Another thing to remember when removing hiss from recordings you want other=
s
to hear is that if your high hearing is going even somewhat you can create
something which sounds just fine to your ears but "dead" and unnatural to
somebody who hears the high stuff well. You can even find some commercial
stuff which has been overprocessed.
Barb Beck
Edmonton
-----Original Message-----
From: Bret
Sent: March 9, 2004 9:23 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] hiss reduction
Well said, I agree in spades.
bret
--- Walter Knapp <> wrote:>
>I certainly agree, it's really tough to remove hiss without messing
> things up. Nothing teaches you to try to do better in the field quite
> like spending hours trying to clean up a recording.
> One thought, when you remove hiss, you remove the hiss that's under
> the
> calls you want. That will, inevitably, change the character of the
> call.
> As you hear it in the original it's a combo of the call and the
> hiss.
> The 'real call' sounds different. Do not judge hiss removal as
> failing
> just because the call changed, judge the call itself and see if it's
> still all there even if it sounds changed. Does it agree with what
> you
> heard in the real world when you recorded it?
>
> Even in a hissless recording, removing the quieter stuff under the
> calls
> with a dynamics filter or such like has to be done with a extremely
> light hand. A lot of the structure of a call is light sounds, not
> just
> the heavy dominant ones.
>
> Ideally it would be nice to have filters that we could set somehow to
> just filter between the calls. I've sometimes done that manually with
> short clips, but it's a lot of work.
> Also experiment with several light applications of a filter, not just
> one heavy one. Often the light approach will come out better.
> And always keep a unfiltered copy to fall back to. Even when you
> think
> you have it right. And have others listen to it. When I was working
> on
> the frog CD, I'd provide them with several choices that I could make
> out
> differences. Very often no one else would hear any difference and
> would
> like them all. You can overmanipulate a recording, get stuck on
> minute
> details.
>
> Walt
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you=12re looking for faster
http://search.yahoo.com
"Microphones are not ears,
Loudspeakers are not birds,
A listening room is not nature."
Klas Strandberg
Yahoo! Groups Links
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
>From Tue Mar 8 18:26:53 2005
Message: 16
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:23:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Bret <>
Subject: Re: hiss reduction
Well said, I agree in spades.
bret
--- Walter Knapp <> wrote:>
>I certainly agree, it's really tough to remove hiss without messing
> things up. Nothing teaches you to try to do better in the field quite
> like spending hours trying to clean up a recording.
> One thought, when you remove hiss, you remove the hiss that's under
> the
> calls you want. That will, inevitably, change the character of the
> call.
> As you hear it in the original it's a combo of the call and the
> hiss.
> The 'real call' sounds different. Do not judge hiss removal as
> failing
> just because the call changed, judge the call itself and see if it's
> still all there even if it sounds changed. Does it agree with what
> you
> heard in the real world when you recorded it?
>
> Even in a hissless recording, removing the quieter stuff under the
> calls
> with a dynamics filter or such like has to be done with a extremely
> light hand. A lot of the structure of a call is light sounds, not
> just
> the heavy dominant ones.
>
> Ideally it would be nice to have filters that we could set somehow to
> just filter between the calls. I've sometimes done that manually with
> short clips, but it's a lot of work.
> Also experiment with several light applications of a filter, not just
> one heavy one. Often the light approach will come out better.
> And always keep a unfiltered copy to fall back to. Even when you
> think
> you have it right. And have others listen to it. When I was working
> on
> the frog CD, I'd provide them with several choices that I could make
> out
> differences. Very often no one else would hear any difference and
> would
> like them all. You can overmanipulate a recording, get stuck on
> minute
> details.
>
> Walt
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you=92re looking for faster
http://search.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|