Re: [mp3encoder] filtering bad recordings
wow-that worked! I tried that in the past with another speech and didn't like 16 kHz sampling but with this mp3 it works fine. I dropped the re-sampling spec and the r switch and kept it mono: lame -m m -b 24 --mp3input original.mp3 compressed.mp3 Thanks for all the help! Marty Visit my media server: http://linuxhippy.servemp3.com:8001 On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 20:10:47 +0100 Gabriel Bouvigne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marty Huntzberry a écrit : That r -2 switch makes it sound softer. Other values did increase (r -1, r-3)maybe it's a glitch in lame. Looking at the output in audacity you can see it decreaes. To be honest we are expecting --scale to be used with a float number (ex: 0.5 or 1.1), but not with a negative number, so there might be a parsing problem regarding this in Lame (I'll try to check it). Regarding your situation, I'd suggest you to try first an encoding without specifying the output sampling rate. This will let Lame choose it based on the target bitrate and its own knowledge of its compression abilities. As an example, in mono and targetting 24kbps, current Lame version would choose to use a sampling rate of 16kHz, which will probably sound better than 22kHz. Regards, -- Gabriel Bouvigne www.mp3-tech.org personal page: http://gabriel.mp3-tech.org ___ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder ___ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
Re: [mp3encoder] filtering bad recordings
Having listened to your sample, aside from *alot* of clipping, that audio should reduce to 22kHz mono very nicely. It's a nice clear recording. I did a quick declip/channel merge with postfish, downsample with sox and encoded it with lame and it came out sounding fine-- at least as good as the 'good' sample you referenced. So... what are you actually doing? Don't spare the details. Are you encoding as a stereo 24kbpbs file by accident? Monty ___ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
Re: [mp3encoder] filtering bad recordings
On 3/15/07, tech list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marty, unfortunately, there's not much you can do since the recording itself was low quality. 22KHz should have been OK for voice, but looks like the mic was placed badly or the acoustics of your room/hall was not the best. Your best bet would be to forget about lame for the moment and try out with some audio tools like audacity. Keep a copy of the original recording and play around with some noise cancellation, filtering etc. to see what sounds best. The Postfish tool (linux only) has a filter called 'deverb' that can remove some amount of excess reverberation, so long as there's a reasonably strong direct signal in the midst of the echo/reverb. Monty ___ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
Re: [mp3encoder] filtering bad recordings
The only effect in audacity and lame that seems to work is reducing the audio. Why does it sound good in it's original mp3 format of 192 kbps and 44 khz but sounds bad at 24 kbps and 22 khz? It's mainly a voice lecture. On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:12:53 +0530 tech list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marty, unfortunately, there's not much you can do since the recording itself was low quality. 22KHz should have been OK for voice, but looks like the mic was placed badly or the acoustics of your room/hall was not the best. Your best bet would be to forget about lame for the moment and try out with some audio tools like audacity. Keep a copy of the original recording and play around with some noise cancellation, filtering etc. to see what sounds best. On 1/24/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a lecture recording (no music, just voice) that was recorded with a digital recorder about 1 foot from the speaker at 22 kHz and 16 bit mono. It sounds like the speaker is in a well. Can I clean the recording up a bit with a filter in lame? Marty ___ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
Re: [mp3encoder] filtering bad recordings
On 3/15/07, Marty Huntzberry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only effect in audacity and lame that seems to work is reducing the audio. Why does it sound good in it's original mp3 format of 192 kbps and 44 khz but sounds bad at 24 kbps and 22 khz? It's mainly a voice lecture. ...maybe becasue you've eliminated 87% of the data? Just a hunch. (That would sound good in a voice-specific codec at 8kHz. I don't know why you think mp3 at 24kHz would sound good). Oh, also, if you're going from stereo-mono, that's going to make an echoey environment way less intelligible. You've collapsed a 360 degree circular soundfield right into the center along with the voice. You don't get to use any of the brain's spiffy localization hardware to pick out voice from the ambient anymore, now the voice and all the noise localize to the same place. Monty ___ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
