to die pretty quickly up
there.
Rich...
I mentioned the idea of a Kickstarter campaign
to fund development of
some decent plugins a few weeks ago in the Open Source Musicians
forum,
Open Source Musicians forum? I search for some time now for a
Open Source Musicians forum in the web,
could you give me a link were it is? 
4:36 p.m.
Some links in the FAQ:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/faq/start#qhow_to_remove_noise_how_to_restore_ol…
5:10 p.m.
Yes, very familiar with pretty much everything that is there having read
most of those articles some time ago, and even used those processes as
well. See my above posts on my opinion of the quality of options that work
natively on Linux.
Seablade
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Emanuel Rumpf <xbran(a)web.de> wrote:
Some links in the FAQ:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/faq/start#qhow_to_remove_noise_how_to_restore_ol…
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
5:12 p.m.
Apologies, I just realized you may have been responding to the OP (It's all
about me don't you know:). So yes that does sum up the options except for
the previously mentioned auphonic (Which I haven't tried) decently.
Seablade
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Vecchione <seablaede(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Yes, very familiar with pretty much everything that is
there having read
most of those articles some time ago, and even used those processes as
well. See my above posts on my opinion of the quality of options that work
natively on Linux.
Seablade
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Emanuel Rumpf <xbran(a)web.de> wrote:
Some links in the FAQ:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/faq/start#qhow_to_remove_noise_how_to_restore_ol…
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
9:43 p.m.
On 05/22/2012 12:36 AM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
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 ...
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
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 ...
23 May
23 May
7:18 p.m.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2012 09:43:35 -1000
david <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
So after this conversation I decided to go check and see if there had been
improvements in the noise reduction in Audacity. There has been, and
fairly significant, at least it is usable now for certain materials, but it
still doesn't hold much against other solutions out there. Granted I only
checked with a boom recording from a shoot I did a little bit back, but yes
there are definitely still artifacts there, and possibly worse is a
reduction(Not huge, but noticable) of consonant sounds reducing
intelligibility slightly, especially on quieter parts.
Still overall much better than it used to be, and if I needed to do a quick
cleanup I might consider it now at least, that is a huge step from where it
was. But my preferred method is still using some proprietary plugins I own
for this.
Seablade
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 ...
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.
22 May
22 May
9:59 p.m.
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 09:43 -1000, david wrote:
I have HEARD examples of Gnome Wave Cleaner doing some good work, but I
have never been able to get it to yield results like the demos I have
heard. It also crashes on large files for me. It wouldn't even load the
45 minute live-music sets that I attempted to use it on.
Rich..
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 ...
23 May
23 May
7:09 a.m.
On 05/22/2012 09:59 AM, Ricardus Vincente wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 09:43 -1000, david wrote:
I have HEARD examples of Gnome Wave Cleaner doing some good work, but I
have never been able to get it to yield results like the demos I have
heard. It also crashes on large files for me. It wouldn't even load the
45 minute live-music sets that I attempted to use it on.
Hmmm - maybe export shorter parts of the 45-minute sets and test it on them?
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
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 ...
22 May
22 May
3:31 p.m.
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 22:36 -1000, david 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.
Have you seen the current state of NR plugins available for other
platforms these days? It is way beyond that.
I can always hear the artifacts that Audacity's NR plug leaves behind.
I have an ancient version of Sound Forge (so old it can not even import
anything except 16 bit files) and its NR plugins sound way better.
Rich...
9:40 p.m.
On 05/22/2012 03:31 AM, Ricardus Vincente wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 22:36 -1000, david wrote:
Haven't seen or done anything with audio on Windows or Mac, so I'll take
your word for it.
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.
Have you seen the current state of NR plugins available for other
platforms these days? It is way beyond that. I can always hear the artifacts that Audacity's NR
plug leaves behind.
I don't hear any at all, but probably your ears are better than mine.
I have an ancient version of Sound Forge (so old it
can not even import
anything except 16 bit files) and its NR plugins sound way better.
OK.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
23 May
23 May
11:44 p.m.
