View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject: recording and converting to mp3 |
|
|
I recorded a lesson with the command Code: | rec -c 1 -r 8000 test.aiff |
meaning record in mono and sample rate 8000. I recorded with the internal mic that is in the laptop.
The sound is so, so. There are hisses.
I have 2 questions. How can I record better without those hisses (background sounds)? rec supports flac aiff wav (wav will be too big).
How can I convert it to mp3? mp3 will compress more? Can I get rid of those hisses? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dottout l33t
Joined: 07 Mar 2006 Posts: 882
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
to convert to mp3 emerge media-sound/lame. the other question..sorry, dunno |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dottout wrote: | to convert to mp3 emerge media-sound/lame. the other question..sorry, dunno |
I have lame installed. You have an idea which parameters I should give? I am not so familiar with bitrate, etc.
I am interested to increase the volume and remove as much as possible the background sound. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cjubon Guru
Joined: 03 Jul 2007 Posts: 450 Location: Vienna/Europe
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd invoke lame with variable bitrate and medium quality, so the switch is -q 5. If you're not satisfied with the result, try -q 2. Lame has not so many filters, it may be difficult to minimize the hisses. You can try the lowpass filter (see man lame), but I think it won't make sense since your sample rate is already very low. Perhaps it would be better to edit the aiff in an audio editor first (e.g. audacity), but the best is always to take care for a good source recording. Built-in micros are mostly crapp, so I'd use an external micro. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Akkara Bodhisattva
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 Posts: 6702 Location: &akkara
|
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
media-sound/sox can do volume adjustments, filtering, and other effects from the command line while converting file formats. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
cjubon wrote: | I'd invoke lame with variable bitrate and medium quality, so the switch is -q 5. If you're not satisfied with the result, try -q 2. Lame has not so many filters, it may be difficult to minimize the hisses. You can try the lowpass filter (see man lame), but I think it won't make sense since your sample rate is already very low. Perhaps it would be better to edit the aiff in an audio editor first (e.g. audacity), but the best is always to take care for a good source recording. Built-in micros are mostly crapp, so I'd use an external micro. |
Thanks cjubon. What would the best sample rate to record? I want to record today another lecture. Would 11000 hz will be better? Or more? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jcat Veteran
Joined: 26 May 2006 Posts: 1337
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
CD quality is 44,100Hz, so you are way off the mark with you're original 8,000Hz, and even 11,000Hz
Recording at those low sample rates will introduce hiss, and reduce the frequency range you can record (which is half the sample rate due to the Nyquist limit).
You should try it at 44,100Hz, and you might even find 22,500 OK (given that you don't require a large frequency range to reproduce the human voice reasonably). But try 44,100Hz first and see how you get on.
You will get larger files, but when you compress to mp3 afterwards you'll find it much smaller!
Bit depth hasn't been mentioned here, but stick to 16 bit for safety's sake
And yes, you will get even better results with an external "directional" microphone as well, so you can home in on the source of the sound more and not the background noise. But try the higher sample rates first, and see if that gives you the improvement you're after.
Cheers,
jcat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
padoor Advocate
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 Posts: 4185 Location: india
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
first try recording with mic with no other signal/speech
see how much noise/hiss is recorded .this includes the motor noise of the fan/harddrive and other mechanical noise.
then cover mic face with cotton a 1/2 inch thick layer and do the same recording.
that is all the noise reduction you can get with internal mic.
with the cotton covered mic speech will come up better but will have to talk little louder.
i thought mp3 files are bigger for the same music /record length.
if you have some control on rec input level you can do better recording.
as jcat said external mic usage is best.
the alc of the recording circuitry will make certain amount of hiss which modulates the recording with hiss and noise.
you cannot expect proffessional voice recording with laptop mic anyways. _________________ reach out a little bit more to catch it (DON'T BELIEVE the advocate part under my user name) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
padoor wrote: | first try recording with mic with no other signal/speech
see how much noise/hiss is recorded .this includes the motor noise of the fan/harddrive and other mechanical noise.
then cover mic face with cotton a 1/2 inch thick layer and do the same recording.
that is all the noise reduction you can get with internal mic.
with the cotton covered mic speech will come up better but will have to talk little louder.
i thought mp3 files are bigger for the same music /record length.
if you have some control on rec input level you can do better recording.
as jcat said external mic usage is best.
the alc of the recording circuitry will make certain amount of hiss which modulates the recording with hiss and noise.
you cannot expect proffessional voice recording with laptop mic anyways. |
I just tried to record myself with the laptop mic at 44100 Hz. I used max volume. Then I covered and recorded again. I get almost the same quality. And to hear the voice I need to put headsets.
