Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Recording and editing speech by phrases

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 9:44:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hello group,

I've been recording spoken text as a hobby with simple software:
Goldwave.

If you have ever tried this you'll know that even if you are well
prepared, eventually you'll make a mistake and you have to re-record
part of the text.

Of course, the ability to do a punch-in with preroll would improve the
workflow, but there will of course be the annoyance of finding the
exact position for the punch in.

So: is there a simple piece of software that would allow the user to
rewind and fast forward by "sentences" or "phrases" instead of linear
time and to make punch-ins with "the start of phrase X" as the
punch-in point?

I know that the American Printing House for Blind People sell a
program which seems to be capable of something like this, but the demo
somehow did not convince me. (see:
http://www.aph.org/tech/sr_info.htm). Besides, the software I'm
looking for could be extremely simple. I'm not sure if a waveform
display would be necessary.

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
June 16, 2005 11:36:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Not sure if goldwave will do it, but I have used in in Wavelab... if
you pause, it will put markers on the scale at the top of the waveform
window., that way after yuo flub, hit pause, then go back into record
and continue. Later you can easily find your flubs, they will be right
before the marker.

then again, you could take a few moments then and just edit them out as
you go. ;-)

Richard Crowley wrote:
> "Carey Carlan" wrote ...
> > (Ville Koskinen) wrote :
> >> So: is there a simple piece of software that would allow the user to
> >> rewind and fast forward by "sentences" or "phrases" instead of linear
> >> time and to make punch-ins with "the start of phrase X" as the
> >> punch-in point?
> >
> > I don't know of such a program, but there is a simpler solution.
> >
> > When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the
> > sentence containing the mistake and continue.
>
> Exactly. Ever so much faster. And some people put some kind of
> audible marker on the flubs so they can be easily identified in review.
>
> I've heard syndicated radio programs where they missed one. :-)
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 1:43:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the sentence
>containing the mistake and continue.

>When you finish the recording, delete the fragment containing the error.

This is really the cleanest and simplest way to handle that. I do this
all the time when I'm reading script. If I stumble or mispronounce, I
go back to the start of the sentence or paragraph and do another take
and keep going, marking the spot on my script so I can edit it later
while I listen to the playback. No need to shuttle, NTTAWWT.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 2:05:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Carey Carlan wrote:
> I don't know of such a program, but there is a simpler solution.
>
> When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the sentence
> containing the mistake and continue.
>
> When you finish the recording, delete the fragment containing the error.
>
> Goldwave will do that with ease.

Sure, I've been doing just that. Yet, I don't think this is such a
non-issue you seem to imply.

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 3:10:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steve King wrote:
> If you invent a better way, let us know. Here's another thing to think
> about. Back in the old analogue tape days I narrated long-form scripts for
> a producer who preferred to stop the tape whenever a mistake was made and
> punch in a new start at that point. At the end of the session he had a tape
> requiring no editing. Unfortunately, I always felt that the performance
> suffered. Rather than concentrating on the story telling, I became part of
> the mechanical process of creating a finished tape.

Good points.

I'm doing both narration and editing so I'll need almost two hours to
produce an hour of edited reading. I too have noticed that having to
hassle with the computer affects performance.

A better way? What if by pressing let's say left arrow during
recording, the program would stop recording and instantly start playing
from the beginning of the last phrase you've spoken (phrase detection
shouldn't be a problem). Pressing left arrow twice would rewind two
phrases and so on. By pressing 'R' the program would punch in over the
phrase you've selected, after a sufficient pre-roll, of course.

