From: Marty Michener <>
>>>Nobody said it would be easy.
Too true.
When I first got into major filtering, it was for the frog CD. Before
producing any of the stuff for that, I spent over a month just
exercising all the available filters on the files. Trying various
possible approaches. And tossing the results. At the end of that time I
felt I could start. So, don't think you can just jump in, even with
instructions, and everything will be quickly done.
Whatever software a person has, they should play with it. Don't get
stuck in a rut in how you filter. Play with various ways of doing it.
Never stop experimenting.
>>>Although I predict that, like several of my previous posts, not a single
>>>person will read through all of this, let alone use any of it, I STILL
>>>send all my hopes for good recordings and my best regards, ;^0
You are wrong there. I read all the way through most of your posts
including this one, so there's one. I have gotten some ideas from your
filtering posts. I am using mac and different software, so don't do it
by the numbers as you tend to describe. But, my general methods are
similar. I just translate it to my software. And add it to my own
personal filtering methods.
I'm using software that allows me to do realtime preview of a whole set
of filters. I can turn each one on and off and so on to check what each
is doing. Adjusting settings as the filters interact. And set a sonogram
at the end to monitor what it's doing to that. So, I don't make all
those intermediate files. Once it's all right I can not only process the
file in one pass, but save the filter set I used. I've found, however,
that such sets cannot be applied to every file without modification.
They more make a starting point for the next similar file.
I do use a noise filter. But very lightly. Those things mess things up
easily. I use it at the end of the stack.
I'm not sure I agree with your idea of one heavy filtering. Like
processing graphics, I find sound processing often can be improved with
several lighter passes. And in any case, a heavy hand rarely does well.
I've also got a trick you don't mention. That's a dynamics filter. After
you have managed to drag that ID clip out, then it can be used to remove
or just subdue faint sounds caused by all that filtering. Set a level,
it moves any sounds below that level by a specified number of dB.
(that's a highly simplified description) Helps in cleaning up heavily
processed files. Though it has to be applied very carefully, calls have
a considerable dynamic range, and removing the quiet part, even in the
middle of the loud part, can result in surprising changes in the call.
Worst was when I was doing the CD and would use the dynamics filter I'd
supply listening tracks with and without the filter. Most could not pick
out what the change was. But i could hear it. In some ways that's the
way good filtering should be, unnoticeable.
And the very best way is a quality recording to start with. Filtering
cannot substitute for good technique or good equipment. If it could,
this would be a much cheaper game. And of course there is the luck
factor. That magic time when everything onsite is perfect.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|