Audacity 2.2.0 Released 103
Popular open-source audio editing software, Audacity, has received a significant update. The new version, dubbed Audacity 2.2.0, adds a range of features and options such as additional user interface themes, and the ability to customize themes for advanced users. It is also getting playback support for MIDI files, and better organised menus, the team wrote. You can find the complete changelog here.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Audacious is a player, audacity is an editor, so they are two different things.
Re: (Score:1)
The OK button in Audacity's splash/About box used to say "Audacious!". Then someone found that too obscure and it became "OK... Audacious!" [sourceforge.net] In the new version it's just "OK". OK... so not really Audacious indeed.
A very neat relyable piece of FOSS Software. (Score:5, Insightful)
The audacity crew as been working away at their audio tool for more than a decade now and it's a cornerstone of all things audio I do. A very nice and neat piece of software. Works as advertised, does what it should and is offered up in a neat set of cross-plattform packages. Love it.
This is how software should be (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
he new interface looks strange. Like someone escaped from an art department ind infiltrated the interface team.
Re: This is how software should be (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Well, it's a professional tool. Minimalist interfaces make more sense when targeting casual/unskilled users.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I did professional audio for quite a few years, and Audacity is just fine for quite a range of work. Very intuitive and easy to use, and lots of capability --- for free.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The best part is that you can write your own plugins in Nyquist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A very neat relyable piece of FOSS Software. (Score:4, Insightful)
+100
It is a great piece of software. They don't ruin it with stupid UI changes, either. It is straight-forward, reliable, fast, and yet very powerful.
Re:A very neat relyable piece of FOSS Software. (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree, it really is a great bit of software.
One thing I'd like to see is a more accurate, reconstructed waveform view. The current display is a simple "join the dots" affair with symmetrical RMS band overlaid.
Due to the way that digital sampling works this waveform is not a real representation of the analogue reconstruction. To get that you basically resample at a much higher rate and then low pass filter at the original Nyquist frequency. Audacity actually does that when you change the sampling rate.
I recently created something similar at work, with reconstruction and some shading to better highlight the true amount of energy in the vertical bands. It was a bit fiddly to get the shading to look good with every waveform.
I wish I had the time to re-implement it in Audacity.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
...The current display is a simple "join the dots" affair with symmetrical RMS band overlaid...
No one escapes Stallman!
I had no idea he had a band...
He sure seems to stay busy https://stallman.org/ [stallman.org]
On topic, I do love Audacity. Just the ability to make a ringtone or alert sound at the drop of a hat is priceless... not to mention the actual work you can do with it. Good job Audacity team!
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had the time to re-implement it in Audacity.
Maybe you can just strip that code out of your project and donate it to Audacity with explanation, and let someone else integrate it. If they have an issue manager, post it there.
Re: (Score:2)
Due to the way that digital sampling works this waveform is not a real representation of the analogue reconstruction.
Without knowing the details of the analogue reconstruction filtering that you will have bolted on to your computer, how are they supposed to display it?
Re: (Score:2)
The parameters of the physical filter in the sound card are irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
Then use a generic approximation to the ideal analog reconstruction, namely a suitably windowed sinc function.
Re: (Score:1)
Gnomefied version of that has a white full screen window with one flat and gray button in center of it which produces a fart noise when pressed. The other features have been removed as they distract users.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It does what it does, for free. However, it still falls short of Goldwav [goldwave.com] and at just $45 bucks it's worth 10 times that much if you have to do anything even semi-professional with audio on a regular basis.
Re: A very neat relyable piece of FOSS Software. (Score:1)
LOL It's Windows only, good luck selling it this crowd.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're a professional, you're already using software that's far better than Audacity or Goldwav.
As a former audio professional, I don't agree 100%, nor do I disagree 100%. I came from the analog world into the digital world, and Audacity really does a surprising amount. Now, if you're mixing down 48 tracks maybe you need something else. But if you've got a final or near final stereo mix that can maybe use some tweaking or processing, Audacity will do it without skipping a beat (no pun intended).
