I don't read all of the technical discussions on naturerecordists. (I know
when I'm out if my depth!) But I did read Walter Knapp's posting (Feb 16)
in which he wrote:
>
> There is a big difference between a very weak recording being amplified,
> and a recording that contains a range of sound levels and was recorded
> with normal headroom. You won't be amplifying a recording made right
> much, or you will clip.
>
May I pose a question Walter? PEAK software has a facility for what it
calls "normalising". It scans a recording, finds the loudest sound in it
and then (if set to 100%) amplifies the whole recording so that that loudest
sound is as loud as possible without clipping.
But you can also set it to less than 100%. And with PEAK's excellent
facility for allowing you to undo any editing you have done (up to the point
where you do a 'save') you can try as many levels of normalising as you
like, until satisfied you have the best for your requirements/taste.
(I imagine that there are other software packages that do something similar,
but PEAK is what runs on my Apple Mac.)
And as you haven't mentioned PEAK and normalisation, Walter, I wonder if
this is because the results aren't as good as I imagine them to be, or
whether it is just that you prefer a more hands-on approach, and to control
any amplification yourself.
Any comment?
Cheers
Syd
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|