Hi again,
Firstly: tnx everybody for the additional advice; it is very much appreciated!
Secondly: Nic, I read your signature line, and you may find the show I'm currently editing interesting, as it is a Depeche Mode show (Ahoy, Rotterdam, March 26th 2006) which I taped last year, and which I'm re-mastering now, due to gross errors made previously (before spreading it, luckily).
Then, I'll react to some of Wbrisette's answers/comments/questions:
>-Manually and/or by automatic filters get rid of clipping and/or other undesirable loud peaks. [
Hmmmm, I don't ever think I've seen anything
>that gets "rid" of clippiing. You can use various limiters and such to make them less annoying, but you don't ever fully get rid of a signal you've
>clipped.]
Indeed. Basically what I meant is something like e.g. Sony's "vinyl restoration" filter, which can successfully get rid of many pops and clicks quite well. Also, indeed you are right, there are some tools that can detect clipping (configurable in terms of the duration of the clipping, etc.), and some can automatically react on found clippings (probably by soft limiting), but indeed I too find that they tend to introduce a kind of "beep" like sound. Not nice. When that happens, I tend to revert to the original, and manually restore the (obviously) distorted waveform, which is not difficult, but which does take a lot of time. For this, I was hoping that perhaps there are more intelligent (i.e. better) tools, that can successfully detect clippings and repair them. It is my opinion that this needn't be all too difficult to achieve: simply detect excessive zero-crossings and or 0dB peaks within short time intervals, and interpolate those out to the level of the surrounding areas... Yet, I haven't found any tool that does this without introducing "beeps" or other undesired sounds, so perhaps it is difficult after all?!?
>-Real-time looping through a graphic equaliser, allowing adjustments on the fly (very important for me!). [
you can setup loops, but I'll have to
>see if there are any built-in EQ functions. I use Waves plug-ins, so I never have issues with EQ, but these weren't free.]
This is a crucial feature for me, so I'll elaborate.
The trial version includes the Apple "Audio Units", which includes 16 of the most common and useful filters/tools one could desire, including a graphic equaliser (using a 10-bands and 31-bands setting). Now, in Sound Forge, what I tend to do to get the balance between the low and high frequencies (and sometimes other frequencies as well) correct, is to find some of the parts in the recording in which I think this balance is most off, then hook up the laptop to the stereo (using the DAT direct line in, hence NOT using the stereo's equaliser), select a loop on the first of those sections, play it various times through the graphic equaliser without doing anything, listening closely to what is off, and then I gradually change the levers while it loops. Once the first section sounds right, I save the settings, and do not yet apply the filter on that section. Instead, I then move on to the next section and try it first without eq., then I try it with the previously worked out eq. settings, then I finetune it for that section, and try it also on the previous section. This process is then repeated on maybe 1, 2 or 3 more sections, until it is finetuned to my likings. Then I apply the eq. once to the entire recording, and then I have a listen to the entire show. I know this is time consuming, but I am very much a 'perfectionist' in this respect. Of course other people would have chosen other eq. settings, or perhaps none at all, but I will aim towards getting an end results that sounds as well as possible, and which as closely as possible resembles the sound as it was during the show. As an example, the Iron Maiden show of last year was way too bass-heavy from where we were standing. I corrected that, such that the balance was much more pleasing, but left a slightly bass-heavy end result.
For me, the final choice for a good software package very much depends on how well it handles this (which is the main reason why I stopped using Audacity, and moved to Sound Forge, which is excellent in this respect).
Now, from what I've seen in WE, it can put the eq. on a separate layer (very cool!), but I'm not seeing a "total output gain" correction switch. It appears this has to be done on the "processor" window, which would be no problem. Now, what I'm hoping it can do (and which is what I'll try later (today?)), is:
-Apply the filter to a separate layer (possible).
-Play only a loop on the "primary layer" (possible).
-Play the same loop on both layers (i.e. incl. eq. settings), and do so taking the tweaking of the eq. settings into account in real-time, without first having to apply the filter and then listening, etc.
-Whilst doing this, checking the volume levels of the output as it would be after applying the eq.
-Adjusting the total output gain such, that it compensates for boosted (or reduced dB levels), and hence prevents clipping or muffling of the total recording.
If WE does all of this, then it'll most certainly be a winner for me, and then I most likely don't even have to try other packages.
>-Easy zoom in/zoom out functionality.
[This is one of the things that sold me on W.E. over Bias' Peak which I had been using. It quite simply is
>one of the fastest products I have ever used in zooming in and out.]
Yes, this is another seemingly unimportant, yet crucial (for me) feature. Fast zooming is very nice, as I inspect the waves from up-close a LOT. Glad to hear WE handles this very well: a big plus!
>-Normalisation (incl. detecting RMS and peak volumes).
>-Soft limiting (I hardly use this, but it can be handy).
>-Tweaking the dynamics, etc. [
I'll group all three of these since again, I'm unsure of what the basic options are for W.E. since I use Wave's
>products for all of these features. You can turn on the setting to view the automatic RMS or Peak volumes. Is that what you meant?]
Though I haven't checked the "audio units" in detail, I think all of the above is present in the standard set of audio units that comes with the trial version. I'll give them a go.
>-Using the 'Wave hammer' function. [
WTF is this??? I've never heard of wave hammer.
]
This is a Sound Forge tool which is very, very handy: it allows you to reduce loud parts of a recording by normalising and/or soft limiting (both can be chosen independently, as well as in combination with one another), and both steps can be configured in terms of dB thresholds and how much limiting to apply, as well as the final amount of dBs to limit/compress up to. It is another of SF's features that got me hooked to it, as it can easily be used to brilliantly reduce loud parts in a very easy way, and again (as for the eq. filter), it can do so in real-time on a selected loop. A very, very handy tool, and I'd *love* to see something like this in WE (or a different product too), as it very nicely combines several of the logical steps for reducing loud parts like audience outbursts seamlessly (when done properly, of course).
>-Interpolating "off" peaks and valleys.
>-Possibility of using additional filters (VST, etc.?). [
I'll group these since both can be done by W.E.]
Excellent!
For the former, I am slightly dissappointed that in SF there isn't (or rather: there doesn't seem to be) a more automated filter, where one can select a part of a wave that contains an obviously off peak, and then can automatically have SF recognise it and redraw (or interpolate) it properly. I gather that Audacity does offer this, and I hope WE has something like that too, as this is another of those features that could save loads of manual editing time.
>In all honesty, most of the larger applications (Peak, Wave Editor, Logic, DP, etc.) can do this, it's all a matter of money.
...and ease of use.
>As far as bang for your buck, I think W.E. wins. I own all four of the applications I mentioned, and neither Peak or Logic will ever get updated again. Digital
>Performer does everything I need when dealing with multi-track files, and Wave Editor has become my tool of choice when it comes to two channel editing.
There it is. Excellent. That's the exact type of verdict I was looking for, tnx!
I'll do my best to give all of them a go in trial versions, and will keep in mind that WE will most likely come closest to what I want to do (i.e. 2 channel editing), so that one will get the main focus for now.
Cheers, and tnx once more!
MM
Topic: MacBook Pro for sampling and/or audio editing? (Read 6479 times)