And for amateurs it's a dream come true. So many musicians are on tight budgets and Audacity will work for t
Re: (Score:2)
I never look at the source code (but I'm sure that all of you do - LOL!).
I often look at FOSS projects' source code, especially when I feel the need to change something.
Do you really think there are no programmers, like, at all?
Realtime effects stacks? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You want to do real-time audio effect stacks on your PC for free?
Read this:
https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/26436/real-time-audio-effects-in-windows
and this:
https://music.tutsplus.com/articles/15-totally-free-reverb-plug-ins-that-rock--audio-35
Yeah forget that. (Score:1)
Either use Reaper or Tracktion (if you insist on Linux). 2017 and still no real time effects? That's like Photoshop without layers.
Re: (Score:2)
Either use Reaper or Tracktion (if you insist on Linux). 2017 and still no real time effects? That's like Photoshop without layers.
Not at all the same problem. Real time acoustic audio recording at which Audacity excels is not the same as photo editing or today's hyped out DAW music production. It makes absolutely no sense to use a recording interface like Audacity for real time effects. The reasons for this are obvious the purpose of Audacity is not as a pass through to a sound stage output interface. Audacity controls are based around recording accurately to digital storage not complex mixing to a concert space with added effects lik
$5K a year? Nope. (Score:1)
Reaper is $50, and is valid for the next upgrade cycle too. Comes with MANY included VSTs. Need more VSTs? There are plenty out there that are free.
Re: (Score:2)
You rely upon software instead of hardware effects like what comes with the old SBLive!
Protip: Software FX universally SUCKS.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Queue the excuses and finger pointing. That is all.
Not finger pointing. ASIO support is not something you will see in Audacity on Windows because no one will pay for it, secondly most Windows devices today have A/D D/A chipsets that do not support ASIO despite ASIO For All, the majority of today's HD Intel and other chipsets commonly used are not ASIO capable. This is why switching to a real time linux is a better choice hands down if you do not have an old pro level asio supported device. Even if you have a pro level card or device chances are it will be
Re: (Score:3)
Thank you grammar nazi. What would we do without you.
That was actually a spelling nazi, please don't mistake those for true grammar nazis.
That said, you forgot a fucking comma. How hard can it be?
Re: (Score:1)
You win!
Looking forward to trying it out... (Score:3)
Oh thank goodness (Score:2)
The new version, dubbed Audacity 2.2.0, adds a range of features and options such as additional user interface themes, and the ability to customize themes for advanced users
That will make such better recordings. Thanks Audacity!
Re: (Score:3)
DAW: For recording, arrangement, mastering, and live performance of audio.
You may do some editing from within your DAW but, if you look closer, you'll discover that your DAW's editor is a plugin, most likely VST. I could use your DAW's editor in my DAW and vise-versa, even if you use Pro Tools and I use FL Studio, just as an example, because they're just plugins, not part of the DAW itself.
If you don't like your DAW's bundled editing plugin, yo
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have a big ego like the rest of you.
Yup. Your ego is so not huge that you have to brag about how not huge it is like some egomaniac braggart.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't have a big ego like the rest of you.
Yup. Your ego is so not huge that you have to brag about how not huge it is like some egomaniac braggart.
I am selfless enough to worship you as the epitomy of trolls. I bow in sheer awe to your level of proficiency.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk about false idols, you choose to worship the trolling abilities of one who wasn't even trolling.
Of course, as you said here [slashdot.org]:
This is probably hard to grasp for the narcissists [google.com] around here.
It's probably a good thing you don't display an excessive interest in yourself. Certainly, you don't excessively admire your supposed lack of ego enough to brag about it here. No. Not at all.
And we're back on the subject of irony.
