Just to draw a line: Reducing noise from parabol recordings is something
else. It's another kind of quality, with a cam effect and a high frequency=
lift. One must still be careful, but filtering is possible.
Klas.
At 02:57 2004-03-10, you wrote:
>From: Dan Dugan <>
>
> > This is the area of "restoration" software. I have quite a bit of
> > experience with it, and I hate it. It isn't possible to remove hiss
> > without affecting the rest of the recording. With a lot of time spent
> > in trial and error, it's often possible to make an acceptable
> > improvement.
> >
> > The problem I have is that when I'm working with the restoration
> > software (DINR, Ionizer, Waves Restoration Suite) I'm paying
> > attention to removing the noise. In the process of getting
> > satisfaction with that, other values tend to slip away. When I listen
> > to my work the next day, I often wonder what I could have been
> > thinking, it sounds dead.
>
>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
>
>
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
"Microphones are not ears,
Loudspeakers are not birds,
A listening room is not nature."
Klas Strandberg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|