Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"UnsteadyKen" wrote in message
m...
Iain Churches said...

There's a full moon.

Aye, young 'un, we here in UKRA know to fear the full moon, tis said
that at this time of the month a fearful apparition called the
"keithG" comes roaring through the newsgroup on a terrible dark steed
called "Moaty Bike" and as he comes he cries foul blasphemies the likes
of which us goodly Strictly watchers should never have to hear. Tis
said that old Gran-pa LeSurf was out in the fields tending his crop of
speaker cables and hear the KeithG cry "Hell Pees sound alright" and
his beard turned white overnight. Tis also said that Mother Allison was
in her allotment planting seedies one night when the foul thing came
a'roaring past and she heard the awful cry of "Devils Audio
Broadcasting is OK for casual listening purposes" Well, the poor old
things brain was addled and she hasn't spoken a word of sense since.

Some old 'uns tell that the KeithG's head was turned when he bought a
copy of Des O'Connors Greatest Hit with his paper round money and he's
been a'haunting the neighbourhood ever since. Some also say that on
some days he can be seen in underpasses fiddling with his equipment and
flashing.

Mark my words, no good'll come of it. Beware.


'Strictly' watchers...??

:-)

And don't joke about Des O Connor's Greatest Hits - I'm sure that's kicking
about somewhere around here, or has done in the past!!

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. ..
Well, The two pianos of.. etc, were a thing of their time. Made in the
days of radiograms to show off with, never mind realism. I think you have
forgotten that there are times when exciting stereo can be fun.


Hah! I've heard no end of 'Stereo Spectacular' type 'demo records' in the
past and almost certainly have one or two kicking about here somewhere!!
Some of them weren't too bad, as I recall (??) - I'll have to fish them out
and give 'em a spin!


Its not
realism, of course its not, but if you really want to hear what happens
when you let a demented sound mixer loose on a multitrack master, look out
for a track called Mandrill, by Mandrill and beware, do not listen on
headphones.


Gawd - sounds like it's summat 'orrible like a baboon's purple arse...??

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Keith the Moronic Git"
"Keith the Trolling Git "

"Phil Allison"


** The interesting thing about surface noise on a vinyl LP is that it
is always in stereo !!


Certainly is when you are playing it, but it gets nicely buried (to a
point) when transcribed to a mono recording!


** Totally false assertion.

Surface noise is independent of the signal level impressed on the disk.


So what?


** How ****ing stupid is this DUMB POMMY **** !!!

The NOISE is NOT gonna be buried during quiet passages !!!

IMBECILE !!!



.... Phil

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


And don't joke about Des O Connor's Greatest Hits - I'm sure that's
kicking about somewhere around here, or has done in the past!!

Yes, Des O'Connor CBE, He probably still lives in that wacking great
house down in Sussex and drives his maroon and grey turbo Bentley. :-)

Poor chap :-((

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. ..
Well, The two pianos of.. etc, were a thing of their time. Made in the
days of radiograms to show off with, never mind realism. I think you have
forgotten that there are times when exciting stereo can be fun. Its not
realism, of course its not,



The Two Pianos Of... and recordings of that ilk, were very much a
fashion statement, as is much popular music. I worked on many
of the Phase Four recordings at Decca.

After the initial stereo showcase recordings, many of them were
multi-microphone multitrack productions. And very popular
they were too:-) No one pretended it had anything to do with
realism.

but if you really want to hear what happens when you let a demented sound
mixer loose on a multitrack master, look out for a track called Mandrill,
by Mandrill and beware, do not listen on headphones.

Fun to blame the sound mixer isn't it? One needs to consider
why the particlar project was made, what it is trying to achieve
and for whom it was intended, Brian. Maybe (probably) not
for the likes of you or I. If it is made for "headbangers", then you
should ask those headbangers if they enjoyed it. If they say
"yes" then the project, even with the demented sound mixer has
reached its goal, and pleased the adiencve for which the music
was intended.

It's rather like asking people who enjoy a Peter
Katin rendition of Debussy, to listen to Thelonius
Monk or Charles Bell playing "And Satan Said"

I find the various categtories of music and also the
styles within those categories fascinating. I was at
a lecture recently where we were asked to listen to
some saxophone clips. Some of the very best playing
dated from the early thirties.(there were probably more
professional saxophone players then than there are now,
so the standard was high and competition very stiff.
The recordings were of course primitive by modern
standards, and the playing (due to the fast vibrato
which was the fashion then) was deemed to be "corny"
Most people couldn't see past these two obstacles
and realise that there were in fact some very good players
indeed at work

Iain

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:36:25 -0000, Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:13:50 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


You can use the dual mono signal quite handily. Put it into your audio
software and use the facility (which most have) of centre channel or
vocal extraction. That way you will lose the spitches (which are 99%
left or right, but never centre), and keep the good stuff.