Am 21.05.2012 23:48, schrieb Fons Adriaensen:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:04:13AM -0400, Ricardus
Vincente wrote:
In the end it will be either a drum-track or vocal track or anything
else that could have been recorded in a studio in the basement of a
railway-station or it will be a restauration-effort to digitize a
vinyl or cassette.
In all cases: if it is hiss or hum, EQ or gate can help if used wisely
but I do not know any software for Linux that allows to cancle out a
train running through the one great vocals-take -- whithout destroying
the voice in the process that is.
IMHO: to do something like this the best way is to start with a tool
that visualises the sound to allow to really find and technically
analyse the problem. A human can hear, waht a train is and what a voice
is, for any software there is only frequency an amplitude so there needs
to be a tool that allows the human to teach the robot, what is noise and
what is signal.
The noise-remover in Audacity does that but is far too primitve to
achieve really good results.
To have the abilities known from Melodyne in Sonic Visualiser such as:
this part of the wave, this range of frequencies with this particular
sequence of amplitudes I can see in this graph is the evil one, go!
Cancle it!
This would be indeed, quite nice, methinks....
best regards
HZN
p.s.: I have seen a MAGIX-Technician doing such a trick in Sequoia some
5 years ago...
The lack of quality noise-reduction software for
linux has been on
my mind quite a bit lately. I thought it might be a cool idea to
create a Kickstarter project to fund the development for this.
Mike from linuxDSP or Fons would be the best choices (I think) to
write the plugs.
:-) Very flattering, but don't expect a single-click solution for
something as volatile as removing unwanted noises from a recording.
In some cases (and more often than one would think) it's just a
matter of some EQ, in other cases a simple noise gate can do the
trick, and sometimes you'll need a multiband expander using pre-
measured statistics. It also depends on how the result is going to be
used afterwards.
As in many cases, it's going to be the skills of the user rather than
the tools that are going to determine success or failure.
Ciao,
24 May
24 May
3:52 p.m.
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:44:21PM +0200, Hartmut Noack wrote:
In the end it will be either a drum-track or vocal
track or anything
else that could have been recorded in a studio in the basement of a
railway-station or it will be a restauration-effort to digitize a
vinyl or cassette.
So that's at least three cases
1. Unwanted ambient noises
2. Tape noise
3. Vynil noise
which require quite different techniques. Vynil noise for
example can (at least partially) be handled as a sequence
of discrete events that have a distinct signature (if the
digital transcription includes supersonic frequencies).
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)
4:04 p.m.
On 24 May 2012 at 13:52, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
So that's at least three cases
1. Unwanted ambient noises
2. Tape noise
3. Vynil noise
Other cases I've faced are:
4. Power line hum getting into the recording system.
5. Acoustic hum from florescent lights.
6. Noise from photocopier drum warming getting into
the power circuit with chirps every 12.6 seconds.
I think Fons is onto something, find the cases for noise
reduction, study the noise content, and devise or apply a
suitable noise algorithm.
For my above cases Audacity's noise reduction is useful.
I'm not in a high fidelity situation.
Cheerio....
--
Kevin
4:20 p.m.
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Kevin Cosgrove <kevinc(a)cosgroves.us>wrote;wrote:
On 24 May 2012 at 13:52, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
This is standard practice for anyone that does restoration work. What Fons
has said, not to demean it at all, is common knowledge for those that use
the tools. Your standard 4 tools are a broadband de-noiser, used for
relatively constant noises in the background, often a multiband expander at
least when dealing with realtime applications. A De-Buzzer designed to
take at periodic noises that have relatively high harmonic content at
regular intervals, primarily a series of carefully designed notch filters.
A De-Hum which is designed to take out periodic noise without much harmonic
content. And a De-Clicker designed to remove clicks and pops you get from
vinyl and other sources (ie. Dust on Tape going over the heads sometimes).
But also as he mentioned you can get more specialized tools as well and yes
some will go so far as to allow you to focus on specific spectral areas, if
anyone has seen Audition this does this, but really I am referring to much
more specialized tools that cost much more money, like Algorithmix
Renovator.
