Which version of RX2 are you using, RX2 or RX2 Advanced? I see that there's=
quite a big price difference.=0D
=0D
Peter Shute=0D
=0D
=0D
--------------------------=0D
Sent using BlackBerry=0D
=0D
________________________________=0D
From: =0D
To: =0D
Sent: Sat Jul 30 18:38:46 2011=0D
Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Anthrophony in "nature" soundscapes=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
<<I recently brought RX2 for this purpose but found it to be pretty hopeles=
s both from a GUI usability point of view and technically very poor at disp=
laying enough spectral resolution to see the offending tones. (a generator =
running on the beach in this case, 11dB above the noise floor of the record=
e) - RX2 liked to crash rather a lot and also consume cpu cycles. >>=0D
=0D
I use RX2 extensively in my recording & mastering business & it is an incre=
dibly capable application. It does have a fairly steep learning curve & I s=
uspect you may have to invest more time in it. There are a number of excell=
ent tutorial videos on YouTube as well as an in depth PDF available from iZ=
otope, which go a long way to explaining many of the tweakier aspects of th=
e program. I would suggest that you run it in standalone mode, not as a plu=
gin in a DAW host. Any crashing I've had has been cured by a reboot. There =
are preferences or menu items which expand the graphic resolution of the sp=
ectral display enormously. For the generator noise you may want to run seve=
ral passes through the Denoise, as well as Spectral Repair modes. Don't exp=
ect many pure pitches to be displayed, as internal combustion engines produ=
ce wide bandwidth noise. Some noises simply can't be fixed, they are too pe=
rvasive, but where fixing is possible RX2 is one of the most powerful proce=
ssors available to editors.=0D
=0D
Scott Fraser=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
|