RSS feed reader

Lostgallifreyan wrote:
"Bill in Co" wrote in
m:

I'm not sure how many of these tools still run on Win98SE, but I know
some do. Programs such as: Wave Corrector Pro, Wave Repair, Vinyl
Studio, and at least some older versions of Magix Audio Cleaning Lab,
just for starters. (one can often find older versions on Amazon or on
eBay, etc). But there are pros and cons to each of these.
Incidentally, I think the first three are British in origin. :-)




Once a computer has been paid for, modified, built to solve certain tasks,
fitted with hardware that depends on the OS running on it, there's no
useful
distinction between it and the mind of its operator. Most of the reason
for
bloat and ever faster machines to do the same basic tasks is precisely
because people want to change computers like they change shoes, always
afraid to get deep into what they have, instead preferring to take every
new
promise instead of building their own life no matter how small and futile
it
might seem to 'limit' themselves that way. Not so long ago, most people
couldn't even change shoes that readily either. As most of our serious
problems come from the same things that bring us so many 'solutions', I
prefer to be cautious and use what I have if it's a choice between that
and
giving most of it up. We've had this discussion several time, and the one
thing I won't do is turn over my machines, or way of thinking, for one
task
at the expense of all the others. It's not going to happen (and likely
wouldn't even if I had a few thousand bucks to throw at the problem
because
there are other things I'd want to do more). I have explained in extensive
detail how and why I manage, in ways many professional sound engineers
don't
know so I think I've stated my case well enough. Just let me live with my
choices. That doesn't hurt, but going round in the same circles again and
again despite explaining very good reasons not to, CAN hurt, so let it
rest.

OK. Sorry if I offended.
(I'm sometimes overly persistent, if not forgetful. :-)

"Bill in Co" wrote in
m:

OK. Sorry if I offended.
(I'm sometimes overly persistent, if not forgetful. :-)


Ok. Take it as a cue for any other discussion... For what it's worth, I
did just look up a Craig Anderton article on FSE. I've trusted his word on
many things since thirty years ago, seeing his writing on guitar electronics
and synthesisers. He is clearly impressed with FSE, but interestingly his
first statements included an immediate assessment of merits versus
difficulties. Basically, what he said was that he could have done the same
with EQ, but it would have been tedious. I'm ok with tedium. EQ's not all
that limiting, some of the smarter ones have really great parameter control,
simple 2D graphics which ease the task a lot. The main thing lacking in most
is easy control of progression over time, in fact most have NONE, they're
fixed! A few good EQ tools with some time based progression and an ability to
auto-correct for phase shifts in output would be a huge step toward FSE, the
only thing lacking would be the visualisation. So while I can't go for FSE
because no decent interface to it runs on what I have, apparently, there may
well be some EQ tools that go beyond control over filter types, slopes,
curves, such as I already have in DirectX plugins, but also allow time based
changes. I don't need to see the spectrum in the time domain, I just need
that much temporal control, and to hear it. There may be such tools that I
missed...

Lostgallifreyan wrote in
:

I just need
that much temporal control, and to hear it. There may be such tools that I
missed...


Just ought to mention here that I do NOT mean stuff like Waldorf's Dpole or
any other special effect VCF type thinger, those tend to butcher fine detail
and offer very poor control. (Actually I wouldn't even use the Dpole as a
special effect, it's like putting salt and sugar into food, each masking the
other but totally changing a character that has more to do with them and
little with the original food. Cakewalk make some useful stuff, but I don't
think I found a good time variant filter there)

Lostgallifreyan wrote:
"Bill in Co" wrote in
m:

OK. Sorry if I offended.
(I'm sometimes overly persistent, if not forgetful. :-)


Ok. Take it as a cue for any other discussion... For what it's worth,
I
did just look up a Craig Anderton article on FSE. I've trusted his word on
many things since thirty years ago, seeing his writing on guitar
electronics
and synthesisers. He is clearly impressed with FSE, but interestingly his
first statements included an immediate assessment of merits versus
difficulties.

I'm not familiar with Craig Anderton, so I can't comment on his knowledge of
audio restoration techniques and practices. But I do think a good source on
this subject would be someone who has either designed the FSE tools for an
audio editor, or an audio engineer who just has good knowledge of - and
experience with - using this stuff, to actually restore many severely
glitched audio files. And preferably (but not necessarily) with an EE
background.