A
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, brother, that's not how it works. I come here knowing full well that there are people here who know more about a lot of things than I do and I welcome them to improve my understanding of these topics. If you can't do that, I'm sorry to inform you that you are the
Re: (Score:2)
Oooh, nice sarcasm, expertly done
Wow... so you're clairvoyant then? You can read my mind? That is SO impressive. I wish I could learn how to do that. I'm afraid you afford too much cleverness. I am terrible at sarcasm. I see people weave sarcasm in such clever ways all the time but despite my best efforts, I am no good at doing it nor am I good at parsing it. I thank you for the complement though. I will try to aspire to your level of intelligence. You've really given me something to shoot for and I thank you so much for that. I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To be honest, I could go on like this until comments on this story get locked, and I would really and truly love to (no, seriously, look at my comment history, I would), but I have work to do today.
That is probably a very wise thing to do. I wouldn't want you to get fired over a trivial matter like this. By the way, you may want to investigate the topic of obsessive compulsive disorder, because it doesn't seem to take much to compel you to obsess over something. :) I've enjoyed meeting you. Best wishes to you, brother!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I doubt I would fire myself, but thank you for the concern.
Yes, you are better than me and everyone else. We concede this. Does that make you happy with yourself?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be the only one here making that claim. But yes, I suppose I'm the one with the problem. Sorry, but no, you're the one going around telling people they have problems; I'm pointing out that, in your specific case -- because you have presented a pattern of doing this -- that you may actually have a problem. Me doing it once is very different from you presenting a pattern, my friend. Of course, I'm not qualified to diagnose, this is not medical advice, blah blah blah and all that, but your therapist, should you choose to see one, might come to a different conclusion about you than the therapist I saw after 3 years of being gaslighted by an abusive ex, who determined after a handful of visits that I have nothing to gain from therapy.
You've already pointed this out and by following you as an ideal example of a human being henceforth, I shall rid myself of all these maladies you describe. Thank you so much! I am SO grateful for you! Otherwise I would be lost forever.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I dare say the ideal example of a human being would not have engaged you in the first place. Perhaps my ability to identify and admit my flaws does make me a better person?
Tell me oh wise one, what is the best example to follow as a human being to be the best person one can be? What set of morals and beliefs result in the best possible human being?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I knew, I wouldn't continually be trying to improve myself. You seem to have struck just the right balance of trolling and entertaining to keep me engaged, so I'd say you haven't done too bad for yourself, despite your issues.
So, if one does not have a frame of reference by which to establish a yard stick to measure the value of another human being or evaluate them in general, how can one be so quick to pass judgment with such a powerful sense of certainty? By definition, you admit, you are not qualified to pass judgment yet you are quick to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Upon who did I pass judgment? I merely pointed out a pattern, with references. You're continuing the pattern, thereby further supporting my position.
Oh, this is rich. Now you want to play the word semantic game. You should just admit that all you're interested in is being right. The only reason I'm even entertaining continuing this conversation is more out of pure curiosity than anything. You see, I find your pattern of thinking quite curious. I'm examining you like a lab specimen. I have met plenty of people just like you and what I don't understand is why anyone would choose to be the way you are. I find it completely irrational and it seems to
Re: (Score:2)
You should just admit that all you're interested in is being right.
Indeed, I am. That's why I state my position, then listen to the positions of others, evaluate the facts and, when I'm shown that I was wrong, learn from it so I can be right next time.
I didn't read the rest of your post.
Re: (Score:2)
You should just admit that all you're interested in is being right.
Indeed, I am. That's why I state my position, then listen to the positions of others, evaluate the facts and, when I'm shown that I was wrong, learn from it so I can be right next time. I didn't read the rest of your post.
Well I sincerely thank you for being honest. I'm not surprised that you didn't read the rest of my post. You do strike me as a high D on the DISC profile. I also am high D but I've learned to be versatile. If you really want to use me as a sounding board seriously. If you want to level up, try to understand that there are multiple personality types and yours is not better or worse than any of the others, just different. Also, and this will help you in your negotiations and influence, empathy can be a
Re: (Score:2)
You are responsive to challenges in a practical, realistic and enthusiastic manner. You are a fact orientated person capable of providing help based on solid information. You are assertive, self-sufficient and individualistic. People are likely to perceive you as being rational and creative at the same time.
