Re: [Audacity-devel] Reassigned spectrograms

[Paul L. <pau...@gm...>]

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Steve the Fiddle <ste...@gm...>
wrote:

> Thanks for the reply James,
>
> On 18 August 2015 at 13:02, James Crook <cr...@in...> wrote:
> > Spectral reassignment is in for 2.1.2.
> >
> > It is a super feature, and 'local' in that bugs in it are unlikely to
> affect
> > anything else.  Its bugs are mostly likely to be around quality of its
> own
> > display, i.e. not reassigning as finely as we might like.  It was being
> > worked on already in 2.1.1 rather than being completely new.
>
> I've just had my first look at spectral reassignment, and yes it looks
> good (nice work Paul).
>
> I'm not sure that we can really say that it doesn't affect anything else.
> Until very recently, users that are not bold (or competent) enough to
> dig down into Preferences were presented with 4 options in the Track
> dropdown menu:
>
> * Waveform
> * Waveform (dB)
> * Spectrogram
> * Spectrogram (dB)
>

You mean Spectrogram log(f), and don't forget Pitch (EAC), which I
considered a broken feature because you had to go to spectrogram first,
zoom the vertical to maximum, and then go back to Pitch, in order to see
Pitch as was intended.

I make "Pitch" an advanced algorithm choice instead, and algorithm choices
are independent of the choice of scale.  Reassignment is hidden just as
deeply as another algorithm.


>
> If we contrast that with the current options:
>
> * Waveform
> * Spectrogram
> * Linear / logarithmic
> * dB range
> * Minimum / Maximum Hz
> * Gain / Range / dB per decade
> * Algorithm: Frequency / Reassignment / Pitch (EAC)
> * Window size
> * Window type: rectangular / Barlett / Hamming / Hanning / Blackman /
> Blackman-Harris / Welch / Gaussian (a=2.5) / Gaussian (a=3.5) /
> Gaussian (a=4.5)
> * Zero padding factor
> * Enable spectral selection.
>
>
> > The track menu changes now give us something better than we had in 2.1.1,
>
> I think that the ability to change the window size for spectrograms,
> without digging into preferences, is a good thing. I'm struggling to
> see how other changes to the track dropdown menu will benefit 'the
> average user'.
>

I lately rearranged this so that the scale choice for Spectrograms is
topmost in the dialog.

The question is about switching among what used to be four view types.
Peter at least says that switching between Waveform and Waveform (dB) is
common enough in his work that it should be kept convenient.  I have yet to
hear the case that switching between linear and logarithmic spectrogram is
frequent for anyone.

So I also offered the popup menu for the ruler to make this switch easier,
at least for mouse users.  Some of the team liked it but I was told
repurposing the right click was not acceptable.

Failing that I might put Waveform (dB) back in the menu.


>
> One of the things that I really liked about Cool Edit Pro (if you
> remember that app), and something that it was frequently praised for,
> is that commonly used basic features were immediately available in
> well thought out ergonomically satisfying menus. For more 'advanced'
> (or 'adventurous'), plenty of advanced and/or technical features were
> available by digging a little deeper. This model can provide a
> terrific user experience for both novices and experienced users alike.
> It is a model that I believe that Audacity should apply.
>
> I'm very pleased that Audacity has 'advanced features' (As most on
> this list are aware, one of my favourite features is Nyquist, which is
> probably the most 'advanced' feature that we ship). I also think that
> it is good to encourage users to 'dig a little deeper', but I get
> concerned when we present basic operational choices mixed in with
> advanced technical jargon, especially as we know that the vast
> majority of our users have little or no previous experience of working
> with digital audio.
>
>
I also suggested making sub-pages in the tree to separate more advanced
settings.  "Spectrograms" itself might only show scale choice, scale
limits, Use Preferences checkbox, and Spectral Selection checkbox.




