Subject: | Re: Dumb question- do you absolutely need to record sounds at 'high' |
---|---|
From: | "Roger.Norwood" bigrogsound |
Date: | Wed May 13, 2009 3:44 pm ((PDT)) |
"Although noise is no longer much of an issue with low level recording, the one drawback to under-recorded tracks is a lack of visual resolution for editing purposes. Locating edit points visually when the waveform has no vertical component or the extremely pixellated rendering with maximum vertical magnification just makes for an unnecessarily tedious editing task. Thus I try to get well modulated levels, even with very quiet ambiences." Makes me wonder how we ever managed to edit anything before being able to s= ee the waveform. I don't find using my ears to establish the edit point tedious, its the bes= t way to judge the quality of the edit. Roger |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | 3. Re: file types Hi HZ subjects?, Raimund Specht |
---|---|
Next by Date: | The Duck rocks, Martyn Stewart |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Dumb question- do you absolutely need to record sounds at 'high', Scott Fraser |
Next by Thread: | Re: Dumb question- do you absolutely need to record sounds at 'high', Scott Fraser |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
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