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 4:39:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ville Koskinen" <vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:1118941501.627607.290530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Carey Carlan wrote:
>> I don't know of such a program, but there is a simpler solution.
>>
>> When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the sentence
>> containing the mistake and continue.
>>
>> When you finish the recording, delete the fragment containing the error.
>>
>> Goldwave will do that with ease.
>
> Sure, I've been doing just that. Yet, I don't think this is such a
> non-issue you seem to imply.
>
> Regards,
> Ville Koskinen

If you invent a better way, let us know. Here's another thing to think
about. Back in the old analogue tape days I narrated long-form scripts for
a producer who preferred to stop the tape whenever a mistake was made and
punch in a new start at that point. At the end of the session he had a tape
requiring no editing. Unfortunately, I always felt that the performance
suffered. Rather than concentrating on the story telling, I became part of
the mechanical process of creating a finished tape. In addition, the
recording session was almost always twice as long as it needed to be, time
for which he paid me. I think he lost on both his time wasted and my
unnecessary additional time charges. However, I doubt that AT&T noticed the
line item on their balance sheet.;-)

An earlier poster mentioned the best answer I've found. In Adobe Audition I
just tap F8, whenever I make a mistake. That places a marker on the
time-line. Another key-stroke combination moves the cursor from one marker
to the next in an instant. A few seconds takes care of each edit for the
most part done visually on the wave-form.

Steve King
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 5:27:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi (Ville Koskinen) wrote in
news:9896c41f.0506160444.6609a2a3@posting.google.com:

> So: is there a simple piece of software that would allow the user to
> rewind and fast forward by "sentences" or "phrases" instead of linear
> time and to make punch-ins with "the start of phrase X" as the
> punch-in point?

I don't know of such a program, but there is a simpler solution.

When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the sentence
containing the mistake and continue.

When you finish the recording, delete the fragment containing the error.

Goldwave will do that with ease.
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 5:27:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Carey Carlan" wrote ...
> (Ville Koskinen) wrote :
>> So: is there a simple piece of software that would allow the user to
>> rewind and fast forward by "sentences" or "phrases" instead of linear
>> time and to make punch-ins with "the start of phrase X" as the
>> punch-in point?
>
> I don't know of such a program, but there is a simpler solution.
>
> When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the
> sentence containing the mistake and continue.

Exactly. Ever so much faster. And some people put some kind of
audible marker on the flubs so they can be easily identified in review.

I've heard syndicated radio programs where they missed one. :-)
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 10:15:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1118945459.329570.45100@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi writes:

> I'm doing both narration and editing so I'll need almost two hours to
> produce an hour of edited reading.

Nothing wrong with that. You can't make any money doing one-hour jobs.
Surely your client expects that it will take more than an hour to
produce a finished hour-long program if he's been in this business
very long. But I agree that computers should make work easier, not
more difficult, than the old way. Sometimes they do, sometimes they
don't, but they certainly change the way we work now.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 11:16:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ville Koskinen" <vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:1118945459.329570.45100@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> A better way? What if by pressing let's say left arrow during
> recording, the program would stop recording and instantly start playing
> from the beginning of the last phrase you've spoken (phrase detection
> shouldn't be a problem). Pressing left arrow twice would rewind two
> phrases and so on. By pressing 'R' the program would punch in over the
> phrase you've selected, after a sufficient pre-roll, of course.
>

"Phrase Detection" isn't as easy as you think. I suppose if you spoke like a
robot and always took exactly the same amount of time between sentences it
could be. But as Steve King pointed out the things you are wanting to do
will more likely give you a worse performance. Cutting off your nose to
spite your face, as it where.
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 11:17:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 6/16/05 8:44 AM, in article
9896c41f.0506160444.6609a2a3@posting.google.com, "Ville Koskinen"
<vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote:

> So: is there a simple piece of software that would allow the user to
> rewind and fast forward by "sentences" or "phrases" instead of linear
> time and to make punch-ins with "the start of phrase X" as the
> punch-in point?


