Marc Myers wrote:
> But I like the three simpler categories of NANPA better, how about:
> Wild - much like the photographers, not modified in any way for the durat=
ion of the clip
> Digitally Processed - would include any post processing including equaliz=
ation, noise reduction, compression, etc.
> Edited - Material has been added (ex: bird calls over ambient sound) or d=
eleted (ex: car horns) for the duration of the recording.
The second category should omit the word "digital" since otherwise it could=
be circumvented by those using analogue signal paths.
Beyond that, it seems impossible to exclude the choice of microphone, pre-a=
mp, file format, etc. from the domain of "processing", since all have a pot=
entially marked effect on the audio. Would using a roll-off switch be consi=
dered processing? How is this different from using the same HPF after the f=
act?
Perhaps it is only possible to distinguish between those recordings that do=
or do not use superimposition (layering) or changes to the original time-l=
ine (cuts, insertions). This would, however, serve to bar many of the most =
emblematic nature recordings extant.
-- robinparmar.com
|