quick and dirty sound fixup help

kraz wrote on 5/13/2007, 12:36 AM
I know there is a whole world to sound cleanup and it is not a simple task but ....

I have a video to show - that has a lot of home shot videos -- using the built in mike with th subject far away and quiet - and a lot of background noise.

I have played in the past with some tools with mixed results ..
(non real time events etc but mostly hit and miss)

I know for the time I can invest I can't get anything great- but what is the quickest easiet way to boost up the sound and not make the noise take it over (or cancel out the noise).

Any quick suggestions? (I have sound forge studio if that helps)

Thanks Allen
(and yes when I have the time I will learn how to do it right)

Comments

Grazie wrote on 5/13/2007, 2:19 AM
You are not going to like the replies.

#1 - Having a Chance!: In my short experience with BG Noise Reduction, I have had some amazing success with particular BG noise that is "different" enough to the one I wish to keep. So, air-con removal OR highway noise drumming away in the BG to the birdsong I want, OR, to some extent, enhancing low volume speech. With these examples I have had more than average success. Good enough to add and not detract from the visuals playing.

#2 - 20:20 Hindsight: There ain't NO substitute for getting audio recorded in the way you need too. If you need that speaker, then it has to be a mic, up close and personal, OR at least a shotgun that has a better reach than the on-board mic.

#3 - The Parameters Are JUST Too Narrow : Just 'cos we got the tools for NR, don't mean that they can do the impossible - which is what, I think, you may be realising at the present moment. In the event that you can get close enough to the material you wish to keep, you may very well be loosing actual quality or roundness to the sound, so that you end up with very high thin tinny frequencies that, in themselves, become at least intelligible and at worst, painful to listen to.

#4 - Letting Go! Again, my short foray and experience in this Redux field has taught me to realise that I can go just so far, and then no further. Often what you WANT to keep and what you want to LOOSE has just too many similarities, within the audio characteristics, to be capable of being separated, and thence valuable. What I have needed to do is just let it go; invest in appropriate audio equipment and realise that sometimes - often - these REDUX tools can not do the impossible. Yes I know it is very tempting . . . but.

But, it is all down to the parameters and extend and complexity of the mix you already have. If you wish to send me a small sample I'd love to have a go. At least I could learn some more about your situation and see/hear if I can do anything with it!!

Good luck! - Grazie

TLF wrote on 5/13/2007, 5:55 AM
Often, it is desirable to keep some background noise. Otherwise the recording will sound sterile and/or unnatural.

Without a sample of your material, it's difficult to give any firm advice, but here is what I would try...

Download a copy of goldwave from www.goldwave.com. It's shareware, so will run unrestricted for a few uses. I prefer Goldwave to the open source Audacity, but use what you feel safe with.

Step 1: Reverse the audio. Apparently, and I'm inclined to agree, certain noise reduction sounds better when you reverse the audio first.

Step 2: select an area where there there is between 0.25 and 0.5 seconds of background noise, and only background noise. Copy this area to the clipboard (ctrl+c).

Step 3: Apply noise reduction, remembering to tell goldwave to use the clipboard contents.

Step 4: Reverse the audio again, and listen to the result.

good luck,

Worley
kraz wrote on 5/14/2007, 7:40 AM
thanks guys -
and goldwave audacity does better than soundforge?
busterkeaton wrote on 5/14/2007, 8:37 AM
If you have Soundforge use that. He is just pointing out free audio tools.
TLF wrote on 5/14/2007, 9:19 AM
Audacity is free, but isn't quite as finely tuned as Goldwave.

Goldwave is shareware, very easy to use, and relatively powerful given its price. It was used to clean up the audio of Neil Armstrong and prove he said "...for a man" not "...for man".

SoundForge I know little about. I tried the demo, but couldn't figure it out (not much time on my hands).

Personally I use Adobe Audition which produces some stunning results, better than Goldwave, but then it does cost so much more!

If you have SoundForge, I see no reason not to use it.

But be aware than all noise reduction will impact to some degree on the original recording. It's a matter of getting a result that had minimal NR artifacts.

Worley
TorS wrote on 5/14/2007, 3:33 PM
These are different clips with all kinds of different background noise and all kinds of softspoken talent, right?
The tools people have been telling you about are (more or less) good for consistent noise like air condition, machine hum, stuff like that. If you have a lively background you need another approach: First you have to accept that the result will be ugly. Then you must fiddle the equalizer to bring up the frequencies that are dominant in the speech you want to preserve. And bring down everything else. That will leave you with a sound like a very cheap telephone and a call from someone you do not want to know. But you will be able to hear what he says.
I second Grazie's tip: If you want good audio, record it good.
Tor
TLF wrote on 5/14/2007, 11:30 PM
Constant hiss, drone, and hum, are relatively simple to remove. Although hiss removal will impact on high frequencies and can introduce a weird metallic "warble" or twittering.

Crackles and pops can be eliminated using special filters that detect transients and attenuates them.

Irregular sounds such as murmuring and traffic are extremely difficult to eliminate, and you won't do it in short amount of time.

Worley