Even old protools free can pop in markers on-the-fly as you record. You can
make this work pretty easily with most systems as you decide to get into the
flow and method. It can be lightening fast (as decades of dialogue editors,
ADR recordists and book engineers know)
Folks real conversant with ANY editing/recording system get the workflow
down and have their own shortcuts that get them there fast.
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 11:18:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 6/16/05 1:05 PM, in article
1118941501.627607.290530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, "Ville Koskinen"
<vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote:

> Carey Carlan wrote:
>> I don't know of such a program, but there is a simpler solution.
>>
>> When you make a mistake that will require correction, repeat the sentence
>> containing the mistake and continue.
>>
>> When you finish the recording, delete the fragment containing the error.
>>
>> Goldwave will do that with ease.
>
> Sure, I've been doing just that. Yet, I don't think this is such a
> non-issue you seem to imply.

DECADES of engineers and voice talent at all levels would disagree...
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 11:24:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 6/16/05 2:10 PM, in article
1118945459.329570.45100@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "Ville Koskinen"
<vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote:

> Steve King wrote:
>> If you invent a better way, let us know. Here's another thing to think
>> about. Back in the old analogue tape days I narrated long-form scripts for
>> a producer who preferred to stop the tape whenever a mistake was made and
>> punch in a new start at that point. At the end of the session he had a tape
>> requiring no editing. Unfortunately, I always felt that the performance
>> suffered. Rather than concentrating on the story telling, I became part of
>> the mechanical process of creating a finished tape.
>
> Good points.
>
> I'm doing both narration and editing so I'll need almost two hours to
> produce an hour of edited reading.

That's damned good. What's your complaint?


> I too have noticed that having to
> hassle with the computer affects performance.
>
> A better way? What if by pressing let's say left arrow during
> recording, the program would stop recording and instantly start playing
> from the beginning of the last phrase you've spoken (phrase detection
> shouldn't be a problem). Pressing left arrow twice would rewind two
> phrases and so on. By pressing 'R' the program would punch in over the
> phrase you've selected, after a sufficient pre-roll, of course.


You really need to TRY the method mentions...
Make a goof,
Keep rolling
Hit a MARKER button
Re-read the section and continue
Repeat as needed

Then go back to all the markers,
make your edits and go out to dinner with friends.

YOU get to concentrate on PERFORMANCE in one pass

Concentrate on EDITS in the next pass.

Done.

Problem?


> (phrase detection shouldn't be a problem)

This is indeed a HUGELY deep and broad computer-speech-recognition issue
that we're many many years away from solving. Human speech patterns are
best/fastest/efficiently interpreted by humans because the context is
EVERYTHING in deciding what's 'right' and 'wrong'.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 2:54:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ricky Hunt wrote:
> "Phrase Detection" isn't as easy as you think. I suppose if you spoke like a
> robot and always took exactly the same amount of time between sentences it
> could be. But as Steve King pointed out the things you are wanting to do
> will more likely give you a worse performance. Cutting off your nose to
> spite your face, as it where.

To me it seems that you only need to detect pauses, navigate through
the audible stuff between them and make punch-ins. Perhaps you could
even place the punch-in points so that they would be located just after
the last "phrase", that is at the beginning of "silence". Then the
reader could make sure that the pause before the rerecorded section
would be exactly as long as he/she wanted.

I don't know how this would affect performance. It seems to me that
concentrating properly before making the correction would help.

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 8:17:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ricky Hunt wrote:
> Detecting pauses (by level) is no problem. You could even set how long the
> pause would have to be to be considered a true pause. But inevitably
> sometime or another you would pause more/less than the set amount (if you
> speak like a normal person, that is) and with your system your system you
> wouldn't even be aware you'd missed it until it's too late and you'd
> overwritten what you wanted to keep (or be stuck with still having to edit).
> People have already given you the best answer for how to solve your problem.
> You're only hurting yourself by not at least trying what they say.

In fact I'm already doing what I've been suggested to do. It's not a
bad way to work, but it is time consuming and I'm not convinced there
isn't an easier way.

I don't think pause detection would cause the problem you described.
I'd be correcting over mistakes that would always be in the end of the
recording, not in the middle, so overwriting would never occur.

