Posted by: "vicki powys"
> Thanks so much for the comprehensive instructions for Soundhack. The
> software is not exactly intuitive to use is it! By following your
> instructions I did manage to make some sonograms but I have to say that,
> when converted to black and white inversion in Photoshop, the sonograms
> could not match anything like the greyscale resolution of Audiograph or
> Amadeus. I am thinking here of sonograms that are suitable for publicati=
on.
>
> But fun to play with all the same, and free!
I see, you are looking for grayscale. Soundhack would not be a good one
for that as the colors it uses have similar gray values. I suppose it
could be changed in photoshop. I use and prefer color sonograms as the
details are much clearer than grayscale. This is not a problem for me as
I either use sonograms onscreen or on the web, both of which support
color. If your publication supports color I'd suggest going that way,
otherwise you are stuck.
Only other sonogram I use is the one in TC Works Spark XL. It's also
color, but can be run in log scale, and will run in realtime as you play
a file. I use it a lot to check recordings and it's always at the end of
any filtering bank I use to check what the filters did. The biggest
problem with that one is that TC Works has discontinued Spark XL.
SoundHack was written in the early days of Mac sound by a music
professor as a tool for his students to use. I'm sure that in the class
setting it's ok for what he wanted to do. It does have some things that
are very hard to find in sound software. I use it for it's special
features, but not as a general use program.
Walt
|