Basically, what he said was that he could have done the same
with EQ, but it would have been tedious.

But I think I've heard that said about noise reduction software, too. Yes,
theoretically that is essentially what is automatically being done by the
noise reduction software or plug-ins, but still, I think the computer
algorithms can often analyze and process it more effectively than me.
Otherwise, there wouldn't be much use for noise reduction tools (including
such plug-ins), unless you solely believe it just for amateurs, who don't
want to invest the time doing it with a multiple band equalizer, which I
don't believe is the only reason. :-)

I'm ok with tedium. EQ's not all
that limiting, some of the smarter ones have really great parameter
control,
simple 2D graphics which ease the task a lot. The main thing lacking in
most
is easy control of progression over time, in fact most have NONE, they're
fixed! A few good EQ tools with some time based progression and an ability
to auto-correct for phase shifts in output would be a huge step toward
FSE,
the only thing lacking would be the visualisation. So while I can't go for
FSE
because no decent interface to it runs on what I have, apparently,

But I don't think we don't know that for a certainty. Unless you mean w/o
doing anything to your system, like adding any other programs. I wasn't
sure what you meant.

there may
well be some EQ tools that go beyond control over filter types, slopes,
curves, such as I already have in DirectX plugins,

Oh, that reminds me. I think there is an FSE tool built into the iZotope
RX audio restoration plug-in suite - I don't know if you're familiar with
that software (not exactly cheap, either, but is a lot less expensive than
Cedar!).

but also allow time based
changes. I don't need to see the spectrum in the time domain, I just need
that much temporal control, and to hear it. There may be such tools that I
missed...

BTW, whenever I try to make any of these corrections, I always preview the
results before committing them - that let's me tweak them a bit better.

"98 Guy" wrote in message ...
Lostgallifreyan wrote:

For example, if I open an instance of FireFox, that instance will be
using what-ever version of the hosts file that existed at the time
firefox was started. If I edit or delete the hosts file while that
instance is running, it has no effect on that instance. Firefox
continues to operate as if the original hosts file is still present.
Even if I open more tabs and browse to new sites, the pre-existing hosts
file is still in effect. If I keep this instance of FF running and open
a new instance, the new instance will behave according to what-ever
changes I've made to the hosts file.

So it seems to be that each application has it's own version of the
hosts file cached for it somewhere in memory, which is loaded at the
time the application is started.


Been a l-o-n-g time since viewing or writing to this NG. Good to see it
active and you guys writing about something worthwhile and interesting
(unlike many other NG's).

Regarding HOSTS and browsers; I too still use FF2 (Bon Echo v2.0.0.22) on
W98 and a large HOSTS file. There is NO perceivable performance hit, and
while it's true FF opens the HOSTS file one time (then keeps it open), I've
noticed Opera (v10.63) does not! I can change the HOSTS file with Opera
browser open, UNblock a URL, and that UNblocked page is now accessible
(simply with a refresh). So HOSTS performance/effectiveness is browser
dependant.

"none" wrote in :

Regarding HOSTS and browsers; I too still use FF2 (Bon Echo v2.0.0.22) on
W98 and a large HOSTS file. There is NO perceivable performance hit, and
while it's true FF opens the HOSTS file one time (then keeps it open), I've
noticed Opera (v10.63) does not! I can change the HOSTS file with Opera
browser open, UNblock a URL, and that UNblocked page is now accessible
(simply with a refresh). So HOSTS performance/effectiveness is browser
dependant.



Sounds ok to me. I guess people who code for use of the TCP/IP stack know of
it and use it as they want. It could also be useful for programs that can't
connect to a web proxy (which is how Proxomitron presents itself to the
world).

Slightly off-topic, I read on the BBC news site last night that some people
might lose net access due to the FBI shutting down some DNS hijacking
network. The compromised machines still remaining might end up pointed to no-
where-in-particular-anymore. This sounds like it might be a case of local
hosts file attack. No idea if it though..

Lostgallifreyan wrote:

Slightly off-topic, I read on the BBC news site last night that
some people might lose net access due to the FBI shutting down
some DNS hijacking network.

There was some malware circulating about a year ago that changed the DNS
settings in people's routers and on their computers so that the DNS
IP-address pointed to IP addresses controlled by hackers or
botnet-owners. The hackers operated their own servers DNS at those IP
addresses that performed god-knows-what in terms of messing up those
systems that connected to them during DNS queries.

