| Subject: | Re: Post Processing Workflow |
|---|---|
| From: | "Microscopica" audiofieldrecorder |
| Date: | Fri May 6, 2011 8:13 am ((PDT)) |
I personally believe that editing field recordings should be limited to sim= ple top & tailing, together with basic level adjustment purely for ease of = listening. Unfortunately, through the ease of digital manipulation, we are = becoming guilty of leaving a legacy of misrepresentation to future generati= ons of both the casual listener and researcher. Post-processing to remove noise from field recordings, will result in an ar= tificial ambience; one that does not actually exist! |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Western Diamondback Rattlesnake, Jim Morgan |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Post Processing Workflow, Dan Dugan |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Post Processing Workflow, Kenton Brede |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Post Processing Workflow, Dan Dugan |
| 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