Audio Processing Software

I can't speak to the higher end tools (Peak, SoundSoap) but I can
speak to WireTap Studio, Audio Hijack Pro and Sound Studio 3 -- I've
never bothered with Amadeus or Audacity). I like all three but they
serve somewhat different needs.

For recording streaming audio, I prefer Wire Tap Studio these days.
I'm a long time Audio Hijack Pro fan but WTS has a much clearner,
cleaner interface at the moment. It's incredibly easy to begin
recording any source including Skype, streaming audio, etc.

For recording oooooollld recordings that need cleaning up (which I am
doing to old mix tapes that have songs I can't find anywhere else) I
am still experimenting. All of these programs utilize the same set of
standard VST plug-ins that Apple provides and a few provide a few
extras and you can download or buy more. I haven't found a good
solution yet so I have a lot of "good enough for now" recordings that
I want to improve. I prefer Wire Tap studio because I am able to store
the actual digitized samples at full AIFF quality and then apply
filtering experimentally. And since I don't have the right filters
right now (or the know-how to properly use them yet) I can keep these
masters as they are and wait until I do. It's quite simple in that
respect.

For recording my own voice for podcasting purposes, I'm moving between
all tools based on my momentary whims. So far, I've had good results
with all of them in terms of quality but Wire Tap Studio and
GarageBand both provide that wonderful feature of applying filters
without altering the original content so I can experiment without
having to re-record if I mess it up. However, nothing beats Sound
Studio 3 for record and EDIT... very easy to clip out what I don't
want or need (Wire Tap Studio also has a very nice editor and Garage
Band's is good enough for most of my needs but not my preferred).

OK, Looking at what I wrote, I really appear to live Wire Tap Studio :)

As far as VST Plug-ins and the like, I just dusted off my own podcast
companion to "Take Control of Podcasting on the Mac"
(http://tcopodcasting.podbus.com/ for the podcast,
http://takecontrolbooks.com/podcasting-mac.html for the book) and am
building a new studio, getting better equipment, and learning much
more about audio quality, filtering, mixing, editing and will soon be
doing a LOT of playing around with VST for an upcoming show. So, I
should have more intelligent things to say in a week or three or four
(no set schedule but I want to get to this sooner rather than later).

Hope this helps!

Now, you're turn: what do you like about PEAK and SoundSoap? Wondering
if I should go down either road myself...

-A

While I'm by no means a sound expert, I do use Sound Studio a lot to post
process my lecture podcasts. I record the raw audio on my iPod using a
Griffin iTalk, which saves it as a 16 bit WAV file. I then run it through an
AppleScripted workflow that strips out noise, compresses, equalises and a
few other things so that the voice comes through clearly, then passes it off
to a shell script that encodes it as MP3 using LAME.

Sound Studio is great as an editing tool. It reminds me of SoundEdit way
back when, and has a very similar mode of operation. It's fully scriptable,
so you can set up automated workflows really easily (certainly via manual
scripting and probably also Automator), and seems to have a full complement
of the usual filters. Sound Studio can use LAME to encode MP3's directly,
but I've never bothered trying to figure it out :)

The only downside for me is that it's not a cross-platform solution (meaning
in my case Mac and Linux). I'm hoping at some stage to switch to a
completely command-line based workflow using SOX so that my colleagues can
also use it, but haven't been able to figure out all wrinkles just yet. In
any case, I'd still use Sound Studio for the first step of removing
irrelevant stuff at the start and end of the recording, because it's
different for each recording and can't be done automatically.

--
Nigel Stanger, Dunedin, NEW ZEALAND.
http://xri.net/=nigel.stanger

On 4/9/08 at 5:27 AM, stevej1mac.com (SteveJ1) wrote:

>I've been pondering whether to upgrade my Peak LE software to the
>new version 6, or for about the same price to purchase one of the
>alternatives. Also, if I do want one of the alternatives, which one?

>I'm particularly interested in digitizing LPs (and even a few cassette
>tapes) and de-noising the resultant files.

I use Amadeus and SoundSoap to digitize LPs. This combination
works fine for me. But then I've never tried Peak. So, it may
well be I simply don't know what I am missing.

>I'd also like the capability of capturing streaming audio.

I haven't tried capturing streaming audio with Amadeus. But I am
sure this can be done. It might need something like JackPilot or
Soundflower (both freeware) in addition to route the audio where
you want it. This would depend on the source of your streaming audio.

