• Re: background noise question

    From billy@billy@MIX.ORG to rec.audio.pro on Wed Sep 24 19:54:13 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

    Geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> writes, quoting Harvey Sanenbum <harvey50120@micro.net>:

    I have been using some rather extraordinary online models and
    algorithms to denoise some wildlife audio recordings I made several
    years ago.? The most startling thing I have found is how WELL thes
    models do.? About half of my recordings I considered unusable.? L
    in the noise and if software NR was applied, there were too many
    artifacts.? No longer

    So, as I'm not used to having completely noiseless results, I wonder
    how much noise I should mix back in?? Two channels are created whe
    using the online denoisers: the denoised track (and I mean denoised!!)
    and just the noise it removed.

    I come from an age of cassette tape which, even with Dolby NR, there
    was always noise.? Even when I used my software NR, I always mixe
    some back in to help hide artifacts.

    Just some general suggestions welcome.? Thanks in advance

    Just wanted to note that, according to the meter, I mixed about -52 dB
    of noise back into the "noiseless" result.

    Sounds more natural ?

    Long ago (ca 1985) I was working on a film for Sting. I had him in the
    studio to fix a couple things, one of which was tape hiss on a Space Echoed guitar track, He told me, "Leave it in, it reassures people." That has
    since turned out to be quite a prescient observation. Among other things telephone companies have done a lot of work with adding noise in digital
    paths, for the very same reason,

    Billy Y..
    --
    rol -(sp) ; save carry
    .purge #lun.sr ; dump open .cstat channel
    ror (sp)+ ; pop carry
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Peter Larsen@digilyd@hotmail.com to rec.audio.pro on Sun Oct 5 14:18:44 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

    Den 13-09-2025 kl. 06:09 skrev Harvey Sanenbum:
    On 9/13/25 1:04 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:
    Not sure if anyone still monitors this group, but I have a question if
    so.

    I have been using some rather extraordinary online models and
    algorithms to denoise some wildlife audio recordings I made several
    years ago.-a The most startling thing I have found is how WELL these
    models do.-a About half of my recordings I considered unusable.-a Low in
    the noise and if software NR was applied, there were too many
    artifacts.-a No longer!

    So, as I'm not used to having completely noiseless results, I wonder
    how much noise I should mix back in?-a Two channels are created when
    using the online denoisers: the denoised track (and I mean denoised!!)
    and just the noise it removed.

    I come from an age of cassette tape which, even with Dolby NR, there
    was always noise.-a Even when I used my software NR, I always mixed
    some back in to help hide artifacts.

    Just some general suggestions welcome.-a Thanks in advance.


    Just wanted to note that, according to the meter, I mixed about -52 dB
    of noise back into the "noiseless" result.

    IF you mix noise back in, then REDO FROM START with less noise reduction applied so that you do not get any artifacts and avoid the trap of
    loosing room tone as they did with Beatles "Love", always a magnificent example of what not to do.

    - Peter Larsen

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2