Recording myself with the headsets and mic (that i use for skype) turned out to be much better |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cjubon Guru
Joined: 03 Jul 2007 Posts: 450 Location: Vienna/Europe
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jcat wrote: | You should try it at 44,100Hz, and you might even find 22,500 OK |
As far as I understand, you're going to record only speech, no music? Then 22,500 is really enough. If you're converting to mp3 afterwards, size will not matter too much, I think.
BTW, queen wrote: | rec supports flac aiff wav (wav will be too big) | wav and aiff are more or less the same with respect to size (both being uncompressed PCM sound data with a header). You can also record wav files with 22500 MHz mono (or less). If size __does__ matter, you can try flac (which is a compressed format, although compressing losslessly - compression ratio is approximately 0.4 or 0.5. Mp3, on the other hand, has lossy compression.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cjubon wrote: | jcat wrote: | You should try it at 44,100Hz, and you might even find 22,500 OK |
As far as I understand, you're going to record only speech, no music? Then 22,500 is really enough. If you're converting to mp3 afterwards, size will not matter too much, I think.
BTW, queen wrote: | rec supports flac aiff wav (wav will be too big) | wav and aiff are more or less the same with respect to size (both being uncompressed PCM sound data with a header). You can also record wav files with 22500 MHz mono (or less). If size __does__ matter, you can try flac (which is a compressed format, although compressing losslessly - compression ratio is approximately 0.4 or 0.5. Mp3, on the other hand, has lossy compression.) |
Yes, only speech. The size is important only until I convert it to mp3. Right now I have 63% usage of my hd. Remaining is 20gb available. And the lecture is 3 1/2hours. I am afraid not to fill the hd until the speech is finished. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jcat Veteran
Joined: 26 May 2006 Posts: 1337
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As I said, you may find 22,500Hz is fine. Try it and see.
Anything less than that, and you will notice an increase in "hiss" or noise in the recording. This is only (but may include) background noise, but is a side effect of low sample rate PCM.
Cheers,
jcat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cjubon Guru
Joined: 03 Jul 2007 Posts: 450 Location: Vienna/Europe
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
queen wrote: | I am afraid not to fill the hd until the speech is finished |
wav/aiff mono 22500 MHz will take not more than 200 MB per hour, so you'll be fine with that, and you would be so even with cd quality recording (44100 MHz stereo). Good luck! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yesterday I tried with 44100hz and it was ok. I recorded as flac. The total size of 3 1/2 hours was 230MB. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cjubon wrote: | queen wrote: | I am afraid not to fill the hd until the speech is finished |
wav/aiff mono 22500 MHz will take not more than 200 MB per hour, so you'll be fine with that, and you would be so even with cd quality recording (44100 MHz stereo). Good luck! |
MHz? Or Hz? A little bit confused? I can't see the units in |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jcat Veteran
Joined: 26 May 2006 Posts: 1337
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hz !
Cheers,
jcat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jcat wrote: | Hz !
Cheers,
jcat |
That's more likely.
Thanks. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jcat wrote: | Hz !
Cheers,
jcat |
In alsamixer what should be the level of the mic? In mine it was 19. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jcat Veteran
Joined: 26 May 2006 Posts: 1337
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It depends on how close to the sound source you are and the sensitivity of your mic, so it's a tough one.
Basically, you want to end up with a recorded file that gets closing to the maximum allowed level, but never over that. This ensures that you get the best quality recording you can (you are using all the bits).
If you reach 0dB (on the digital scale) it will distort, this is called "clipping". Brief "clips" are ok, but if it happens frequently you'll get a distorted sound.
Normally when you record, it's a good idea to have an input level meter so that you can see how close to the maximum level you are (for your given mic gain level) in real time as you record. If one's not available then the best thing to examine the file after you've made your recording, using a package like Audacity. That way you can examine the recording for any "clipping", or whether it's too quiet (not very close to maximum level of 0dB digital), and adjust the mic level to compensate for you next recording. This will take some trial and error
You can also use a package like Audacity to edit the recording before you convert it to an mp3. that might be handy
Cheers,
jcat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
01mf02 Veteran
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 1070 Location: Innsbruck, Austria
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You may get louder recordings by enabling the "Mic boost" option in alsamixer. Hope it helps, and good luck with the recording! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
queen Veteran
Joined: 19 Jul 2005 Posts: 1642
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
01mf02 wrote: | You may get louder recordings by enabling the "Mic boost" option in alsamixer. Hope it helps, and good luck with the recording! |
but it doesn't increase any level in mic boost. It's off. How can I put it on? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|