Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Audacity 3.4

audacityteam.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 122 posts

Re: Audacity 3.4

#81

Post by orlp »

hurryer wrote: post #75
vintermann wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really make enough from being an audio professional that price doesn't matter? Whether you do or not, there are a hell of a lot of hawkers of software and "hardware" alike, who stand ready to sell their overpriced "professional" tools to people who fail to make it in the music industry (which is going to be most of them, regardless of tools or even skills). A high sticker price is a way to prove your commitmen…

Good professional audio hardware is not overpriced. Sure, there are $15k microphones but you absolutely do not need those, a $1k one is top quality and not expensive if you use it regularly. You are confusing it with audiophile gear. Regarding Audacity, it's missing tons of features and it's UI is bad. Just like Gimp vs Photoshop. I did some audio production and Audacity is just not usable beyond the most basic opera…

> a $1k one is top quality

$100 gets you a SM57 which probably has been on more platinum albums than any other mic.

Re: Audacity 3.4

#82

Post by synergy20 »

LWinterberg wrote: post #72
synergy20 wrote: post #4

this is made in wxWidgets by the way, a cross platform c++ GUI framework like Qt but 100% free on the other hand inkscape is made with gtkmm(gtk), which also runs cross platform.

Audacity will switch to Qt/QML for version 4 because wxWidgets just keeps getting in the way.

surprised,any specifics? and why not gtk since wxwidgets uses gtk underneath for Linux,and gtk works for win and Mac too,easier to port it seems

Re: Audacity 3.4

#83

Post by nemetroid »

LWinterberg wrote: post #69
evgpbfhnr wrote: post #2

Speaking of which, how did that "audacity isn't FOSS" fuss end up? A quick search shows tenacity is still active ( https://codeberg.org/tenacityteam/tenacity ) but I have no idea how much the projects kept interacting after the initial debate

It's complete BS. Audacity never stopped being open source and currently has update checking and crash reporting - it does not have any telemetry.

They did introduce a mandatory CLA which allows for using the code in non-GPL ways, even noting that this was the purpose of introducing the CLA.

https://github.com/audacity/audacity/discussions/932

Re: Audacity 3.4

#84

Post by nemetroid »

RockRobotRock wrote: post #9
evgpbfhnr wrote: post #2

Speaking of which, how did that "audacity isn't FOSS" fuss end up? A quick search shows tenacity is still active ( https://codeberg.org/tenacityteam/tenacity ) but I have no idea how much the projects kept interacting after the initial debate

seems like its because they tried to add basic telemetry?

The reason for the "non-FOSS" accusations was not related to the introduction of telemetry, but the new CLA. But they did this around the same time they tried to add (but backed out) telemetry, so people tend to confuse the two events. Which I guess is helpful for Muse.

https://github.com/audacity/audacity/discussions/932

Re: Audacity 3.4

#85

Post by bdhcuidbebe »

Aachen wrote: post #17

> You can now change the duration of your audio clips without affecting their pitch non-destructively. Audacity 3.4 uses a new time stretching algorithm specifically made for music, which outperforms many of the commercially available options. Way to bury the lede! What's this magic algorithm being spoken of, how does it work so well? > A more detailed overview of these changes can be found in our changelog . The cha…

> The library name links to a Microsoft repository.

You link to the official audacity and chose to (incorrectly) describe it as ”a Microsoft repository”

Why being dishonest?

Re: Audacity 3.4

#86

Post by nyanpasu64 »

LWinterberg wrote: post #80
actionfromafar wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be nice with a fork which followed Audacity closely but without the telemetry. (Like VS Codium I suppose.)

This fork exists and it's called Audacity. Audacity doesn't have any telemetry, the PR never got merged. And any online functionality it does have (automatic update checking, crash reporting) can be turned off.

Perhaps remove the "Share Audio" ~~ad~~ button in the toolbar?

Re: Audacity 3.4

#87

Post by jai_ »

Aachen wrote: post #17

> You can now change the duration of your audio clips without affecting their pitch non-destructively. Audacity 3.4 uses a new time stretching algorithm specifically made for music, which outperforms many of the commercially available options. Way to bury the lede! What's this magic algorithm being spoken of, how does it work so well? > A more detailed overview of these changes can be found in our changelog . The cha…

Staffpad and Audacity are both software under the ownership (?) of Muse Group.

Staffpad is recent acquisition which is why they are now able to share technology like this: https://mu.se/

Re: Audacity 3.4

#88

Post by lozenge »

vintermann wrote: post #68
Slow_Hand wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was curious myself, so I downloaded Audacity and tried. It's a granular time-stretch algorithm. By the sound of the artifacts at extreme settings it's akin to the 'Complex Pro' algorithm in Ableton Live (if you have any reference to that) and seems to be equally effective at a wide variety of sources (percussion, vocals, full records). Is it better than most commercial offerings? Hard to say after a brief test, but…

Do you really make enough from being an audio professional that price doesn't matter? Whether you do or not, there are a hell of a lot of hawkers of software and "hardware" alike, who stand ready to sell their overpriced "professional" tools to people who fail to make it in the music industry (which is going to be most of them, regardless of tools or even skills). A high sticker price is a way to prove your commitmen…

Ableton Live Suite costs 750 USD? Not much for a lifetime license of something that you would use on every project. Plus there's the ability to collaborate with other professionals that depends on the Ableton project file format.

Edit: Mind you, it contains software instruments, sound packs and MIDI effects allowing you to add synthesized music to recorded music. Audacity only manipulates existing audio and you will need to bring in other software if you want to add synthesised audio which in Audacity will just be treated as extra audio tracks rather than MIDI. That will obviously make it more difficult to produce music. It would be like having to rasterise every layer instead of using a vector graphics to build an illustration.

Re: Audacity 3.4

#89

Post by seanw444 »

orlp wrote: post #81
hurryer wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good professional audio hardware is not overpriced. Sure, there are $15k microphones but you absolutely do not need those, a $1k one is top quality and not expensive if you use it regularly. You are confusing it with audiophile gear. Regarding Audacity, it's missing tons of features and it's UI is bad. Just like Gimp vs Photoshop. I did some audio production and Audacity is just not usable beyond the most basic opera…

> a $1k one is top quality $100 gets you a SM57 which probably has been on more platinum albums than any other mic.

Exactly. After a certain point, you get diminishing returns. $100 gets you probably 85-90% of the way there, which is certainly more than enough. People forget that a good mic and a good DAW do not fix a bad take. The price of the tools is less important than their proper usage, and simply recording things well.

You don't even need an SM57. I know for a fact the iPhone mic and iPhone Garageband has been one artist's success.

Re: Audacity 3.4

#90

Post by RicoElectrico »

Slow_Hand wrote: post #61
Aachen wrote: post #17

> You can now change the duration of your audio clips without affecting their pitch non-destructively. Audacity 3.4 uses a new time stretching algorithm specifically made for music, which outperforms many of the commercially available options. Way to bury the lede! What's this magic algorithm being spoken of, how does it work so well? > A more detailed overview of these changes can be found in our changelog . The cha…

I was curious myself, so I downloaded Audacity and tried. It's a granular time-stretch algorithm. By the sound of the artifacts at extreme settings it's akin to the 'Complex Pro' algorithm in Ableton Live (if you have any reference to that) and seems to be equally effective at a wide variety of sources (percussion, vocals, full records). Is it better than most commercial offerings? Hard to say after a brief test, but…

How is granular time stretch different from OLA or WSOLA?
Post reply on HN