Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Audacity 1.2.0 Released

Posted by timothy on from the cross-platform-and-smooth dept.

mbrubeck writes "After almost two years of development, the free cross-platform sound editor Audacity has released a new stable version for Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows. Audacity 1.2 has major improvements including professional-quality dithering and resampling, and new pitch- and speed-changing effects. Our previous stable release was announced on Slashdot in June 2002. More recently, Audacity was presented at this year's CodeCon in San Francisco."

31 of 329 comments (clear)

  1. Hopefully studio costs going down by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hopefully open source software will help make studio recording costs go down... it costs a freaking fortune to record a band/etc., and that's part of the reason that artists get little out of their gross profits.

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      With Ardour, JAMin, and Audacity my cost (software) to record is $0.00.

    2. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by LizardKing · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Software is a trivial cost in the grand scheme of things

      That really depends on what you are trying to acheive. If you want a respectable home setup, then software is likely a major part of the cost. Most amateur and semi-pro setups now consist largely of direct to disk recorders and editing suites. Effects, synths and samplers implemented in software are increasingly replacing standalone hardware.

      a decent vocal microphone such as a Neumann U87 will set you back around $3000

      That's not a "decent" vocal mic, it's an exceptional one. For most people recording popular music styles (be it rock or dance stuff) will not need anything more sophisticated than a Shure SM mic which will set them back $100.

      Chris

    3. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've always wondered how unnecessarily inflated those prices are.

      I was skimming through some audio forums a while ago when considering getting a nice (well, by my standards) pair of headphones. I was surprised by what a lot of musicians were using for live performances -- relatively inexpensive microphones and headphones. Unless the standard for recording is *far* higher than for live performances, it just seems that musicians are getting overcharged.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a zillion dollar amp and zillion dollar microphone sound nice...but are they worth the order of magnitude increase over the next-lower grade of audio hardware?

      --
      May we never see th
    4. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by LizardKing · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most rock music with any budget would be done with a decent mic such as a U87

      Again, it depends on the budget. I have recorded on top flight digital stuff as well as two inch analogue tape, and the difference in quality was not noticable to the human ear. The overall quality of the recording is rarely down to the equipment used, more often it depends on the ability of the engineer / producer.

      Chris

    5. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by LizardKing · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Another thing that adds to the recording costs of major label artists is that they frequently go into the studio with no completed material. The label demands a new album when the band has just finished touring to support the last one. Enthusiasm and energy are at a low ebb, and the band spend ages knocking new material together. This often gets written off as "pre-production".

      Chris

    6. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by clifyt · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Unfortunately, piracy fucks everyone over.

      Why did Cubase get sold for dirt cheep to a company that doesn't even understand DAWs (and rumor has it, more than half of the selling price went DIRECTLY to paying the debt of the company...the new company didn't assume any of this).

      Piracy is the assholes way of doing anything. If you want something that costs, pay for it. If you don't want to pay the costs that they want you to, don't use it. Audacity is something I've actually installed at a clients place in the past because he wanted me to give him a copy of Cakewake (the guy is willing to pay my $75 an hour, but not willing to buy a $300 software -- one that would EASILY be made up in the cost of dealing with crack and hack issues that always come up with pirated apps).

      The thing folks don't understand about the music industry is that that guys that are making money at this stuff do not pay for it. Its used as advertisement in exchange for endorsements. I haven't paid for software in YEARS, yet everything is legit. Then again, I know enough bigger guys and can convert them to different softwares that they see my getting the software as a plus.

      The hobbiest is the market each and every one of these music companies are targetting. They want (fuck, I can't even think of why the kiddies listen to these days...I work with old farts that might not sell a billion albums, but consistantly put out decent albums that sell midrange...they are the insurance acts of the industry). They want ******* to say they used some software so every f'n kiddie in the world wants to use it and buys a legitimate copy. They want everyone to know they use Martin Guitars or Zildian cymbals or Yamaha synths or whatever, when the average person would be fine with a Soundblaster (yech) and a pawn shopped $50 instrument.

      So, you do a diservice by pirating any of this shit...you do a disservice to the whole community by pirating it. Do yourself a favor and check out the free softwares because they will do 90% of what the end user wants and needs and if they need that extra 10% -- then a grand is NOT a lot of money for that software.

      Don't fuck over the software companies just because they aren't offering something you can't steal. Would you claim that theft keeps down the prices on guitars for hobbiests? If so, you are a dumbass. Just because its bits and bytes on magnetic media doesn't make it any less theft. I wish we would stop calling this stuff piracy and start calling it outright theivery.

      Time to download the lastest Audacity and see what it has...