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 10:38:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ville Koskinen" <vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:1118987679.514131.293230@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> To me it seems that you only need to detect pauses, navigate through
> the audible stuff between them and make punch-ins. Perhaps you could
> even place the punch-in points so that they would be located just after
> the last "phrase", that is at the beginning of "silence". Then the
> reader could make sure that the pause before the rerecorded section
> would be exactly as long as he/she wanted.
>

Detecting pauses (by level) is no problem. You could even set how long the
pause would have to be to be considered a true pause. But inevitably
sometime or another you would pause more/less than the set amount (if you
speak like a normal person, that is) and with your system your system you
wouldn't even be aware you'd missed it until it's too late and you'd
overwritten what you wanted to keep (or be stuck with still having to edit).
People have already given you the best answer for how to solve your problem.
You're only hurting yourself by not at least trying what they say.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 1:31:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <Lduse.72664$xm3.64513@attbi_s21> rhunt22@hotmail.com writes:

> Detecting pauses (by level) is no problem. You could even set how long the
> pause would have to be to be considered a true pause.

And just how would you do that? Do you know of a DAW program that can
detect and mark periods of silence? I know that it can be done
dynamically (like the auto ID markers on a DAT or real time CD
recorder) but I don't recall running into that function in a DAW
program - but then I'm no walking compendium of DAW features.

It seems that I've heard about some CD construction programs that can
do that, but I can't think of which. Generally the pauses have to be
longer than the pause between sentences though. Otherwise you'd get
hundreds of markers where you don't want them. When I record a live
show to DAT or CD, I always turn off the auto-index function and
insert them manually when I can remember to do it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 5:20:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ville Koskinen" <vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in
news:1119007039.662149.204850@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> In fact I'm already doing what I've been suggested to do. It's not a
> bad way to work, but it is time consuming and I'm not convinced there
> isn't an easier way.

In my experience, removing the blanks doesn't take considerably more time
per edit than stopping the recording, backing up, and restarting the
phrase.

About the only way you could speed it up significantly would be to make no
mistakes in the first place.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 6:29:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1119008516k@trad...
>
> In article <Lduse.72664$xm3.64513@attbi_s21> rhunt22@hotmail.com writes:
>
>> Detecting pauses (by level) is no problem. You could even set how long
>> the
>> pause would have to be to be considered a true pause.
>
> And just how would you do that?

Simple. Just set a threshold and how long it has to stay below that
threshold to be considered a true pause. Soundforge does this already (Auto
Region is what they call it). It just doesn't do it exactly like this guy
wants (it won't let you "search back" a single phrase for example).

> Do you know of a DAW program that can
> detect and mark periods of silence? I know that it can be done
> dynamically (like the auto ID markers on a DAT or real time CD
> recorder) but I don't recall running into that function in a DAW
> program - but then I'm no walking compendium of DAW features.
>

I don't know of any programs that do exactly what he wants either. But it's
such a specific thing he wants that nobody else really seems to want so it
doesn't surprise me that the feature doesn't exist.

> It seems that I've heard about some CD construction programs that can
> do that, but I can't think of which. Generally the pauses have to be
> longer than the pause between sentences though. Otherwise you'd get
> hundreds of markers where you don't want them. When I record a live
> show to DAT or CD, I always turn off the auto-index function and
> insert them manually when I can remember to do it.

Right. As I said Soundforge already does this. Basically it's just like a
compressor's detection circuit. It even includes attack and release. But the
point you bring up about pause length is why I told him unless he speaks
like a robot with some kind of precise meter and pauses of equal length (who
would want to listen to that???) it's invariably going to miss a pause he
wanted or jump to the wrong one. Either way he's going to have to stop and
make sure he's at the right place before he continues so this way would
actually take longer than the manual marker idea.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 6:29:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <f7Bse.59658$x96.9925@attbi_s72> rhunt22@hotmail.com writes:

> Simple. Just set a threshold and how long it has to stay below that
> threshold to be considered a true pause. Soundforge does this already (Auto
> Region is what they call it). It just doesn't do it exactly like this guy
> wants (it won't let you "search back" a single phrase for example).

