Audacity Forum

steve, please share examples of bad sounding repairs of music. I would like to make this tool more broadly useful. Maybe it is already and I just need to suggest better settings.

Indeed. I already eliminated choices in repair method and used what I thought best -- for each click, a composition of eq-band calls with constant parameters, not curves. Just let the crossfade make transitions. Variable parameter eq-band in Nyquist is suspect anyway, I understand, and highpass and ...

I have had success removing some very obvious clicks that are not during silence but are superposed on the vowels. I can also remove the rattles that afflict some sibilant sounds, thus removing low frequency noise from high frequency signal. There are also lip closing sounds as in "sp" and "sm" whic...

I hope you think the repair is good enough. Repair uses eq-band with constant values, not curves.

The error you got was because of the extreme setting for the number of bands.

UPDATE 29 May 2014: Started another topic for a major new version here. http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=79278 Continuing this discussion. http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=75331 I am developing a tool to remove the natural click noises that happen during speech an...

That description doesn't seem to match what I saw or what you seem to be working around. Is this bug known to manifest different ways?

Steve, I read the code. What is bug 425? Does it involve incorrect trimming of right channel stereo results, sometimes? Because I tried my own work in progress on this example and that is what I saw, and when I imitated your workaround it went away. My own efforts at automatic click removal seem not...

I set *gc-hook* to t to see what would happen. What do these messages mean? Examples: [ gc: total 82640, [ny:gc-hook allocating 2000 more cells] 28173 free; samples 953KB, 0KB free ] [ gc: total 84640, 28202 free; samples 953KB, 0KB free ] I was trying to use some tricks in my code to reduce the amo...

I don't understand how the Lisp runtime works, but it seems more interpreted than compiled. I don't fully understand it either, but yes the Lisp code is interpreted, though with lazy evaluation, which can make a huge difference to overall performance... (if t "done" (do-lots-of-stuff)) I think your...

Trying another workaround. Compute a convolution with a big window as a sum of convolutions with pieces of the window, shifting the summands appropriately. Should give identical results, but avoiding large windows if I use sufficient pieces. It seems after all that large convolution windows are the ...