    7. Re:Hopefully studio costs going down by afidel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't have to spend huge amounts of money to get great sounding headphones. I personally own a pair of Sennheiser HD 495's. Only set me back $60 and they blow away almost anything under $150 (check out this graph to see how they perform). I would love to spend $200+ on a great pair of headphones but not in this crappy economy.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  2. The world of Out Of Phase Stereo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I use Audacity a lot to do "Out Of Phase Stereo" or OOPS to remove the "center" of a stereo recording.
    Many songs put the vocalist at the center so this is a useful way to remove vocals from a song.
    1) Load your favorite .MP3, .OGG, or .WAV song
    2) one click to split into two tracks (left & right)
    3) click on either left or right track, select "Invert" from the Effects menu...this is the key step.
    4) click-select both tracks and select "Quick Mix"
    5) you are left with a mono recording that has the former "center channel" (usually the vocals) removed!

    This won't work on "live" concert recordings and works best with "Pop/Rock" from the 1960s & 1970s

    Thomas Dz.

  3. still lack vital ui feature? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    i remembered testing it and being really satisfied with its editing features. but, i had no index while playing a project, of where the sound-head was in the file. i am used to seeing a line that shows which audio data is played at the moment, yet audacity lacks that features? is this now available?

  4. comparing the wrong things by qortra · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Audacity is a fantasic wave editor, but it is neither a sampler (like the s900) nor a multitracker (like cubase) nor a proprietary hardware money-making machine (like protools). If you're looking for a computer based DAW, check out Ardour; it's quite nice, and its all graphical (so long as you have jack running somewhere).

  5. !Cool! by tcdk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And I was looking around for a new sound edit program. I've been using CoolEdit for a long time but Audacity seems to do everything I need.

    Just took it for a spin and it looks good. It even have a noise reduction function...

    Hey, just checked the undo feature and you can even undo the mp3 import.

    The mp3 export function seems a bit lacking, but thats what programs like CDex is for (on windows).

    --
    TC - My Photos..
    1. Re:!Cool! by einer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No VST is a real killer. I was told that, even as flawed, ugly, hacked, and putrid as VST is, it's the only real name in the game right now. My DJ friends won't move to a platform without VST. No matter how enthused they are about free software or the ideas of open source, no matter how much the ideals of the open source community ring true to them, if it doesn't work, they're not going to switch.

  6. Sweet!!! by Bill+Kendrick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a game developer, I need tools like Audacity to make and tweak the lame little sfx in my games. ;)
    Congrats guys and gals!!!

  7. Most important questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does it support recording to hdd and does it declick recordings from phono?

  8. A question for Audacity users.. by Mr+Smidge · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Perhaps I can take advantage of this discussion to ask a quick question..

    How might I record from the line in port of my sound card? I generally record vinyls that I own to a digital format to listen to more conveniently, and audacity's GUI option dialog only allows me to record from /dev/dsp, which records everything, i.e. "What U Hear".

    I tried changing it to /dev/mixer in the config file, but the effect was the same.

    This is annoying, if I'm recording and GAIM happens to make a noise, or something else does. I know I could just kill every other sound-producing process, but I'd rather work out how to record directly from line-in.

    Any clues? Thank you, knowledgeable /. crowd.

    Before you ask, I have STFW somewhat on this..

  9. Debian Woody packages? by Bill+Kendrick · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was so excited when I saw "Debian" listed on the download page, til I discovered it was about some _POTATO_ packages! :^(

    I tried replacing "potato" with "woody" in the apt source URL, but to no avail. :^( Anyone built Audacity 1.2.0 for Woody yet? C'mon! Backports! Backports! I LIVE off 'em! ;^)

    -bill!
    (yes, yes, I know about apt-pinning :^P )

  10. Re:Whats this? Freshmeat? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not many people know about Linux audio software -- the Linux audio world is surprisingly quiet (no pun intended). It's easy to lose track of how usable Linux is for audio work...this is kind of like a new version of Apache is for the Linux webserver world. Audacity has at least the potential to be the best-in-field for what it does at the moment, so it's a bit of a big deal.

    To be honest, if Linux video editing becomes significantly more feasible suddenly, where one can swap out a Windows or Mac box and use Linux in its place happily, and kino is to credit for this, then I suspect that kino will be on Slashdot before long...

    --
    May we never see th
  11. Doing the opposite ? by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many songs put the vocalist at the center so this is a useful way to remove vocals from a song.

    What I'd like to know is how you can remove the instrumental background so you only have the vocals.

    Would be damn useful for Bjork remixes.

    Thomas Miconi

  12. Minor nit - stops audio when launched in OS X by sjonke · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A minor nit - when I launch Audacity in OS X it kills sound from other applications, particularly iTunes. I have to stop and start playback in iTunes to get the sound back. Not a big deal, but slightly annoying. It seems like a pretty nice audio editor albeit with a somewhat clunky user interface. I really want to drag that little playback triangle around, but can't! The change tempo and change pitch effects are highly amusing. I just wish it could directly input and output AAC format, but I suppose that's unlikely.

    --
    --- What?
  13. Rezound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://rezound.sourceforge.net
    I think this is better...

  14. Re:Videoediting by madsdyd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I like Kino - so much that I actually contributed to it. Lots of people seem to like Cinerella There are a lot of other projects.

  15. Re:Good, but not good enough by jkantola · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I personally pipe my guitar from the POD to a laptop with Audacity to a home stereo/PA. Very nice, I always get my playing recorded, and with Audacity's very efficient handling of large files it's easy to pick out the good bits.