OK, that sounds reasonable. I didn't know that Sound Forge had that
feature. Does it split the file at the point where it detects silence?
If so, then why couldn't he "search back" by jumping to the previous
region start point? Surely it has that feature.

I think he should edit like everybody else. There are some "time
saving" features that take so much time to use that they end up being
time wasters.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 8:59:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1119026693k@trad...
>> Simple. Just set a threshold and how long it has to stay below that
>> threshold to be considered a true pause. Soundforge does this already
>> (Auto
>> Region is what they call it). It just doesn't do it exactly like this guy
>> wants (it won't let you "search back" a single phrase for example).
>
> OK, that sounds reasonable. I didn't know that Sound Forge had that
> feature. Does it split the file at the point where it detects silence?

You can adjust the parameters to determine where it drops a marker. Actually
the "auto region" command itself just drops markers according to the
parameters: attack sensitivity, release sensitivity, minimum level, minimum
beat duration (how long it has to stay below treshold to be considered a
pause). You can choose whether to have that marker fall on the attack of the
next "phrase" or at the point when the level (release) falls on the previous
phrase. Also, it either processes the whole file or you have to select what
parts you want processed. If you want to actually break it up and save all
the regions (phrases) as individual files you use the "Extract Region"
command (all Auto Region does is drop markers). As I said before a program
could be written to do what he has asked. I don't know of any that currently
do it though. The programming itself wouldn't be that hard (I programmed for
a living before my disability). I just don't think it would work as smoothly
as he thinks it would unless he speaks with the precision of a robot (though
it probably could be tweaked to work specifically for him). You would still
need to manually listen to make sure you were at the right place. Personally
I'd rather drop the markers manually (heck, it's just a single keypress) and
go on.

> If so, then why couldn't he "search back" by jumping to the previous
> region start point? Surely it has that feature.

He could but the process every time he made a mistake would be.

* Stop recording.
* Either process the whole file looking for regions or select just the
section you want to look for pauses
* Run the Auto Region command
* Press the "previous region" key and then listen to make sure you are at
right place.
* Punch in (overwrite) and continue

To me simply dropping a marker manually and continuing, then coming back and
doing the clean up would be much simpler and take less time. But if he's
determined to go this route (and finds a programmer to write the program for
him), more power to him.

>
> I think he should edit like everybody else. There are some "time
> saving" features that take so much time to use that they end up being
> time wasters.

Amen.
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 9:50:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ricky Hunt wrote:
> I don't know of any programs that do exactly what he wants either. But it's
> such a specific thing he wants that nobody else really seems to want so it
> doesn't surprise me that the feature doesn't exist.

I researched this a little, and some audio book authoring programs have
the feature. See eg. www.daisy.org for links. I guess some
organisations pay good money for the feature, which is why I'm still
not convinced that the two pass recording and editing method is
optimal.

Unfortunately, there is nothing like this for the consumer market.
Surprisingly, I haven't even found handheld voice recorders with the
feature, which supposedly would be helpful for physicians and others
who need to record notes.

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 1:49:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <BSNse.81772$nG6.58442@attbi_s22> rhunt22@hotmail.com writes:

> >> Just set a threshold and how long it has to stay below that
> >> threshold to be considered a true pause. Soundforge does this already

> You can adjust the parameters to determine where it drops a marker. Actually
> the "auto region" command itself just drops markers according to the
> parameters: attack sensitivity, release sensitivity, minimum level, minimum
> beat duration (how long it has to stay below treshold to be considered a
> pause). You can choose whether to have that marker fall on the attack of the
> next "phrase" or at the point when the level (release) falls on the previous
> phrase.

That could be useful, but it might be pretty tedious to set up and
it's bound to have some falsies, both missing things you'd like marked
and marking things that don't need to be marked. I could see that in
the course of a half-hour narration, in order to be useful for
editing, there might be 500 or so markers - quite a forest to skip
through when deciding what needs editing. Much better to rehearse so
you can read it pretty well and just re-do a phrase as soon as you
realize that you flubbed it. Mark that somehow, either with a marker
in the program, a notation on the script, or have the producer look at
his stopwatch and jot down the time.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 5:04:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1119099026.641961.217030@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi writes:

> I researched this a little, and some audio book authoring programs have
> the feature.

