Steve Pelikan wrote:
> I'm putting together a progam that will perform audio editing and signal
> processing procedures and would appreciate any suggestions for features to
> be included --- especially features that would be useful for dealing with
> natural sounds. The goal at first is to provide procedures that aren't
> generally available on currently distributed programs. Since people use a
> variety of editors --- what are the most useful features of your favorite
> program?
I currently do most sound processing (as opposed to simple editing) in
Spark XL. I do simple editing in Peak. It has a good waveform display,
and is very easy to use for simpler stuff.
Spark XL has a setup where you can build a array of filters and run them
simultaneously, including realtime. This they call FX Machine. I use it
with Spark's own functions and VST plugins.
The most useful part is to put Spark's Sonogram in the last block. That
will give you a good color high resolution sonogram, even in realtime.
So you can check what your adjustments can do.
I use cutfilters, notch filters, various sorts of filters to bring up or
kill different frequencies. I use Spark's adaptive noise filter (you
train it by sampling the noise you want removed). I also sometimes use
their declick/decrackle filter. Often I'm putting a sound simultaneously
through a half dozen filters at once. The entire filter setup is savable
for future use. I really like the multifilter approach. A big timesaver
over doing filters one at a time.
Spark XL has quite a range of filters for modifying sound. Since for the
most part I want the calls original I don't use those much.
Spark XL lacks a filter that works selectively by removing part of the
dynamic range of the sound. I use SoundHack for that. Go in, for
instance and remove the noise floor below the sounds you want. Say, all
that's 50 dB below the max sound level. Not only useful for removing
noise, but for some filter artifacts.
Though I've used it little Soundhack also has a binaural processor that
allows you to position the sound in the field where you want. Something
developed by NASA, I believe.
Don't forget MS Stereo processing. It's not that hard, but very uncommon
in sound programs.
> 1) A WYSIWYG graphical spectrogram editor that lets you "paint out" a noise
> using the mouse and then transforms the sound back to time domain.
I have played with a couple crude versions of this, It seemed to have
lots of potential, though the implementations I saw were too crude.
It would be a killer filter. I want!
> 2) A multi channel processor that computes the bearing and distance to a
> sound source.
This will pretty much imply a excellent database of mic characteristics
to have any hope of accuracy. Bearing sounds easy enough, distance will
probably not be possible unless a standard signal is played and recorded
at the same time.
For the vast majority of nature recordists the 1 or 2 channel mono or
stereo processing is as far as they will be going. It gets' complex
setting up more mics in the field. Nature recording per se is not into
the sort of micing that's done with music where each instrument may have
it's own channels.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|