#76270  by strumminsix
 
Bought a recorder, Edirol R09Hr, and happy with it! I recorded our first show with it and it did well!

Now, it took me 2 hours to split the whole show into 2 sets. There has got to be a better tool out there!

Please let me know which MP3 splitter tools you guys use!
 #76290  by tigerstrat
 
(Probably showing my ignorance here) So your source file is mp3, not wav?

For wav, I am still using good ol' Exact Audio Copy to break down into tracks and edit, then use MkwAct to convert to mp3, but that's probably not the solution you seek...
 #76294  by Laytonco
 
Strummin, I use NERO. I load the wav file onto my computer and open that file with Nero. I edit the file so I can see the wav on screen. Now, if I want to cut the tunes with no editing, I can do that in 5 minutes, the whole show. But I rather like to listen at the beginning and end of the tunes so I can take out the nutty chatter and long pauses between songs. Like when the drummer gets up and heads to the bathroom! That kind of cutting takes about 2 hours for one show.

Peace,

Gil
 #76295  by strumminsix
 
Yes, Tom, I record room shows in MP3 vs WAV. IMO, very little difference in that setting.

Rusty, I use Audacity too. But cutting and pasting from there just takes FOREVER since it first takes the MP3, makes it WAV (behind the scenes) then you cut and paste the tracks around and then have to export it as MP3 it just takes so many hours...
 #76297  by FretfulDave
 
I was writing a long reply, but yeah, if you got an MP3, it has to expand it out, no matter what utility you use and then if you re-convert back to MP3, not only does it recompress but you lose another layer of sound quality. You need to record in WAV format and the processing will be faster. I use GoldWave and have gotten very good at it over the past 7 years. I edit things out to WAV files and do batch converts to MP3.

Dave
 #76299  by FretfulDave
 
:smile: Thanks TJ! You rock :cool:

I also have to concur with Laytonco, a long jam could take 1 1/2 hours, depending on how granular you wish to get, fades, etc. I do it quick, try to pick the silent spots, look at the time and set the time for beginning and end of the clip in a drop box in GoldWave. Can get a jam done in 45 to an hour. Batch processing to MP3s not included, but that is what batch processing is... start it and walk away, do something else and come back. But for sure cleaning something up takes longer w/ fades in and out, etc.

Peace,

Dave
 #76300  by Billbbill
 
I use cool edit - ss, if you have any notions of uploading to the archive, the live music section, it must be lossless. If you don't - never mind. :smile:
 #76301  by FretfulDave
 
Billbbill wrote:I use cool edit - ss, if you have any notions of uploading to the archive, the live music section, it must be lossless. If you don't - never mind. :smile:
Very good point! Another reason to capture WAV, then process.

Good call Billbbill.
 #76335  by strumminsix
 
Okay, so when you guys record it normally takes you many hours to prep a show?

Also, Dave, are you 100% that the sound quality goes down when you record MP3, edit in WAV, then it puts it back into MP3?
I think you are right but want to check.

BTW, found this - MP3 direct cut:
http://mpesch3.de1.cc/mp3dc.html

It edits just the mp3, can split tracks and do simple fades. It's all I need!

Yes, I will do WAV recording when we play in a larger room with a good PA and solid sound guy and better stage.

But more than anything need to use up the space I have and not have to off-load everything same day and low-cost...
 #76341  by Rusty the Scoob
 
Yep, it takes several hours to cut up a show nicely and prep it for the Archive. It's much quicker if you have no smooth transitions (i.e. each song has an obvious start and end) and don't bother to cut out any dead air between tracks.
 #76358  by FretfulDave
 
strumminsix wrote:Okay, so when you guys record it normally takes you many hours to prep a show?
I think that is fair to say. I think 2 hours on the outside. Depends on how many songs and stuff. Last jam I was at was cut short and only had maybe 11 songs in it. That still took about 40 minutes for me to edit up and I did not do any fades or anything.
strumminsix wrote:Also, Dave, are you 100% that the sound quality goes down when you record MP3, edit in WAV, then it puts it back into MP3? I think you are right but want to check.
I am basing that on the way that the compression algorithm works. Basically it takes a sample from the bit stream, identifies bits that, based on probability, can be thrown away without destroying the sound and that is how it achieves reducing the file size. The reverse algorithm for playback will interpolate and reinsert bits as best it can using probablility algorithms to recreate what was removed in the compression. It is an approximation and you are not guaranteed that the resulting bit pattern is the same as the original. The human ear has a difficult time discerning the difference until the compression amount gets too great. So for example an MP3 @ 192 kbits is almost undetectable to my ears versus the original WAV which is at 1440 kbits. I defintely tell a difference at 128 and when you go for more compression than that, say 64, to my ears it is unlistenable... like an old 5th or 6th generation tape. That said, when you load the MP3 into the editor, it decompresses the bit stream by adding in those interpolated bits. Now you cut/copy out the section of the bit stream that represents your song and you go to save it to an MP3, it will apply the compression algorthm again and choose bits to discard to achieve the size reduction. You can't be sure if it would remove the interpolated bits that were added back in or would it choose to remove some of the remaining "originals". This is why I say the sound qualtiy would go down. I guess if it managed to pick all the interpolated bits and removed them again, you would not lose anything over the original compression.

So I can't say 100% but I think there is a good chance you will lose some further quality in that process.

"Nothings for certain, it can always go wrong"

Dave
 #76362  by strumminsix
 
Thinking of it that way, Dave, I betcha you are right. In theory, if the codec and algorithms were perfect it wouldn't be an issue but I'm guess what it'll take more dynamics away now that you've opened up my eyes! Thanks!