That is what I suspect happens automatically when the capture is set to
'mono' and the file is saved as such - I can't see any facilities in the
software to enable you to choose it as a process..??

Nope, it will just add the two channels together. The crackling will
become a little less evident because it is now coming from the same
spot as the music, and a bit better hidden than when it was separated
spatially.

I don't know what Sound Forge (is that what you use?) does. It is
there in Audition.


Don - this is actually something that is unique to Audition as far as I
know. The Centre Channel Extractor is much cleverer than it may first
appear as it actually looks at the correlation between channels and leaves
(or removes) signals with the correlation that you choose.

Cheers

James.


--
http://www.jrpmusic.net

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:03:14 -0000, "James Perrett"
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:36:25 -0000, Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:13:50 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


You can use the dual mono signal quite handily. Put it into your audio
software and use the facility (which most have) of centre channel or
vocal extraction. That way you will lose the spitches (which are 99%
left or right, but never centre), and keep the good stuff.


That is what I suspect happens automatically when the capture is set to
'mono' and the file is saved as such - I can't see any facilities in the
software to enable you to choose it as a process..??

Nope, it will just add the two channels together. The crackling will
become a little less evident because it is now coming from the same
spot as the music, and a bit better hidden than when it was separated
spatially.

I don't know what Sound Forge (is that what you use?) does. It is
there in Audition.


Don - this is actually something that is unique to Audition as far as I
know. The Centre Channel Extractor is much cleverer than it may first
appear as it actually looks at the correlation between channels and leaves
(or removes) signals with the correlation that you choose.

Cheers

James.

Is that so? I didn't know it was unique. I really only use Audition
because I have sort of grown up with it throughout its CoolEdit
incarnations, and I now use it more or less by instinct.

d

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:03:14 -0000, "James Perrett"
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:36:25 -0000, Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:13:50 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


You can use the dual mono signal quite handily. Put it into your audio
software and use the facility (which most have) of centre channel or
vocal extraction. That way you will lose the spitches (which are 99%
left or right, but never centre), and keep the good stuff.


That is what I suspect happens automatically when the capture is set to
'mono' and the file is saved as such - I can't see any facilities in
the
software to enable you to choose it as a process..??

Nope, it will just add the two channels together. The crackling will
become a little less evident because it is now coming from the same
spot as the music, and a bit better hidden than when it was separated
spatially.

I don't know what Sound Forge (is that what you use?) does. It is
there in Audition.


Don - this is actually something that is unique to Audition as far as I
know. The Centre Channel Extractor is much cleverer than it may first
appear as it actually looks at the correlation between channels and leaves
(or removes) signals with the correlation that you choose.

Cheers

James.

Is that so? I didn't know it was unique. I really only use Audition
because I have sort of grown up with it throughout its CoolEdit
incarnations, and I now use it more or less by instinct.''

But AFAIK this Centre Channel Extractor does not exist in CEP Pro
(or at least in the beta testers version that I am familiar with)

Iain

d

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:12:14 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Is that so? I didn't know it was unique. I really only use Audition
because I have sort of grown up with it throughout its CoolEdit
incarnations, and I now use it more or less by instinct.''

But AFAIK this Centre Channel Extractor does not exist in CEP Pro
(or at least in the beta testers version that I am familiar with)

Did it only appear once Adobe bought it? I'm glad they did something
more useful than just making the interface "pretty".

d

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

In article , Don Pearce
wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:12:14 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Is that so? I didn't know it was unique. I really only use Audition
because I have sort of grown up with it throughout its CoolEdit
incarnations, and I now use it more or less by instinct.''

But AFAIK this Centre Channel Extractor does not exist in CEP Pro (or
at least in the beta testers version that I am familiar with)

Did it only appear once Adobe bought it? I'm glad they did something
more useful than just making the interface "pretty".

Pardon me for hijacking this thread, but the mentions of CEP prompt me to
ask a question about it.

I don't use CEP or know anything about how it works. However in a thread on
a couple of tv/broadcasting technical groups I've been discussing the
problem of intersample peaks that can produce 'overshoots' that can go
above 0dBFS of someone scales up the samples to be too close to 0dBFS.

I've been told that CEP shows the shape inbetween samples if you 'zoom in'
and that it uses an approx to the formally correct sinc function to do
this. But in the discussion there is also mention of using 'sinusoid
curves' as if the process were a simple one of generating a 'smooth fit'
using a spline fit (or similar) of sinusoidal curves.

Can someone here who uses and understands CEP comment on how it displays
waveforms from LPCM data samples, and - critically - does it do the
formally correct sinc method to show the correctly defined output waveform
between samples?

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html