> Unfortunately, there is nothing like this for the consumer market.

Maybe that's becase the normal consumer market has no need for this
feature. Broadcast studios use software that most of us here (who
produce music almost exclusively) have never heard of, and have
features that might make us wonder "Why would anyone need to do that?"
Well, they do, and they're happy to pay for it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 6:03:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2005-06-18 rhunt22@hotmail.com said:
>Region does is drop markers). As I said before a program could be
>written to do what he has asked. I don't know of any that currently
>do it though. The programming itself wouldn't be that hard (I
>programmed for a living before my disability). I just don't think
>it would work as smoothly as he thinks it would unless he speaks
>with the precision of a robot (though it probably could be tweaked
>to work specifically for him). You would still need to manually
>>listen to make sure you were at the right place. Personally I'd
>>rather drop the markers manually (heck, it's just a single
>keypress) and go on. If so, then why couldn't he "search back" by
>jumping to the previous region start point? Surely it has that
>feature. He could but the process every time he made a mistake
>would be. * Stop recording. * Either process the whole file looking
>for regions or select just the section you want to look for pauses
>* Run the Auto Region command * Press the "previous region" key and
>then listen to make sure you are at right place.
I'd say just record the damn thing dropping markers manually every
time he perceives a mistake when actually recording. I've done enough
of this kind of thing in the analog days when I was still editing with
a razor blade. STill best bet is to mark places either on the
recording or in the script when there's a mistake, but listening is
still the important part. AT the end of the day one still has to
listen to the recording as one is editing and get what sounds like a
smooth presentation. IT ain't like editing text for presentation.
Even then if you're going to print after you've edited for spelling
errors then there's editing for gramatical errors and flow. SAme with
voice only. To get a smooth coherent presentation the op is going to
want to listen as he goes through editing and maybe retake sections if
he really didn't get what he was after on certain passages. However I
still think drop a marker at a point where there's a flub and start at
the beginning of a sentence or paragraph is the more workable
solution. NO software in the world is going to be able to get this
part right.

Iirc a poster in this thread was using the same software as the op and
mentioned how pressing f8 would place a marker at a certain spot while
recording. Place your markers when recording and edit the obvious
clams and then give another listen. NO matter how automated you
supposedly get the software there are still these two rounded devices
on the side of your head called ears which you're supposed to use.
AFter all it's audio, not look at the cute waveform.



Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 9:57:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ville Koskinen" <vkoskine@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:1119099026.641961.217030@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Ricky Hunt wrote:
>> I don't know of any programs that do exactly what he wants either. But
>> it's
>> such a specific thing he wants that nobody else really seems to want so
>> it
>> doesn't surprise me that the feature doesn't exist.
>
> I researched this a little, and some audio book authoring programs have
> the feature. See eg. www.daisy.org for links. I guess some
> organisations pay good money for the feature, which is why I'm still
> not convinced that the two pass recording and editing method is
> optimal.
>
> Unfortunately, there is nothing like this for the consumer market.
> Surprisingly, I haven't even found handheld voice recorders with the
> feature, which supposedly would be helpful for physicians and others
> who need to record notes.
>
> Regards,
> Ville Koskinen
>

Ville, it wouldn't be that hard for a programmer to write you a program to
do this if all you wanted was this feature. Meaning just a program that
strictly records input as a WAV and does the "jump back" thing. At the end
you would just save the file and then open it in another app for any other
processing you wanted to do. If you ask on some of the DSP boards you might
find someone who has the code laying around and might do it for a little of
nothing.
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 9:59:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1119095241k@trad...
>
> That could be useful, but it might be pretty tedious to set up and
> it's bound to have some falsies, both missing things you'd like marked
> and marking things that don't need to be marked. I could see that in
> the course of a half-hour narration, in order to be useful for
> editing, there might be 500 or so markers - quite a forest to skip
> through when deciding what needs editing. Much better to rehearse so
> you can read it pretty well and just re-do a phrase as soon as you
> realize that you flubbed it. Mark that somehow, either with a marker
> in the program, a notation on the script, or have the producer look at
> his stopwatch and jot down the time.
>

