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