Although my experiences are a bit unique, I thought I'd jump in on
this thread. I am a relatively new blind Mac user who, like many
blind folks, enjoy messing around with audio. In addition, I also
host a weekly assistive technology podcast. Anyway, a good, usable
and accessible sound editor was one of the first packages I looked for
when switching to the Mac. Although I tried Sound studio and Audio
High Jack Pro, I really found Amadeus Pro to meet my needs. Not only
does it work great as an editor, but it seems to be the one with the
most keyboard shortcuts. Although I find keyboard shortcuts essential
from an accessibility standpoint, I think that especially in terms of
sound editing, they just make the process easier. Amadeus Pro also
supports a ton of batch options which can be used to convert files,
modify the attributes of files, add parts to existing files i.e. an
intro, etc... In my opinion, Amadeus is worth it's price even if just
for the batch processing capabilities.

Another editor which I found to be quite good is Fision by Rogue
Amoeba, the same folks who make Audio High Jack pro http://www.rogueamoeba.com
  . Although Fision doesn't support recording, it's great as a basic
editor. I'm not sure how it does it, but Fision can open large files,
even compressed files such as mp3, in a very short amount of time.
Since it doesn't record, Fision won't help you digitize your tapes,
but in conjunction with AHP, or another recorder, it's a great
solution as well.

I realize my perspective is a bit skewed because of my needing
something with keyboard shortcuts and at least basic VoiceOver
compatibility, but hope yo you find it helpful.

Steve

On or about 4/9/08 5:27 AM, thus spake "SteveJ1" <stevej1mac.com>:

> I'm particularly interested in digitizing LPs (and even a few cassette tapes)
> and de-noising the resultant files.

I really should write a Take Control book about this, because I've been
doing it for some years now and I have a lot of experience with it. And my
experience covers a vast range of parameters. You have to ask yourself how
much time and how much money you are willing to spend, as this can make a
huge difference in what tools you'll use.

But let's just separate the basic issues. Distinguish the following:

* The wave editor. If you're going to use a soundwave editor, then the basic
requirement is that it should be good at editing soundwaves; if you are
using other tools that require hosting, then it is nice if your soundwave
editor can also host those tools. For my money, Amadeus is still far and
away the best soundwave editor, though it is not a very good tools host. I
use it for every form of cutting, pasting, splicing, finding and eliminating
the occasional clip, etc.

* Removing clicks and pops. Fortunately there is now an excellent free
automatic tool for this, ClickRepair. So I use Amadeus's superb ability to
find clicks and interpolate to remove them, to handle major clicks and pops
and other infelicities, followed by a round of ClickRepair.

* Denoising (removing hiss) and other sonic effects. This is where it gets
tricky. Amadeus does include a denoising function, but I would never use it
for any serious work. In my view, SoundSoap is a waste of money, an absolute
piece of [insert coprophilic noun here]. RayGun, which was way better, seems
to be no longer available (Arboretum's Web site is missing in action). The
best tool for the job, absolutely superb, unfortunately also costs a LOT of
money (Waves Restoration Bundle, see waves.com). I hear good things about
the WaveArts master restoration suite, but I've never tried it, and it is
also not cheap (though it is a lot cheaper than Waves, and at this point you
are in the same region as SoundSoap Pro, which this should easily beat in
quality). Whatever you choose, you might then also need a better host than
Amadeus; I use DSP-Quattro but others might do just as well.

m.

--
matt neuburg, phd = matttidbits.com, http://www.tidbits.com/matt/
pantes anthropoi tou eidenai oregontai phusei
Among the 2007 MacTech Top 25, http://tinyurl.com/2rh4pf
AppleScript: the Definitive Guide, http://tinyurl.com/2ouo3b
Take Control of Customizing Leopard, http://tinyurl.com/2t9629
TidBITS, Mac news and reviews since 1990, http://www.tidbits.com

On Apr 11, 2008, at 9:29 PM, Matt Neuburg wrote:

> * The wave editor. If you're going to use a soundwave editor, then
> the basic
> requirement is that it should be good at editing soundwaves; if you
> are
> using other tools that require hosting, then it is nice if your
> soundwave
> editor can also host those tools. For my money, Amadeus is still far
> and
> away the best soundwave editor, though it is not a very good tools
> host. I
> use it for every form of cutting, pasting, splicing, finding and
> eliminating
> the occasional clip, etc.

What do you mean by hosting? The ability to record? I agree that the
two need not be considered together. I do not need nor really care if
I edit where I record. I want to make the best possible recording and
then move the data to the best possible editor. I'm still doing a LOT
of experimenting on that front. More to follow on that in my podcast
(and, perhaps, in the next revision of TCoPodcasting).