The "authorities" somehow shut down the botnet in question and took
control of the rogue IP addresses and set up their own surrogate servers
that operated properly in terms of DNS queries, and they began to
collect some metrics in terms of how many comprimized systems were using
them, where those systems were located, etc.

I believe that the initial number of comprimized systems using these
fake servers was about 500k, and over time (a year?) the number dropped
to 250k.

The authorities believed that over time, the vast majority of
system-operators/owners would discover that their DNS settings were
mis-configured and would fix them, and so these surrogate servers
wouldn't need to be online for more than a few months. But they were
wrong, and they extended the deadline for turning off these surrogate
servers at least once, and here we are - at the point where (finally)
they will be shut off.

They became reluctant to turn off the surrogate servers after learning
that some of the comprimized systems using them belonged to fortune-500
companies as well as .gov and .mil domains, and that too many
"important" users would be disrupted by essentially having no working
DNS functionality if they took the surrogate servers off-line.

The media picked up on this situation (which is what the authorities
wanted) and in the end I don't know how many systems were still using
the surrogate servers by the time they pulled the plug on them (which is
supposed to be today).

"Bill in Co" wrote in news:AMSdnRwUx-
:

BTW, whenever I try to make any of these corrections, I always preview the
results before committing them - that let's me tweak them a bit better.



Working backwards here, never mind..... So, I agree, it's why ideally I
want plugins that will run in SoundForge in W98 SE, and perhaps being useful
in Cakewalk/Sonar too. SoundForge's preview is a tool I like. Fast simple and
consistent interfaces are import to me.

I looked briefly at iZotope, but I heard of them before, I think they put
emphasis on special effects and simulation of vinyl media rather than
restoration. As with Hyperprism's 'Bass Maximiser' and the Waldorf D-pole,
tools like those often have no well-defined neutral setting, so it can be
hard to set subtle processing or be sure whether or not processing IS
actually happening at all in some cases. We should never be in doubt when
aiming to clean a sound of unwanted noise. They did seem to have some stuff
that runs on W98 so I'll look again. (I guess the X in iZotope is something
to do with a method of getting a frequency domain).

"Bill in Co" wrote in
:

But I think I've heard that said about noise reduction software, too.
Yes, theoretically that is essentially what is automatically being done
by the noise reduction software or plug-ins, but still, I think the
computer algorithms can often analyze and process it more effectively
than me. Otherwise, there wouldn't be much use for noise reduction tools
(including such plug-ins), unless you solely believe it just for
amateurs, who don't want to invest the time doing it with a multiple
band equalizer, which I don't believe is the only reason. :-)


In the case of NR, it's a contant print made with fine detail, to remove
periodic or constant noise whose variations are on extremely short time
scales. That is best done automatically, but FSE (and more importantly the
underlying filter process) need human input. FSE isn't just frequency domain,
it is also time domain, otherwise it would be no more than a static EQ.

The main reason for FSE is the removal of transients that affect only part of
the spectrum, and stand some chance of clean reduction if we can isolate
them. This can only be as good as the underlying filter. So long as I can get
control of a filter like that I don't miind if I can't see the time/frequency
plot, time is enough, with the second dimension being used to plot a simple
curve or two, such as cutoff frequency and slope. Many filters set those
parameters statically, but my best shot is likely to be finding one that lets
me draw dynamic curves the same way that some Cakewalk and SoundForge plugins
do it. A good dynamic filter will have some phase offset correction I hope. I
have fixed problems in bass signals with a static EQ and found a delay that I
had to correct before merging the fixed sound with the original in a cross-
fade. I don't need full FSE, I just need some dynamic filter that lets me
avoid some of the tedium that results from making up for static methods'
deficiencies.

(I wonder if FSE might lead to many newcomers having no awareness of filters
and their methods and limits. If so, it may lead to unrealistic
expectations because any audio cleaner is only as good as its filters).

"Bill in Co" wrote in
:

I'm not familiar with Craig Anderton, so I can't comment on his
knowledge of audio restoration techniques and practices.

English guy, probably. He has written product manuals for Peavey though, a US
firm. He has written other manuals too, and academic books on synthesis, and
electronic guitar projects. He has a knack of lucid explanations that go deep
while not appearing difficult.