My thoughts exactly. It's one of those things that sounds simple in theory
and it is easy to program. It's the voice-over artist that's the
unquantifiable variable. I doubt many would want to talk in the way
necessary to make it work flawlessly. And if they did I certainly wouldn't
want to listen to it.
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 5:06:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ricky Hunt wrote:
> Ville, it wouldn't be that hard for a programmer to write you a program to
> do this if all you wanted was this feature. Meaning just a program that
> strictly records input as a WAV and does the "jump back" thing. At the end
> you would just save the file and then open it in another app for any other
> processing you wanted to do. If you ask on some of the DSP boards you might
> find someone who has the code laying around and might do it for a little of
> nothing.

I'll do that. In fact, at one point I tried to find a scriptable audio
editor (like Excel VBA for audio recording) to be able to test the
idea.

Thanks for the responses. I've at least learned that getting the
performance to a good level requires some work even if you are a
professional. As a hobbyist, I guess my interest to this specific topic
is something similar to a runner getting interested in GPS-navigation
to measure distances and speeds (I've heard this happens).

Regards,
Ville Koskinen
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 12:16:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>
> [...] most of us here (who produce music almost exclusively)



Um, <*ahem*>... cough cough...

There happen to be more than a handful of us here for whom music is not
the primary focus of our work. Part of it, sure, but not the most
significant part. Some of us record people reading things, note where
they've made mistakes, then go back and cut them out. Then we add music
and sound effects and clips of stuff recorded in the field and mix it
all up until it washes over you like a sonic tsunami! <g>

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 12:16:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Lorin David Schultz" <Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote in message
news:7uFte.71509$on1.20797@clgrps13...
> "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...] most of us here (who produce music almost exclusively)
>
>
>
> Um, <*ahem*>... cough cough...
>
> There happen to be more than a handful of us here for whom music is not
> the primary focus of our work. Part of it, sure, but not the most
> significant part. Some of us record people reading things, note where
> they've made mistakes, then go back and cut them out. Then we add music
> and sound effects and clips of stuff recorded in the field and mix it all
> up until it washes over you like a sonic tsunami! <g>
>
Ditto here (nowadays), though I do like to read posts from you music guys.
Reminds me of my early days, when the security cameras were about the most
important equipment, when a well known band flew down three flights of
fire-excape, when they saw a buddy of mine in his Chicago Police Seargent's
uniform on the front door video monitor.

Steve King
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 11:35:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On or about Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:20:33 GMT, Carey Carlan allegedly wrote:

> In my experience, removing the blanks doesn't take considerably more time
> per edit than stopping the recording, backing up, and restarting the
> phrase.

And then there is an advantage in having all takes there for the edit.
Sometimes the reader may punch the re-start a bit too much, or rushes
through the first bit of it (which they got right the first time) before
settling back to the more usual pace.

In these cases, the best fix may not be to just delete the first take and
keep the second. It can often be better to cut from the middle of the
first take into the same point of the second take. That may produce a
better result than either individual take.


If you try to do it with an 'automatic jump back' feature, you'd never
quite be sure if it was going to jump back to the start of that sentence
(or two sentences back!), the last comma, or some other point that you
took a breath, that you may not have even noticed at the time that you
did. The duration of each of these points compared to your set pause
length will determine where it goes back to.

A millisecond or two at one point or another may determine whether you
still end up with some clause repeated, or else missed out because the
program went back further than you thought it might.


Noel Bachelor noelbachelorAT(From:_domain)
Language Recordings Inc (Darwin Australia)
!