3 ms·

While this is an article about programming, I'd like to mention that if you need to remove background noise from an audio clip, then Audacity has an excellent f

While this is an article about programming, I'd like to mention that if you need to remove background noise from an audio clip, then Audacity has an excellent filter for this. Of course that's not anywhere as adaptable as doing it in code yourself is.

pushpop 7y ago
Audacity is open source though so one could always dig into the code if they wanted. Plus I don’t think it’s fair to say “not anywhere as acceptable as doing it in code yourself”. I understand the point of your disclaimer but as someone who’s been writing code for three decades, I really love the fact that we no longer have to write our own tools.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  I mean adaptable. I don't know how much you could automate with Audacity in this regard. With your own code, you can.
  - pushpop 7y ago
    Apparently Audacity supports automation from a variety of different languages[1]. Though I’ve not tried myself so I couldn’t comment how good it is. However you’re right that if you’re writing software that depends on such a tool it’s better to have something you can compile into your software (or at least an .so / .dll you can redistribute). [1] https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Automation https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Automation
Joeboy 7y ago
If you don't care about open source and don't mind spending money, Izotope RX7 has much better denoising tools than Audacity. It's actually the main reason I now have Windows installed on my desktop (alongside Ubuntu).
- tripzilch 7y ago
  I know a lot of things about audacity can be a bit clunky, but the quality of the denoise tool in Audacity is actually extremely good. I read its code one time, and I was impressed. I'm not familiar with RX7, maybe it does better audio quality but it's probably also got a better interface/workflow. Which is definitely worth a lot in a professional setting.

pushpop 7y ago

Audacity is open source though so one could always dig into the code if they wanted. Plus I don’t think it’s fair to say “not anywhere as acceptable as doing it in code yourself”. I understand the point of your disclaimer but as someone who’s been writing code for three decades, I really love the fact that we no longer have to write our own tools.

Mirioron 7y ago
I mean adaptable. I don't know how much you could automate with Audacity in this regard. With your own code, you can.
- pushpop 7y ago
  Apparently Audacity supports automation from a variety of different languages[1]. Though I’ve not tried myself so I couldn’t comment how good it is. However you’re right that if you’re writing software that depends on such a tool it’s better to have something you can compile into your software (or at least an .so / .dll you can redistribute). [1] https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Automation https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Automation

Joeboy 7y ago

If you don't care about open source and don't mind spending money, Izotope RX7 has much better denoising tools than Audacity. It's actually the main reason I now have Windows installed on my desktop (alongside Ubuntu).

tripzilch 7y ago
I know a lot of things about audacity can be a bit clunky, but the quality of the denoise tool in Audacity is actually extremely good. I read its code one time, and I was impressed. I'm not familiar with RX7, maybe it does better audio quality but it's probably also got a better interface/workflow. Which is definitely worth a lot in a professional setting.