There is an 'ok' article on the basic process located on CEDAR Audio's
website, who are pretty much the standard in the industry to my knowledge
for realtime noise reduction(As compared to Algorithmix reNovate which is
offline/non-realtime)
http://www.cedaraudio.com/
Click on "About Audio Restoration"
At least it covers the basics pretty well if you click through to info on
the various tools at the bottom of the page.
Seablade
So that's at least three cases
1. Unwanted ambient noises
2. Tape noise
3. Vynil noise
Other cases I've faced are:
4. Power line hum getting into the recording system.
5. Acoustic hum from florescent lights.
6. Noise from photocopier drum warming getting into
the power circuit with chirps every 12.6 seconds.
I think Fons is onto something, find the cases for noise
reduction, study the noise content, and devise or apply a
suitable noise algorithm.
7:45 p.m.
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 10:20 -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
The most common noises I need to remove are things like tape hiss
(quite common), AC hum (60 hz in the US and 50 hz in Europe), and some
obnoxious broad band background noise.
For example, I have been mastering some live music sets, and this
particular festival is basically in a field, in the middle of nowhere,
so they have regular Honda generators providing power behind the stage.
They were careful to build a large sound-blocking barricade out of bails
of hay to surround the generators, but some sound still quite audible.
I would like to be able to remove that sound, because it sorta puts a
crimp in some of the acoustic sets.
Vinyl restoration isn't something I do that often, so that really isn't
something I would want at this time.
Sadly, no one commented on my idea of creating a Kickstarter project to
fund software like this. Maybe there aren't that many people who could
use it. Kinda sucks, really, because something like this, when you need
it, you REALLY need it. In a very angry moment of weakness last week, I
considered changing platforms! :-)
Rich...
So that's at least three cases
1. Unwanted ambient noises
2. Tape noise
3. Vynil noise
Other cases I've faced are:
4. Power line hum getting into the recording system.
5. Acoustic hum from florescent lights.
6. Noise from photocopier drum warming getting into
the power circuit with chirps every 12.6 seconds.
I think Fons is onto something, find the cases for noise
reduction, study the noise content, and devise or apply a
suitable noise algorithm. 
12:33 p.m.
2012/5/21 Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>rg>:
:-) Very flattering, but don't expect a
single-click solution for
something as volatile as removing unwanted noises from a recording.
In some cases (and more often than one would think) it's just a
matter of some EQ, in other cases a simple noise gate can do the
trick, and sometimes you'll need a multiband expander using pre-
measured statistics. It also depends on how the result is going
to be used afterwards.
What about take sample of "clean noise" (usually on beginning of
recorded track) and use some phase cancellation trick to add sampled
noise in opposite phase.
Can this work on constant noise?
Just theory.
mira
1:05 p.m.
Hallo!
What about take sample of "clean noise"
(usually on beginning of
recorded track) and use some phase cancellation trick to add sampled
noise in opposite phase.
No, because noise has random phase, if you are speaking from
non-periodic noise ...
But a similar idea is used by many spectral-based noise reduction
techniques:
they take a short noise print and then try to remove this constant noise
from all other signals, so that just the signal without the noise remains.
LG
Georg
--
auphonic - automatic audio post production
http://auphonic.com
audio development, machine learning, open source and more
23 May
23 May
7:25 a.m.
You might try Audacity for that: Menu item Effect / Noise Removal
- jos
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:05 AM, Iain Mott <mott(a)reverberant.com> wrote:
Hello lau-sters,
Does anyone have a recommendation for de-noising software on linux? I'd
like to remove distant traffic noise from 96kHz/24bit recordings of
voice. Is this something better handled on Windows/wine?
Thanks,
Iain
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
"Anybody who knows all about nothing knows everything" -- Leonard Susskind
4557
days inactive
4560
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
35 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
Alexandre Prokoudine -
david -
Emanuel Rumpf -
Folderol -
Fons Adriaensen -
Georg Holzmann -
Hartmut Noack -
hermann -
Iain Mott -
Jaromír Mikeš -
Julien Claassen -
Julius Smith -
Kevin Cosgrove -
Lorenzo Sutton -
Ricardus Vincente -
Thomas Vecchione