Freesound Forums

Hi there, I've got a question regarding field recordings. I like to make field recordings, e.g. sounds from streets, cars, people etc., and sometimes these recordings need some polishing. I used to edit them in Goldwave to reduce noise, fade-in and fade-out, remove pops etc. but recently I thought it is better not to do it. What is your opinion?

Pro editing: nice, clean sounds, but some interesting things may have been removed because the uploader didn't like it.
Con editing: raw original recordings that contain everything including noise, but downloader can decide what to do with, cleaning or not etc.

I'm not sure it has been discussed before but I can't find a thread about it.

best of both worlds:
upload the sound (NON-edited), then edit it and upload it as a remix.

I personally really prefer unedited sounds. imho even fade in and out is out of the question.

- bram

Well, I think its up to the uploader ofcourse. It also depends on the trade off your making. I try to provide the material to the standard that I would prefer other stuff to be at. So if I decide to upload I try to ask myself the question if I would find this material usefull as it is now.
If the answer is no then perhaps its time to go back to the editor and do some processing. And always be sure to say so in the description. Noise Reduction can quite easily lead to mp3 like artificats once you start to process it futher.

"best of both worlds:
upload the sound (NON-edited), then edit it and upload it as a remix."

That seems a good idea! I agree that unprocessed sounds are the best, but this demands from contributors that they make good field recordings, which is difficult and may diminish the number of uploads.

@ Anton: I usually delete some 50% (!) of what I recorded because it doesn't suit my own standards. Imho it is the best way but it can be painful

I tend to cut out quite a lot. Both my "TottenhamCourtRd" and "PlaceLane" files have a lot of poor or boring stuff removed. I really don't think anyone would want to sit through the whole unedited thing. (Long and bad enough as they are). Certainly I try to get rid of mic handling noises where I can.

Mike

I wish I could upload unprocessed sounds only, but sometimes this is difficult or impossible with the gear I have. Sounds from nature, for example, always short of gain... I often have to 'tweak' a bit (and cut a lot). Sounds recorded at home are easier because I have more control, so I always try to upload the raw material.

I think besides normalizing for volume, it's better if samples aren't affected yet. BUT if you have the time it would be best to include both the raw samples AND your own personal mixes!

-o

So, the main conclusion seems to be that both raw samples and processed samples should be uploaded. But that als means that the initial recording should be of (rather) good quality and that is not always possible. I have a similar problem as dobroide has, i.e. not having the best gear and therefore not having the best recordings, although some polishing would do the job. While I agree with the idea to put raw and processed samples on the website, we also run the risk of having a large amount of, well, not-so-good recordings (i.e. useless noise).