4 ms·

I used this filter to reduce wind noise during a tour guide of BB63: https://youtu.be/1LDlOmKtfeQ?t=60 https://youtu.be/1LDlOmKtfeQ?t=60 This is a 20 yr old v

by relwin 4y ago

I used this filter to reduce wind noise during a tour guide of BB63: https://youtu.be/1LDlOmKtfeQ?t=60 https://youtu.be/1LDlOmKtfeQ?t=60 This is a 20 yr old vid shot at Pearl Harbor on the deck of USS Missouri with a low-end consumer Hi-8 camera using built-in mics. Notice flags and clothes rippling in the wind. This filter works pretty well in this case. Maybe it was trained on a New York accent? Mixing in the enhanced track as needed works well. Using only the enhanced track may sound artificial at times. Here's another vid shot at a brewery where this filter helped clarify the brewmaster's voice over a noisy restaurant and outdoor machinery (again, built-in mic): https://youtu.be/nANSdnYj-R0 https://youtu.be/nANSdnYj-R0 I found this filter useful.

black_puppydog 4y ago
> Mixing in the enhanced track as needed works well. Using only the enhanced track may sound artificial at times. Funnily, in order to use this sort of model for tasks involving speech recognition it's often recommended in the literature to mix back in some of the original noisy audio. This reduces the impact of artifacts introduced by the enhancement which would otherwise reduce ASR quality due to domain shift in the data. Guess humans and computers have similar needs in this case. :) These are impressive results, the audio mostly sounds like you gave the guy a lapel mic. :P
- homero 4y ago
  As a human I had a hard time understanding that audio
  - 0_____0 4y ago
    Honestly you might have had a hard time understanding that speech in person
O__________O 4y ago
Having unlisted version on Youtube “before” the audio was filtered would make it easier to hear the true difference, but agree the quality is impressive as is.
- relwin 4y ago
  I did so on the brewery tour: https://youtu.be/M5pdHVoXQHE https://youtu.be/M5pdHVoXQHE
  - O__________O 4y ago
    Thanks! Honestly I liked the post filtering audio with no “natural audio” mixed back in. Get the reasoning, but still. Did you do testing with anyone to gauge viewer preference? If so, how?
    - relwin 4y ago
      This filter is not perfect so you'll have a few audio artifacts that you won't want in your final mix. Mixing with the original audio hides these artifacts somewhat. Using this filter also increases your audio mixing effort (you're mixing in a second vocal track) so it's easiest to mix the 2 audio tracks at constant levels then adjust when you hit an artifact. This is my personal preference on this style of audio mixing, and others who watched (and gave feedback) couldn't tell it was enhanced and had no difficulty understanding the speaker.

by relwin 4y ago

black_puppydog 4y ago

> Mixing in the enhanced track as needed works well. Using only the enhanced track may sound artificial at times. Funnily, in order to use this sort of model for tasks involving speech recognition it's often recommended in the literature to mix back in some of the original noisy audio. This reduces the impact of artifacts introduced by the enhancement which would otherwise reduce ASR quality due to domain shift in the data. Guess humans and computers have similar needs in this case. :) These are impressive results, the audio mostly sounds like you gave the guy a lapel mic. :P

homero 4y ago
As a human I had a hard time understanding that audio
- 0_____0 4y ago
  Honestly you might have had a hard time understanding that speech in person

O__________O 4y ago

Having unlisted version on Youtube “before” the audio was filtered would make it easier to hear the true difference, but agree the quality is impressive as is.

relwin 4y ago
I did so on the brewery tour: https://youtu.be/M5pdHVoXQHE https://youtu.be/M5pdHVoXQHE
- O__________O 4y ago
  Thanks! Honestly I liked the post filtering audio with no “natural audio” mixed back in. Get the reasoning, but still. Did you do testing with anyone to gauge viewer preference? If so, how?
  - relwin 4y ago
    This filter is not perfect so you'll have a few audio artifacts that you won't want in your final mix. Mixing with the original audio hides these artifacts somewhat. Using this filter also increases your audio mixing effort (you're mixing in a second vocal track) so it's easiest to mix the 2 audio tracks at constant levels then adjust when you hit an artifact. This is my personal preference on this style of audio mixing, and others who watched (and gave feedback) couldn't tell it was enhanced and had no difficulty understanding the speaker.