That first bit there about being responsive to challenges, that's versatility my friend. I'm also no stranger to empathy, nor to the fact that there are multiple personality types. Some part of me believes that you already suspected as much, though.
Re: (Score:2)
nor to the fact that there are multiple personality types. Some part of me believes that you already suspected as much, though.
I stated that in the part of the longer post you declined to read. :) Our conversation is at an end. I am no longer interested in sharing knowledge in this conversation. I'm not saying this arrogantly but factually, you haven't presented any new information to me and by the sounds of it you're saying I haven't to you so I don't think there is much we can help each other with in terms of accumulating more knowledge. We must go on our respective journey's. Happy trails, friend. Best of luck to you.
Re: (Score:2)
I stated that in the part of the longer post you declined to read
Actually, you stated it in the post immediately above the one you just replied to. ;)
If you're done here because you think you've caught me in a lie, you should perhaps reconsider. If there's another reason, well, happy trails to you, as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I stated that in the part of the longer post you declined to read
Actually, you stated it in the post immediately above the one you just replied to. ;)
If you're done here because you think you've caught me in a lie, you should perhaps reconsider. If there's another reason, well, happy trails to you, as well.
You think I care about your morals and ethics, that's cute. Whether you lie or not has no consequence to me therefore it is a waste of my time and energy to be concerned about that. That's your own problem. If you're happy with yourself, great. If not, well you know what to do. I don't really care what you choose to do with your existence though.
Like I said, I only found you interesting as an opportunity to observe your behavior and thought process. Your personality type is something that I have great
Re: (Score:2)
Because, face it, previewing MIDI files in a DAW sucks.
When you're done working on a song, you've recorded your sam
Interface themes... really? (Score:2)
This app handles space characters typed into the "save file" dialog box as hot keys to commence playback of the audio in the underlying window. The entire app is full of similar errors, but interface themes leapt to the top of the list?
Re: (Score:1)
I downloaded 2.2.0 and they appear to have fixed the bug I cited. Not too shabby!
No built-in MP3 support still? (Score:1)
Darn... I was hoping MP3 support would be included since the license isn't being enforced anymore.
Huh? (Score:2)
Post a link to the CHANGELOG but not the software?
http://www.audacityteam.org/do... [audacityteam.org]
ITYM "Not SIgnificant" (Score:2)
When the first two items of your "significant update" are about themes, your update is probably *not* significant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Only took a year to support Sierra (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You apparently have no clue what Gatekeeper [slashdot.org] is.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it that Slashdot now, occasionally and randomly, changes the URL in an href?!
Gatekeeper https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It's called PEBCAK
Re: (Score:2)
Various forms of this bug have been present since forever (and my version of forever is roughly half of yours).
If you missed the protocol off it used to automatically insert slashdot.org, shit like that. I reported it, back when I was young and naive (won't bother umlauting the i, it'll just turn into @#^&&^(TM)*&*&&(TMTMTM)(TM) or something).
Re: (Score:2)
What changed is something that didn't change. Apple has no interest in allowing non-Apple software to run, so their "security" application disallowed Audacity, despite that Audacity had been running under MacOS for a long time as a useful tool.
Perhaps Apple has a competing product. I don't know, they didn't when I was using them a bit over a decade ago. But my guess is that just just broke anything that wasn't too prominent that they weren't selling.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
One of the "achievements" noted is full support for last years version of macOS. Isn't open source amazing? You now can upgrade to last year's version of macOS.
Commercial software was upgraded a year ago.
Ok open source advocates, the floodgates are opened, you can now upgrade from a two year old O/S to a year old O/S.
But you guys have already have Garbage Band, the poor Windows guys do have something that can record in the software that comes with Windows but it does not even support audio editing. Just think how great it would be if Microsoft created a clone of Garbage Band, it would most likely have a ribbon interface and be part MS office suite of software. Most people who have a Mac and just want a free audio editor use the free crapple ware readily available from the Store not Audacity. By contrast Ms Sound Recorde