Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Apfelmatsch

Pages: [1]
1
Hello,

I'd like to suggest a feature.

After one has drawn the bars or beats in a track by hand and has aligned two or more tracks, it would be nice, if SV would just copy the bars/beats to the other tracks.

Since it is able to jump to the same "note" in different tracks per the alignment tool, it should be possible for it to make references and know how to copy the beats accordingly or am I thinking to simple here?

Another thing:
It is also possible to create a line that shows the bpm when one points the mouse on it, how does one make the bpm visible as numbers and not by first pointing the mouse on it. I also miss a guide that brings me to this result: http://www.charm.rhul.ac.uk/studies/chapters/images/pubimg/thumb/thm_dlwfig18.jpg which you can find here http://www.charm.rhul.ac.uk/studies/chapters/chap8.html

2
Hello,

I installed "aubio" like all other Plugins the recommended way via creating a "vamp" folder in the library audio plugins directory. All other plugins show up in the menu:
I select "Transform" and then "show by name" and there I can see
- beatRoot
- Match Performance Aligner
- Tempogram
... for example!

But I can't see "aubio"!

I followed the steps like with all the other plugins and I even watched a video by Matthias Mauch and he did it the same way I did it.

What am I doing wrong?

My System: Mac Os X 10.9, SV 2.4.1
installed Plugin: vamp-aubio-plugins-0.5.0-osx.tar.bz2

3
This paper http://dml.city.ac.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/DML-Final-Workshop-Audio-Analysis.pdf mentions three tempo/beat tracker plugins, one of those is simply named "Tempotracker Vamp Plugins" (see page 11)

I can't find it in the list of downloadable plugins. However there is a thread seeming to talk about it and there it says that it has bugs http://vamp-plugins.org/forum/index.php?topic=92.0


PS: an additional site note, so I don't spam the whole Forum with small questions... in the Musicologist's guide to Sonic Visualiser they tell one to install the "Vamp Audio Plugins" (for a person like me, who usually first thinks that I am the error, it took me quite a while to try if they are referring to "Vamp Aubio Plugins" and download it. Just a text correction, but...). Also, the Mazurka Plugin demanded to install in the guide is not available for Macs, did they not mention this with purpose, because you plan to port it for Mac in the future (and so you won't have to change the guide)?

4
Hello,

I am not sure, if I am allowed to post here and this Subforum is meant for any sort of technical support, but:

the notes to "Marsyas Vamp Plugins" say that it is not available for Macs, but it can be used with Sonic annotator 0.7 for Macs.

I downloaded both the 32bit and the 64bit version and can't install or open it, when I open it I get a Terminal window with the last line "abborted" (well its German here, but that's what it says in translation).

What am I supposed to do with the unix-file in the tar.gz archive?

Also, for the not so technically minded, it might be nice to add, that the Marsyas page links to the 32bit version for Macs, while there is a 64bit version available via navigating from the Vamp-plugins.org/download.html page to all available downloads of the certain Plugin.

My system: Mac OS X 10.9

5
If I want to know in what tempo several parts of a piece of music are played, what should I use.

In the musicologist's guide to Sonic Visualizer they speak of either tapping by ones own or using Spectrograms. I suppose they are talking about the "Chronogram" feature in Mazurka Plugin, which is not supported on Macs, right?

6
Getting and Using Vamp Plugins / Re: Mazurka Plugins for Mac
« on: July 20, 2015, 23:55:15 »
I have this question, too.

Or is there maybe another Plugin that is similar?

7
Hi,

(1.) someone told me, if I use analysis software (in general) that it doesn't work with analogue sources (i.e. studio/live recordings that maybe were first released on LP and then later for CD). I mean I can imagine, that it would interpret "noise" (hizzing?) as music and give wrong results...
but, if there is little noise in the recording they made the digitalized CD version of, would that be usable?

