Post by Rebekah Amber Clark on May 7, 2018 20:31:06 GMT -8
I would recommend Audacity, which is also completely free of charge. You may wish to switch to a different software later on, but at least for me, I found Audacity to be extremely easy to use, intuitive, and user friendly. It has a lot of features, but even if all you want is the very most basic level of just using the record, stop, play, and rewind buttons you can absolutely start there and work your way up as you get more familiar with what all the doodads do, instead of having to be overwhelmed right off the bat!
Seconding Audacity. There's still a learning curve, but there are topics posted right in this very section on here that cover certain things you might not get like noise reduction and normalization to make things easier. And if you don't get it right away, it's cool. You can always ask for help.
I also want to say - over at GFTB, they highly recommend and badger their subscribers to 'not use audacity' - until once they gave up the ghost and revealed why they don't want their users to use audacity - and the reason for that was that the graphs showing the audio had no accurate way of showing the dB (loudness) of segments in their audio, which meant that it would make it tough to figure out the right figure to use in the 'compressor'... that's it folks - that's why you shouldn't use audacity.
The thing is - I've found a workaround for this - which I think works, but some audio engineer here can confirm it. Let's say I found the area of my audio that is too quiet, and I'd like the rest of my file compressed to this level (at a suitable ratio) so that later I can normalize. What i've figured out is that, if I select this quiet area, then choose effect < amplify, the dialog box will show up showing me exactly how much amplification that area needs to reach 0dB e.g. +17dB, which to me - essentially means that, this quiet area's volume level peaks at -17dB, and I use that information to operate the compressor. Am I doing it right?
Post by LadyStardust on May 10, 2018 1:56:28 GMT -8
Audacity, hands down. In fact, I still use it because I like how simple it is to record and edit basic auditions and lines. As long as you're not doing a bunch of mixing or post-processing, it does everything you need it to.
It's funny, I'm a huge proponent of Reaper, but it's not the easiest learning curve to plow through and it's still a little weak in some areas. It's funny you mentioned spectral editing. I find spectral editing in Audacity is more precise than spectral editing in Reaper, though Reaper's is more flexible. It's a trade-off. But that's true of most things, anyway.
Personally, I have found Reaper to be much easier to use than Audacity, it took some time to go through Booth Junkie's videos (because he goes on f o r e v e r) but once I was setup with levels and EQ all I gotta do is load it up and record, all the stuff I would do in post in Audacity is already applied when I am done recording.
megasean45: I still need help with this! It's been so long! I'll pay if I have to! JUST HELP ME PLEASE! People are waiting for this! Just one video! One! Just one, and the series is done! Please!
Apr 15, 2019 12:48:17 GMT -8