Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Mute audio via tagging? (Read 3713 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mute audio via tagging?

I was wondering if there is such a way to use tagging or the header to store data within the audio file to mute a specific part of that file when being decoded or played?

Say I have a piece of music going to an audience that does not like swearing for example. Instead of destroying the audio file by actually muting the audio wave where there swear word is, would it be possible to store a tag that knows/remembers that specific period and length in time so that when decoded... it mutes it?
The option for muting could then be turned off and on, depending on the audience.

Can anyone enlighten me on this please?

Cheers.

Mute audio via tagging?

Reply #1 –
I haven't heard of anything like that here.  I'm only familiar with the Replaygain/MP3Gain type tools that effect an entire file.

It's certainly not what you hoped for but using MP3s with mp3DirectCut you can select a slice of audio in question and adjust the gain, fade in, or fade out the selection.

Quote
"Note: Volume change works only with Layer 3. As the data remains encoded, volume changes can only be made in a resolution of 1.5 dB steps.

Using the Gain dialog is not recommended, because it is obsolete. Only for special purposes it may be useful, e.g. to make a silence. Fades should be be created with the drag method, or at least with the 'Create simple fade' function."

With the global gain process MP3Gain uses this is lossless and reversible but I have no idea if the method mp3DirectCut uses is similarly lossless.  And even more unfortunate the help file states that special functions like that are not supported from the command line so there is no automated way to do/undo the process for example supplying the user with batch files to switch the gain back and forth for the censored region.

It's probably a better idea IF the end users are using something that supports gapless playback to cut out the censored parts and keep two copies of them, one digital silence and one normal.  The overall size wouldn't be much larger if the censored regions were small and you could supply two playlists for them to switch between.
"Have you ever been with a woman? It's like death. You moan, you scream and then you start to beg for mercy, for salvation"

Mute audio via tagging?

Reply #2 –
I would suggest that you just keep two copies - the original and the one with the segment cut out.

Mute audio via tagging?

Reply #3 –
Thanks heaps for the replys guys.

What about in terms of streaming data - stay digital radio, where the audio file is tagged as in my first post, but the end user can choose whether or not he wants the content censored or not by changing the way the decoder reads the tags?

Not possible?

Mute audio via tagging?

Reply #4 –
Of course it's possible, but since the protocol doesn't exist, you would have to develop the protocol and the playback software.  It reminds me of ClearPlay, which is conceptually similar...  Censoring in real-time during playback.  With ClearPlay, it's not done with a "tag" in the program file itself.  It's done with a separate file that keeps track of where the offensive parts are. 

Professional recording/mixing software can be programmed to do something like that.  You can pre-program different volume levels for different sections of a recording.  (With the right hardware/software, the software can be pre-programmed to physically move the volume sliders on the mixing board.)  But, you couldn't use that software as-is to create two different streams, switching the effect on-and-off at the player-end. 

There are advantages to "real editing" in advance if you can.  You can use techniques that are less distracting/intrusive than a mute or a "bleep".  Sometimes you can chop-out a word (without leaving a gap), and the sentence still sounds natural.  Sometimes you can chop-out a whole sentence without affecting the overall dialog.  Sometimes you can repeat a phrase.  For example, I've changed "What the f***?" to say "What the, What the..."  Or you can reverse a word or phrase to make it unintelligible.  When you reverse "D***", it sounds something like "Mad", which works pretty well.  I made an edited copy of a movie, and a girl now says "This mad thing..."  I was amazed how well it worked!  (Most of the edits in that movie aren't quite that slick.)

P.S.
After a few more minutes of thought...    If you really wanted to do this, the ClearPlay concept of a separate "cue file" would be best.  That way, it could work with any audio file-format...  You wouldn't have to worry about making non-standard audio files, or convincing all of the standards-bodies to change the file-specs.
 

Mute audio via tagging?

Reply #5 –
Quote from: DVDdoug on
After a few more minutes of thought...    If you really wanted to do this, the ClearPlay concept of a separate "cue file" would be best.  That way, it could work with any audio file-format...  You wouldn't have to worry about making non-standard audio files, or convincing all of the standards-bodies to change the file-specs.

This is some good info thanks. I appreciate the knowledge given!
I will continue with these thoughts in mind. The cue sheet instead of the tag in the actual file makes more sence.

I'm sure I will revive this thread eventually to give you guys a heads up =)