I'm going to have to try out Amadeus :) -- I've used all the others (I
also miss SoundEdit from the MacRecorder days...) and have my likes
and dislikes.

> * Denoising (removing hiss) and other sonic effects. This is where
> it gets
> tricky. Amadeus does include a denoising function, but I would never
> use it
> for any serious work. In my view, SoundSoap is a waste of money, an
> absolute
> piece of [insert coprophilic noun here].

Interesting. I just listened to Scott Bourne sing its praises on Mac
Break Weekly and was considering giving it a try for some of these
older tapes I have, and for my own recording to defeat the noise of
the furnace, dehumidifier, etc in my basement/home office. Have you
used it for more than just this specific task? Is it bad for this but
you haven't tried it for others? Just trying to get an understanding
of how extensively you've used and abused it.

This is a great thread. Thanks to the original poster for starting it!

-A

On Apr 13, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Andy Affleck wrote:

>> * Denoising (removing hiss) and other sonic effects. This is where
>> it gets
>> tricky. Amadeus does include a denoising function, but I would never
>> use it
>> for any serious work. In my view, SoundSoap is a waste of money, an
>> absolute
>> piece of [insert coprophilic noun here].
>
> Interesting. I just listened to Scott Bourne sing its praises on Mac
> Break Weekly and was considering giving it a try for some of these
> older tapes I have, and for my own recording to defeat the noise of
> the furnace, dehumidifier, etc in my basement/home office. Have you
> used it for more than just this specific task? Is it bad for this but
> you haven't tried it for others? Just trying to get an understanding
> of how extensively you've used and abused it.

I've used Amadeus fro denoising and I must say I am quite impressed
with how well it works. It does take a little care in selecting the
"sample" of noise to be used for the file, but if you do that
carefully the results are quite good (IMHO).

Regards,

Howard

> I've used Amadeus fro denoising and I must say I am quite impressed
> with how well it works. It does take a little care in selecting the
> "sample" of noise to be used for the file, but if you do that
> carefully the results are quite good (IMHO).

One way of sampling noise is to copy many short sections of noise
from between sections of signal: if any exist. Pasting them into an
extra track opened for that purpose. Then do the noise sampling from
that. I mostly contented myself with reducing rather than
eliminating noise. Going that far often introduced it's own
artifacts: just like over sharpening images does in Photoshop.

George

I agree with Matt Neuburg in some fields and have similar experiences with Amadeus and ClickRepair. The missing Denoising and other filters delivers Apples Soundtrack Pro for me - part of the Final Cut Studio bundle. This program is getting more stable than in former versions and does nearly all the jobs you need for wave editing and sound repair. - OK, nobody will buy the whole bundle if not also for the purpose of video editing.

Hermann

Steve, I've been a user of Peak for about 7 years now. I use Peak Pro 5.2 and deeply respect the way that it allows me to handle audio. During this time, discussions about this software seem to indicate that the engine that coverts streaming audio into digital bits and pieces (code) is one of the most highly evolved, and accurate on the market. I'm sure that other recent brands of software are competitive, but I'm not exactly sure in what way Peak has been surpassed. I would love to see some comment on this. Additionally it's my guess that Peak LE is every bit as thorough as Peak Pro, just not as many bells and whistles. The DSP plug-ins in Peak LE are sufficient to achieve many aspects of audio manipulation.

Because my transfers of LP's are kept to a minimum, I generally remove clicks by hand (a bit time consuming) and avoid plug-ins that remove noise artifacts, mainly because the original audio is something I try to preserve as much as possible. I'm sure that I will however pay attention to the suggestions posted on this thread.

It is a wonderful thing to get some 'audio-interest' in TidBits, and I sorry that there is not more interest from "management" in the direction of professional and home audio.

Jon

Returning to this thread -

Recall that I regard SoundSoap as turning sound *into* soap, and the only
denoising tool whose results I really do like, Waves Restoration, costs over
$1000. Well, the entire landscape has just been changed by Brian Davies'
release of a new inexpensive ($30) DeNoise application:

<http://wwwmaths.anu.edu.au/~briand/sound/continuous_noise/>

I haven't tried it yet, but if it's up to the standard of his ClickRepair,
it could become a key tool in everyone's vinyl/tape-to-digital transfer
process. m.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Wiretap Studio Pro here. It does a decent
job of removing Hiss and Hum, and I like the way it preserves the original
quality recording. Plus, it has live preview.