Which is pretty much exactly what I did. I used WaveARTs MRNoise for this
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
> > Can you explain what you did exactly
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Fons Adriaensen =
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 01=
:40:23PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
> Just personal preference, but I think both of these have an
The original had most of the signal above 2kHz or so almost gone, so<=
this had to be boosted. Tape hiss gets amplified in the same way (this
was a _casette_ recording). It's probably possible to remove some of
the hiss using an FFT-based multiband expander.
Which is prett=
y much exactly what I did.=A0 I used WaveARTs MRNoise for this purpose, I h=
ave access to Izotope RX2 as well, but given that the signal there is so we=
ak, I didn't use that in a destructive manner, and I am finding I prefe=
r wavearts for primarily high frequency noise.=A0 However since RX2 is a ne=
w acquisition for me I am still learning their strengths and weaknesses.
Second order shelf filter, +12 dB or so at 4 kHz and above. There wer=
some faint traces of signal around 8 kHz, so a very narrow band around
that frequency was boosted a few dB more.
Heh it =
is very interesting to hear you describe it, as I didn't look at the si=
gnal analysis at all when I did mine, but also put in a fairly sharp lowpas=
s filter at 12k as I didn't hear anything usable above that when I boos=
ted.=A0 Now I am curious to go back and try out what you describe as well a=
s look at the statistical analysis and see if it can be improved a bit more=
or not, I just don't have time these days sadly.=A0 This was a quick 1=
5 minute project or so to see what I could do out of my own curiosity while=
I had some spare time before a meeting.