(2.) What parameters would be affected by analogue sources and what not?
(3.) I guess tempo will not be a problem, if there are no cracks that could be misinterpreted as beats in the recording, right?
(4.) Analysing the pitch could be a problem, right?
(5.) Dynamics would be a problem, right?

My questions are in regard to classical music (a Symphony).

I added numbers, so people can answer easier, if they don't want to quote.

8
Thank you Chris! That was very thoughtful and will have a look into it. Yet I will have to decide how much time I will preserve for testing the tools as such vs actually starting to compare the different interpretations.

The text link is great! Thanks!

9
Host Forum: Sonic Visualiser / Re: MP3 or WAV different result?
« on: April 29, 2015, 14:21:32 »
Thank you for answering!

OK, the pdf you linked does sugguest (as you somewhat gave a hint to) that a minimum of aprox. 160kbps is needed to not affect the research results.

I am still a bit insecure, though. There seems to be a special case: http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/en/why-do-data-compression-processes-mp3-example-strongly-affect-loud-masters-no-headroom What is described here, is that different from the loudness war phenomenon (which will not play a role here)? If the studio master has already been made very loud, it will get problematic after compression. So let's say from the tape, they made an audio CD setting the loudest point as high as possible or even upping the most silent points of the tape. I guess when the MP3 seller / the label then compressed that to mp3 you get a similar phenomenon like in loudness war (I guess that was what you were referencing to radio broadcast situations etc.).

Well, ok. I can never know, what the studio guy did to the tape. When the conductor conducted from pianossimo to fortissimo and the studio guy just equalized that, I can't do anything about it. I probably won't even know, if he did change the conductors intents.

Apart from that is the loudness war stuff been done to classical music, too? Maybe in a false attempt to make it more impressive to the listener?

Another thought: according to the pdf, in my tests, could I go so far and even compare 256kbps mp3s (as I guess that is the most likely to be found) or 320kbps mp3s with FLAC/ALAC and wav/aiff? Like conductor 1 as MP3 and conductor 2 as wav (which would be derived from FLAC) and compare them?

Maybe I should even compare mp3s of the same conductor and same recording against each other, maybe I find that different mp3 sellers used different quality compressors (given that all use 256mbps).

Since I have a Mac and Sonicvisualizer does only take wav I will also have to look out for something that can convert FLAC (PC) to wav and ALAC (Mac) to wav and maybe even aiff (Mac) to wav (PC).

10
What Plugins are needed to compare parameters of different musical interpretations (recordings) of classic music? In this case a Symphony conducted by different conductors.

do I need any of the plugins to have a complete test set for lets say "conservative" use? (compare what the conductor let the orchestra let sound/play/do different. Of course I know that the guy at the mixer will have an influence, too to some degree, but... anyway.)

It this is a stupid question, please don't ignore, but tell me, that it is stupid, so I don't wait for answers any longer.

11
Host Forum: Sonic Visualiser / Re: MP3 or WAV different result?
« on: April 24, 2015, 14:02:56 »
Does no one have an answer or did I ask a stupid question?

12
Host Forum: Sonic Visualiser / MP3 or WAV different result?
« on: April 21, 2015, 21:50:40 »
Hello,

I'd like to know, if it will have an effect on the test results, if I use MP3s or WAV (i.e. AIFF = CD-audio).

I imagine, since MP3 is more compressed, the used codec might have e.g. compressed the loudness of the music, too.

I have to compare interpretations of a neo-romantic/modern symphony and while getting MP3s of all interpretations would be the easiest and cheapest way, I fear I will miss something of the original that got compressed out of a studio file, while I think the wav/Aiff/CD-Audio will have more of the orifinal studio/live-recording.
Also I guess, I should not mix MP3 and WAV interpretations, right?
Also, I guess, I should not use some MP3s from Spotify and compare to some MP3s converted from CD-audio with iTunes or mepgstreamclip or different MP3-portals/streaming-services, right?

Well, of course, I could just test it and make it part of the text I am working on.

Thank you.

Pages: [1]