Jump to content
IGNORED

Aphex Twin @ Melt 2006 - some new clips


Recommended Posts

Guest tomaswoj

Howdy,

 

some nice guy posted his digi-cam clips of this gig:

 

http://www.youtube.com/user/cursedjerk

 

He has more of this gig, ive contacted him, and he said, he may upload it somewhere in original digi-cam quality (its always better than youtube's 32kbps/22kHz/mono :)). Stay tuned for more details.

 

Morover - since those clips audio quality seems to be a bit better than our (watmm's) bootleg recording (no audio clipping on to high input volume!) - maybe someone could mix'n'match them - and produce enhanced version of the bootleg ? :)

Link to comment
https://forum.watmm.com/topic/26151-aphex-twin-melt-2006-some-new-clips/
Share on other sites

Guest tomaswoj

Hi Gentlebeings,

 

in terms of those clips - there is 11 of them (5 are on youtube already) and this nice guy is going to upload them somewhere around beginning of next week. Hopefully (if each of them is 2 minutes on average) we will get then almost 25% of video from this great gig.

 

Anyway, i took what we have on youtube right now, and tried to play a bit with original audio file, patching it with the youtube clip(s). I took the first one with Alberto Balsalm being played, and patched an excerpt of original melt file. See the result in the attachements (original version named melt_orig_file.mp3, patched version - well you guess it :)).

Patched part starts around 2m05sec.

 

Some comments:

- audiacity used, just played with vol. envelopes,

- original is 192kbps, my patched version is 96kbps (and mono in patched part), as the youtube only supports 32kbps/mono - so no point to up-sample when doing a 'prototype' :)

- i believe the clips, once we got them will be stereo, and something better than 32kbps :).

- ive not played with equilizer/low-high pass filters, although i should probably. this results in patched part being very 'unsoft', with lots of details on higher frequencies, while the original recording is quite 'blurred'. But for someone keen in audio matters i dont believe it shall be the problem :).

 

And now we come to the point. There will be 11 of those clips.

 

And it would be really cool, if someone with more audio experience would take a look at them, and tried to patch the original recording with them, of course preserving all the rules of audio editing (like normalizing volume levels, some smooth fade-outs/ins, equalizing a bit :)). As i said, im not audio geek, moreover its hard for me to find that amount of time, that probably might be needed to do it well :).

Any volunteers ? :)

 

Ah, one more comment: in my whole naivness ive tried to programmaticaly reconstruct clipped areas (due to too high recordin vol.) in the file. I took my belowed java, wrote a small app, played a bit with recording envelope, found a way to 'mark' clipped areas - as for some reason they are not flat in this bootleg. Then i tried to reconstruct the curves based on neighbourghood, and doing some quadratic approximation first, then sin approximation, and finally some copy'n'paste from neighbourghood areas that 'seemed' to look just fine - but with no good results. Actually all my output was much worse than original recordin :). So I simply gave up. If someone knows some neat alrogithms that may help, please share :). Seems that local reconstruction is just not enough.

 

Cheers

tomaswoj

melt_orig_file.mp3Fetching info...

melt_patch_file.mp3Fetching info...

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×