naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: How would you clean up this file?

Subject: Re: How would you clean up this file?
From: "Dana Blackmer" danablackmerphd
Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:04 am (PDT)
Thanks, Walt.  I have a few questions:

I get the 80Hz noise in all my recordings.  Is this "normal noise" for a
Portadisc and MKH 30/40?  Also, is the "low shelf filter" you used to knock=

it out equivalent to using an FFT filter in Adobe Audition?

I have the same questions about the 18kHz noise.

Concerning the distortion noise that shouldn't be there - can you describe=

it or tell me where it is on the sonogram?  I didn't identify it and would=

like to be able to hear/see it as you did.  If you worked on the file from=

my original post (DawnChorus.mp3) the distortion may have occurred because=

I may have inadvertently encoded the MS signal twice, using Audition's
Channel Mixer's "Mid-Side to L-R" pre-set.  I later posted an original file=

(www.danablackmer.com/AudioFiles/DawnChorusMS.wav) and an mp3 file
(www.danablackmer.com/AudioFiles/DawnChorusXY.mp3) that I know wasn't
double encoded.

You also said that you added and trained a denoise filter (Spark XL TC
Denoise) to decrease this distortion noise.  Would this be similar to
Audition's Noise Reduction filter (a filter that works by capturing a noise=

reduction profile from a segment of about 0.5-1" of noise-only sound and
then using that to profile to reduce the noise in the entire recording).

Thanks again for your helpful response.

Dana



At 04:53 PM 6/25/2006 -0400, you wrote:

>Posted by: "Dana Blackmer"
><danablackmer%40comcast.net> danablackmerph=
d
>
> > Thanks in advance to anyone who can give me some suggestions. My
> > hope is that the more experienced of you can educating the less
> > experienced of us in the science and art of what to do after you've
> > finished recording.
>
>Hopefully I have nothing to do but transfer the recording.
>
>I downloaded the file, then put it in my sound editing program, in this
>case I ended up doing it using Peak.
>
>I then set up a empty filter bank (TC Works FX Machine) with a realtime
>sonogram (from TC Works SparkXL) in the last slot (after everything).
>All filtering was monitored not just by ear but by sonogram. This is
>important if you wish to minimize effects on wanted sounds.
>
>Listening to the sample while watching the sonogram three things were
>obvious, and you requested another.
>
>1. There was some low frequency noise below 80 hz, so I added the equium
>plugin (Elemental Audio) and a low shelf filter in it to knock out that.
>A drop of 18dB in it's level. This was a nearly inaudible change.
>
>2. There was a sound band up above 16kHz, probably noise. This was cut
>down 18dB using a high shelf filter in equium. Though for most it's
>inaudible.
>
>3. There is some sort of distortion noise, I believe this is what you
>are identifying as steady insects but it's not insects. Though a number
>of distant calls were also changed by whatever it is. You need to find
>and eliminate the source of this as it should not be there at all and
>cannot be removed entirely with filtering. It should not have occurred.
>I have a portadisc and M/S MKH-40/30 and this is not normal to them. I
>did add and train a denoise filter (Spark XL TC Denoise) to it and
>removed as much as I could. Note this did cut down some wanted sound,
>particularly some of the high pitched birds chattering and dulled the
>recording a little. More experimentation with training the filter might
>yield a better setting. The unwanted sound was cut down by about 12dB
>
>4. I toned down the fly a little bit by placing a parametric equalizer
>notch in equium set narrow and at 205Hz (the second fly). I farther
>toned the first fly down by using a notch filter at 215Hz in equium.
>(the two flys are not running their wings at quite the same beat rate)
>This did not eliminate the flys, though that could be done by a similar
>method as their buzzing does not overlap any other wanted sound in
>frequency.
>
>This left a cleaner recording, though many calls are badly off due to
>whatever was wrong with your sample.
><http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/DawnChorus-es.mp3>http://loscan.home.mi=
ndspring.com/DawnChorus-es.mp3
>
>I agree with others, unless your purpose is to present a cleaned call of
>a single species, limit your filtering primarily to things like man made
>noise (though one could say that belongs too).
>
>If you can ID that problem in the recording, which could be when
>recorded but is more likely either in transfer to computer or in
>encoding to mp3, the recording sounds like it's pretty good.
>
>Always focus on getting the best recording in the field. Assume you
>can't remove anything with filtering.
>
>Walt
>
>







<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU