On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Ian White GM3SEK <gm3...@ifwtech.co.uk>wrote:
> ...time compression isn't part of that problem - applied correctly, it is > part > of the CURE... > Yeah, it's sort of obvious that more control is better than less. The idea that using software that can shape audio to what you want will automatically screw things up is easily disproved by a few minutes of experimentation. Of course it's possible to make a mess of things, just as it is with any power tool. Part of the confusion surrounding this topic comes from the fact that audio software is generally so opaque. A lot of audio software is hellaciously complex and has a gigantic learning curve (I'm thinking in particular of Cubase, but Pro Tools and others are similarly hard to master). But Audacity is easy to get into. It has a lot of pre-packaged goodies, written by some of the world's great FFT engineers, and the "leveller" and tempo changers are real jewels for our purposes; they give good results even if you're not Jay-Z. If you make a clip that's compressed to the max and then compress it again, you'll get a mess, but that's cockpit error. Guy's comment that he had tried it and didn't like it is fair enough, although I think if he fiddled some more he'd like it. The rest of the objections are pure conjecture and could easily be disproved by spending a few minutes trying it. The assertion that time compression always creates a bad sound results, as Ian sez, from confusion. Tony KT0NY ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