> > and (as RM) that's good enough to justify making them.  As me, I think
> there
> > is still something not as good as it should be in how we select track
> > options, but I can't put my finger on it, and it does not scream enough
> to
> > me to worry about it for 2.1.2.
> >
> >
> > I think Steve you are right to worry.  We have a tremendous amount of
> > technical debt caused by the wx change.  3P1s, and 8 DEVEL-FIX-MADE P1s
> > which are pending confirmation that they have been fixed (without
> breaking
> > something else important).  Any changes as big as spectral reassignment
> > intended for 2.1.2 from here on need to ask "Is it OK?" on this list and
> the
> > answer is probably no.
>
> Thanks. That alleviates one concern that we will be struggling to
> document all of the recent changes. The documentation crew already
> have a lot on their plate with essential Wx3 changes. I'm not sure who
> is going to document "reassignment" - perhaps Paul can help with that?
>
>
> > Minor features/improvements are definitely OK
>
> Good - I've got a couple of little enhancements that have been
> requested on the forum that I'd like to get in. I'll try to get those
> in sooner rather than later.
>
> > and in
> > particular picks for these ones from Gale's wishlist:
> >
> > Option to turn off backwards scrubbing OR a modified click that
> > automatically plays forward from the seek point. This is to reduce
> > un-necessary RSI after seek.
> > Some TLC for those who do large amount of daily export and import:
> >
> > Bug 550 – Add Directories Preference to export to directory the file came
> > from
> > Related to above, easier one-step overwrite of the same file you
> imported.
> > Bug 549 – Add missing export formats to Chains and Chains export format
> > parameters and sample rate
> > Bug 551 – Export Multiple: Pass through common metadata to next window
> > Support per-track metadata so that if you import multiple files you can
> > export multiple using each file's metadata instead of export all files
> with
> > only the last file's metadata
> > Bug 701 - Embedded album art and lyrics discarded.
> >
> >
> > I would like to see some more work on noise reduction to make it
> > better/easier to use.  I would like Paul to set a colour for spectral
> > selection that he is happy with to replace the yellow.  We are leaving
> > 'rough edges'.  We do have until 30th August before Semifreddo.
> >
> > Steve, does this answer your concerns?
>
> It certainly helps :-)
> Thanks
>
> Steve
>
>
> >
> > --James.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 18/08/2015 11:39, Steve the Fiddle wrote:
> >
> > I'm just wondering why we are seeing so many new features introduced
> > for the 2.1.2 release. I thought that this release was about updating
> > to Wx3. My concern with so many changes in this release is that either
> > quality suffers or the release is seriously delayed. Perhaps James can
> > comment and reassure us that it is all in hand?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > On 17 August 2015 at 15:40, Paul Licameli <pau...@gm...>
> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think it's "experimental" any more, I think I got all the math
> right
> > now.
> >
> > There are opportunities for more efficiency.  It is true that caching of
> > results leaves something to be desired for some changes of view, but
> that is
> > already true of spectrograms generally.  There is no caching of any
> > spectrograms for changes of zoom level.  There is some caching only for
> > scrolling left and right without changing the zoom, and that much won't
> work
> > now with reassignment.
> >
> > I consider any such effort for performance a future project.
> >
> > PRL
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Steve the Fiddle
> > <ste...@gm...> wrote:
> >
> > Is this an experimental feature?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > On 17 August 2015 at 15:18, Paul Licameli <pau...@gm...>
> wrote:
> >
> > As of
> >
> >
> https://github.com/audacity/audacity/commit/3ddbbd375d6963838b91fe2f54c91df96d90e79a
> >
> > Now reassignment is a third algorithm choice in spectrograms preferences
> > and
> > view settings.
> >
> > This is an algorithm that sharpens the results of a spectrogram.  It
> > works
> > by computing two extra FFTs using different windowing functions.  The
> > contributions that the usual FFT makes to pixels on the screen, are in
> > effect moved slightly using results of the other FFTs.  This can
> > counteract
> > both the "time smearing" and "frequency smearing" effects.
> >
> > But not only is this spectrogram about three times as costly to compute
> > -- I
> > also had to disable the caching that allows horizontal scrolling of
> > spectrograms to go faster.  This sort of caching is important for
> > scroll-scrub with spectrogram on.
> >
> > The zero padding of spectrograms that I implemented in the last version
> > was
> > meant to accompany this.
> >
> > Try it out with tones and chirps -- you will find just a thin bright
> > line,
> > even if your window size is small!
> >
> > Try it with an impulse -- you will find a bright vertical line, even if
> > your
> > window size is large!
> >
> > Try it with real world examples -- and it is true there are strange
> > artifacts from "cross terms" if you have two or more sources of sound,
> > or
> > inharmonic sounds, which make a sort of gauzy pattern as in this
> > article.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reassignment_method
> >
> >
> > PRL
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> aud...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>