Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
General Audio / Re: Spectral analysis opinions
Last post by greynol -
Then buy it from a reputable source.
2
General Audio / Re: Spectral analysis opinions
Last post by TheModifiedDog -
Well..To know if it's a transcode or not !
3
Because I'm incredibly stupid, I've not figured out to get multiple fields working with a single GUID. Could the next SDK example include that as well?

For now, I've hacked around it with multiple GUIDs which seems to work fine. I'm using it to store playcounts from last.fm and I've finally been able to ditch foo_customdb (hooray!  :P )
4
General Audio / Re: Spectral analysis opinions
Last post by greynol -
What's the point???
5
Not near enough grey hair, but yeah, similar to the (self assessed) elite aural athlete Olympic gatherings.

In audiophile circles, you're viewed as a hero if you can hear stuff that others cannot. In real life, you're committed to an institution.
6
One thing I noticed though is the difference between the original 192/24 and the 44.1/16 (-0.2dB, resampled and dithered via SoX) spectogram, the resampled one looks more smudged, or smeary, don't know the right word.
Is that how it's supposed to look after resampling or did I do something wrong?
The visual difference is caused by using the same FFT size in different sample rates. It has nothing to do with sound quality at all.
7
General Audio / Spectral analysis opinions
Last post by TheModifiedDog -
Hi guys :) I wanted to know your opinion on this spectral analysis.
The track is "Raspberry Beret" from Prince.
Knowing the file is a FLAC...Does it look to you like a transcode ? Thank you for your answers guys !
Here is the spectral analysis : https://imgur.com/a/GW9Lu
A closer look : https://imgur.com/a/8rYkq
8
One thing I noticed though is the difference between the original 192/24 and the 44.1/16 (-0.2dB, resampled and dithered via SoX) spectogram, the resampled one looks more smudged, or smeary, don't know the right word.
Is that how it's supposed to look after resampling or did I do something wrong?
It seems normal.


Just don't forget, that for Audacity not to dither automatically when saving to 24 or 16 bit you should disable dither in settings Edit->Preferences->Quality
http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Dither

Also, if you are using Audacity anyway, the whole process can be done in Audacity. Audacity uses SoX resampler with default band-width 95% and linear phase since version 2.0.3. http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Libsoxr
In Edit->Preferences->Quality set Default sample format to 32, High-quality Conversion Sample Rate Converter to Best, High-quality Conversion Dither to Triangle (or Shaped if you prefer dither+noise shaping). After opening your files and using Amplify effect, change Project Rate (it is in left bottom corner by default) then export to 16 bit. Resampling and dither will be done automatically when exporting.
9
Hi Luke, I've been using Audacity (http://www.audacityteam.org/) for exactly what you are doing for over 15 years for sermons, and my workflow is to first switch to mono, truncate silence to 2 secs or less, amplify to max without clipping, and apply compression.  I then save the audio to a 64bit MP3 file, and it is about 30Mb per hour.
10
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: JScript Panel
Last post by elia_is_me -
What is the name of the global context in JScript Panel? I have been trying to use it alongside Webpack. I can make it work with a few hacks but if I can just straight up access the global variable I would take it.
global = this