91–100 of 122 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Any new shady telemetry?
As you can see in https://github.com/audacity/audacity/pull/835 , the telemetry was never added.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
> Audacity's source code is currently released under the GNU General Public License version 2 (GPLv2). We intend to update the license to GPLv3 to enable support for new technologies not compatible with GPLv2 (i.e. - VST3, which is compatible with GPLv3).
VST3 is dual licensed with some Steinberg license and GPLv3. The purpose of the CLA was to be able to migrate Audacity binaries to GPLv3 with VST3 support. This has happened as of Audacity 3.2.
Other uses for the CLA are to publish the thing in app stores down the road. It's not stopping Audacity being open source, unless you consider Apache software not open source.
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.
You wouldn't want to record an acoustic guitar ballad on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As you can see in https://github.com/audacity/audacity/pull/835 , the telemetry was never added.
I'm not sure what you think that thread says, but it seems to confirm telemetry was added, then they lock the thread to end the discussion. Which is always a sign of bad faith. Did you mean to link to another where they removed all the telemetry they added?
You can verify for yourself that there is no telemetry code in Audacity.
These are some really nice quality of life updates. I've never used time stretching, but combined with the beats and measure markers, it could be really nice.
There's a particular occasional need for easy to use time stretching of audio against video. Every now and again there'll be a hard to otherwise source episode of something that turns up two poor vesions, one with good video but damaged | lower quality sound another with good sound | bad video .. and they each have differing frame rates and edit cuts. To make a better version involves a bit of time stretching on the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what you think that thread says, but it seems to confirm telemetry was added, then they lock the thread to end the discussion. Which is always a sign of bad faith. Did you mean to link to another where they removed all the telemetry they added?
Note that it says "closed" at the top. Pull requests which are merged say "merged", like this one: https://github.com/audacity/audacity/pull/5484 You can verify for yourself that there is no telemetry code in Audacity.
> 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 basic idea is this. For a time-stretch factor of, say, 2x, the frequency spectrum of the stretched output at 2 sec should be the same as the frequency spectrum of the unstretched input at 1 sec. The naive algorithm therefore takes a short section of signal at 1s, translates it to 2s and adds it to the result. Unfortunately, this method generates all sorts of unwanted artifacts.
Imagine a pure sine wave. Now take 2 short sections of the wave from 2 random times, overlap them, and add them together. What happens? Well, it depends on the phase of each section. If the sections are out of phase, they cancel on the overlap; if in phase, they constructively interfere.
The phase vocoder is all about overlapping and adding sections together so that the phases of all the different sine waves in the sections line up. Thus, in any phase vocoder algorithm, you will see code that searches for peaks in the spectrum (see _time_stretch code). Each peak is an assumed sine wave, and corresponding peaks in adjacent frames should have their phases match.