|
a question about nero noise reduction
|
|
Member
|
1. April 2012 @ 14:08 |
Link to this message
|
hi
has anyone here ever used the the nero wave editor noise reduction?whats your opinion of it?is it good?
benbernie
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
2. April 2012 @ 15:37 |
Link to this message
|
I haven't because I don't use Nero and I don't use noise reduction. However, noise reduction is not 'rocket science' anymore. I would trust it, on the other hand, I would mention most of what Nero does is usually half-assed. Audacity is free and well trusted.
|
Member
|
2. April 2012 @ 15:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
o ok mez..thanks
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
2. April 2012 @ 16:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
By the way, I should have asked what would you be using it for? Normally it is after converting analog to digital. Noise reduction only works on standard noises, such as a vinyl hiss, vinyl pop or radio static. It will not work for artifacts, noise created while ripping or transcodeing that shouldn't be there. If you have those kinds of noises, noise reduction will not work no matter what software you use.
|
Member
|
2. April 2012 @ 16:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
hi
im doing 78s..and i have pops and clicks to remove..
ben
|
Member
|
2. April 2012 @ 16:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
hi
did u ever use cooledit pro for records?
ben
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. April 2012 @ 16:27
|
|
hello_hello
Junior Member
|
3. April 2012 @ 03:12 |
Link to this message
|
Nero Wave Editor has a function for removing pops and clicks (as opposed to noise reduction). I'm using on old version but it's called Declicker and it's under the Enhancements menu. I find it works quite well.
Noise reduction also works reasonably well if memory serves me correctly. Ideally you'd run a noise analysis on just a section of the audio which should be silent, but which contains noise. Then Nero uses the analysis to remove the noise from the entire audio. At least that's the way I remember it.
Audacity also has similar click and noise removal filters. Wavosaur no doubt does too.
|
|
JST1946
Senior Member
|
3. April 2012 @ 05:00 |
Link to this message
|
I have been using Acoustica products for about 10 years now and the spin it again program works great for noise reduction and removing the clicks and pops from vinyl and cassetes.It also splits your albums into separate tracks.
http://www.acoustica.com/spinitagain/
|
Member
|
3. April 2012 @ 05:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
thanks guys..
ben
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
3. April 2012 @ 17:18 |
Link to this message
|
I leave the noise for 33s. I don't mind the pops and hiss because my records were not so bad. It reminds me where the music came from. 78s might tempt me. For those type of noises noise removal is supposed to work great not removing the music underneath like hiss filters do. I still don't trust noise removal. Plus that can be done at any time. I would take the time to burn a before and after to CDs then use the TAO analyzer in the top sticky. Make sure it isn't removing what it shouldn't.
JST1946 how well does this part work?
Automatically look up track information online for less typing!
What database does it use?
That alone would sell the product to me if it was better than freedb. Otherwise you can just use freedb and a splitter.
|
Member
|
3. April 2012 @ 17:37 |
Link to this message
|
hi
wheres the tao analyzer?do u think nero has gotten any better with age?
ben
|
|
JST1946
Senior Member
|
3. April 2012 @ 19:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Mez:
I leave the noise for 33s. I don't mind the pops and hiss because my records were not so bad. It reminds me where the music came from. 78s might tempt me. For those type of noises noise removal is supposed to work great not removing the music underneath like hiss filters do. I still don't trust noise removal. Plus that can be done at any time. I would take the time to burn a before and after to CDs then use the TAO analyzer in the top sticky. Make sure it isn't removing what it shouldn't.
JST1946 how well does this part work?
Automatically look up track information online for less typing!
What database does it use?
That alone would sell the product to me if it was better than freedb. Otherwise you can just use freedb and a splitter.
You just type in the artist and name of the album if you know what it is and it will search for the album information for you. You just need to match up the album with the one you loaded for splitting. Depending on where you live some albums have more tracks than the other so it might not match. Once you select one it will tell you if the albums are a match.I am pretty sure all the programs have a free trial and they are all very easy to use.The CD burner and label maker are really great also.They used to sell a gold bundle with about seven different programs with free updates. I would give them a try and see what you think.They have different types of noise reduction or removal that you can try before you burn the CD.
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. April 2012 @ 14:35 |
Link to this message
|
It likely uses freedb as the source. That is for CDs but will work if the album is identical.
benbernie the top post/sticky (Audio expert) is loaded with links, one is to the Tao Analyzer.
|
Member
|
4. April 2012 @ 14:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
thanks mez
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. April 2012 @ 12:34 |
Link to this message
|
I came across a guide for capturing 78s. It is a MUST READ! You can't capture exactly like a 33. Such as you need a 78 needle which is shaped differently than a 33. It suggests only using Audacity (from an Audacity site) because Audacity has tools specific for 78 clean up. This will be add-ons specific for the 78 label. 33s have a standard RIAA equalization while 78s have equalization specific to the manufacturer.
Now I know why 78s sound so bad when played as a 33. The cleaned up captured audio will be superior to the 'live version' played on any system. There is a science just to cancel out RIAA equalization generated in the cartridge.
Guide for capturing 78s
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. April 2012 @ 13:25
|
Member
|
8. April 2012 @ 13:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
thanks mr mez..
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. April 2012 @ 13:49 |
Link to this message
|
Good, I even PMed you. You shouldn't be cleaning up 78s without reading it. The beauty of burning the raw waves to CD always works since you don't screw them up.
|
Member
|
8. April 2012 @ 15:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
hi
when i8 say "cleaning them up "i mean of clicks and pops and generall surface noise..
benbernie
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. April 2012 @ 15:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
In theory it might matter. In reality it probably doesn't. It is easy to get carried away. Human hearing is not very good even if you think you are an expert.
The theory is to get the sound to get the recording back to 'live sounding' then the noise reduction will work exactly as expected.
|
Member
|
8. April 2012 @ 16:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
hi
can u explaine the 2nd sentance more clearly?
lenny
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. April 2012 @ 09:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
The reason noise reduction is so safe is that the targeted noise is well known and has exact sound characteristics. Audio exactly matching that is removed. If the audio is some how 'shifted' MAYBE it will not look EXACTLY as it should. After rethinking the problem the pops and hiss are 'outside' the shift, not really being in the audio that has been shifted. In plane words I think the noise removal will work EXACTLY as expected.
|