    You should check out Ardour for a more professional, multi-track recording environment. It shouldn't have any serious latency issues, at least given that you run a low-latency kernel. It's still under (active) developement but it works quite well already.

  16. Re:Good, but not good enough by Nadir · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What you really want then is not Audacity, but Ardour together with Jack and an ALSA-supported soundcard

    --
    --
    The world is divided in two categories:
    those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.
  17. For Windows Users Only by blackmonday · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you're running windows, check out this software. Closed source but free. 16 tracks, and supports VST. Looks nice.

  18. Re:Finally by TheLink · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm looking for digital Dolby B/Dolby C filters to convert some dolby tape recordings to CD.

    http://www.dolby.com/cassette/bcsnr/ctype.html

    Looks like Audacity doesn't do it yet. Doesn't seem to be an easy way to do a complete Dolby B/C filter digitally - it's not static - the filtering depends on sound output levels. Can do a simplistic one I suppose.

    --
  19. Inkscape is vector graphics software!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    SODIPODI - vector 2D maturing nicely http://www.sodipodi.com/
    Dont forget to try Inkscape http://www.inkscape.org
    Originally based on Sodipodi but it has a much friendlier user interface.
  20. Re:Videoediting by TuxBeej · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I used Cinelerra for a project in my Japanese theatre class and it was a *very* steep learning curve. Of course, it was also the first time I had done any sort of non-linear video editing, so that is probably paritally to blame.

    After I got used to the interface and the specific methods of inserting transitions and whatnot, I found it pretty simple to add in voice-over tracks and sound/video effects. I was also using it on a Duron 933 w/ 512 MB RAM - not at all a powerhouse video-editing workstation by any stretch of the imagination (check the recommended system on the Cinelerra home page).

    I basically just imported clips from a FireWire digicam, spliced in some clips from some anime to illustrate my points, and added effects to clean up the transitions. I didn't get the project done, but I did find that learning the software was a fun experience. I'll probably try it again someday, but this time, I'll be using a better class of system.

    I would definitely recommend that people at least *try* Cinelerra when they have some time to spare to learn the interface. Having not tried Kino for some such forgotten reason, I can't compare the two.
    --

    --
    Brendan "Beej" Dery "Only in Canada, eh?"
  21. Nightmare for equipment brokers, wet dream for us by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2, Interesting
    One of my friends' dad works in the studio-equipment business. As he pointed out, almost the only thing left for them to "sell" is the nice look-and-feel of a full sound board with thousands of manual controls on it. Even traditional-looking soundboards these days are mostly front ends for digital mixers.

    Audacity is a case in point -- a small workstation with a few SoundBlaster cards can handle as many tracks as you like and produce sound at least as good as was used to make all that old vinyl, and costs under $1,000. Ultimately, that means anyone who can afford an instrument can probably afford to play at being a sound engineer, with really good postprocessing equipment.

    I've been using Audacity for about a year and a half to work my way through my record collection, mp3ifying it. It's great -- I record the records with a SoundBlaster card, depop the recording with some shareware, and noise-gate, adjust levels, and chop up the tracks with Audacity. The results sound better than the original vinyl, since the noise gating gets rid of the surface noise.

    My rip of "Layla" off the original Derek and the Dominos vinyl is clear enough that you can hear the master's tape hiss change as each of those famously many mixing tracks gets switched in and out by the recording engineer. I never noticed that when I used to just play the record -- but once the the vinyl surface noise is gated out, it's obvious.

    Audacity is good enough that I was able to digitize a friend's old clay '45 of the Clouds singing "Wyatt Earp" in the late 1950s -- even after the record had broken in half! I superglued it back together and played it at 33rpm. Of course, there were two loud "pops" for each revolution of the record, since there's no way I could line the grooves up perfectly. In fact, it wouldn't play at 45 -- the bumps would throw the needle out of the groove. But I was able to go in with Audacity and clip out all the pops, then resample to get a full-speed recording. The resulting MP3 accurately reproduces the sound-and-feel of a 1960s era jukebox :-)

  22. It's Getting Somewhere... by eston · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been using Audacity since its really early beta releases on Win32 and OS X (and now, on Linux), and even with 1.0 I was frustrated by how instable it was. It's more stable now, and I love its multitrack feature, but it's still lacking the stability that's required for when I'm making a recording longer than ten minutes. :p On OS X Audacity seems to find it amusing to crash right as I finish a recording.

  23. Re:Slashdot math... by stor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hey Dominic!

    I just wanted to let you know:

    I was flipping through a PC Mag at Sydney airport while waiting for a plane and it had a section reviewing sound applications.

    So there was SoundForge, CoolEdit, a wholy bunch of expensive proprietary Windows sound applications and... Audacity!

    I had to blink to ensure I wasn't hallucinating. It got a good review, too. The reviewer was impressed.

    Just thought you'd like to know that you're officially playing with the big boys.

    Cheers
    Stor

    --
    "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"