Thank you, Koz. This is re-assuring. I know that when i made my first recording I felt obliged to process the life out of it; I have since learned to just speak into the microphone and let the Proof-Listener tell me what, if anything, “needs fixin’”. I found nothing audibly incomprehensible in the recording so passed it “PL-OK”.
And you are spot-on with your comment. It LOOKED wacky to me when exposed in Audacity, but then - you are well aware of my lack of expertise!(grin)
You may need to get a little more exacting than that. You can understand every word in a telephone call, but that won’t pass theatrical testing. You wouldn’t want to listen to a book in that voice.
Quite so, but Librivox has a lower set of standards of audio quality and a higher set of standards for participation “Join in and have fun recording”, and that’s Librivox.
There are some audiobooks that make me weep, but as they say “If you think you can do a better job, then re-record it and we will publish it”.
You should be using your > high-quality, wired headphones > to inspect quality,
Ah! If I but had such a set. I figured to see if I could survive a year before spending my miserly pension on state-of-the-art stuff. In six months time I will buy one of your cast-off sets (at a reduced price!) and that will be better than anything I could find in this town!
hedge-clipper had been used to trim the top!
That’s not what you have in the illustration. … It is possible to have a broken microphone and get that hedge-trimmer look.
This to my mind is worth pursuing - if the Reader is interested; it is his call. If I hadn’t glanced at the wave form i would not have raised this issue at all.
Example: I know A.A.Milne’s poems by heart (from my 75 years of being a small child), so I can PL those while sitting out in the garden, skipped verses, repeated phrases etc. Anything else I sit at the laptop and read the text along with the reader, hence I was using Audacity on this track.
… we’re teaching a quality control practitioner how to quality control. Wasn’t there any training or course of classes?
Not at all, and the PL business is hit-and-miss. If your (volunteering) PL insists on no gaps greater than two seconds, then you write a macro to achieve that:-
Comment:_="Locate gaps of two seconds or more (Greater Than 2)"
LabelSounds:measurement="peak" post-offset="0" pre-offset="0" sil-dur="2" snd-dur="60" text="##1" threshold="-40" type="between"
A different PL might allow up to four seconds which, in a 474,000 word tome on logic, would let you use the length of gap to highlight the delimiters of semi-colons, sentences, paragraphs, major sections of a chapter etc.
It is the luck of the draw, and personal whim.
To make matters worse, i suspect that some PLs love to recommend Effects processing, while others do not.
This is not MoTown (grin!)
You can post up to 10 seconds of perfect quality WAV sound file on the forum. Post some and we’ll listen to it.
Thank you for this oft-repeated offer. I have never tried it, but will encourage the reader - if he is interested - to post a segment.
And in writing that I realize that I should make use of the offer; I record using the built-in microphone (don’t scream so loud, Koz) on the principle of Campbells Law on hardware faults and failures “Eighty-three percent of the time, It’s The Cable”.