To Edit Youtube Audio or Not to Edit ...

[lpa53]

To edit or not to edit. That is the question.

I suppose I should be recording guitar and vocals separately and processing them, but I've been creating my Youtube videos simply by using the raw output from my ZOOM Q3HD.

I've tried doctoring the audio a bit using Audacity but am not sure it's worth the effort or even produces an acceptable sound.

I've posted two versions of the same piece, one with raw audio and one that has bass boost, reverb, and volume edits made in Audacity. After all that work, I tend to prefer the raw audio.

After recording, I noticed that the settings on the ZOOM had the lo-cut on and sample rate and bit length set at the lowest. Are there recommended settings for these to get the best audio in a small room with the ZOOM only about 5 feet away?

Any thoughts?

Raw ZOOM Q3 Audio >

Audio with Audacity Edits >

(couldn't get the videos to embed correctly...)

[Ty Ford]

The raw sounds louder and brighter. My lap top speakers don't hav much low end, so I didn't hear much.

I'd want to hear that first with no reverb to decide if reverb were necessary.

You sound like you're in a small room! What a shock! I want to hear you with less room.

Try to cover some of the hard surfaces with something soft to reduce the bounce and I think you'll like what you get better.

If it were me, I'd move that mic in about head high aimed slightly down so as to catch your vocal first and then your guitar.

Yes, ditch the roll off and I think if you stick with 24-bit, 44.1 kHz, for recording you be fine.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Archtop Guy]

I think the raw sounds better in this take too. The main problem with the processed one is the level, which as they say, is "user error." I still think that the correct post processing in Audacity can improve things.

BTW, I am pretty sure that YouTube always does sound some sound processing, Would love to hear other opinions on this but I think they do some compression, leveling, and normalization.

Agreed that the biggest improvement to this recorded sound would be less room. One way to do that would be to use two close microphones for guitar and vocal. Then kill the video sound track and add in your own audio with optimized balance, level, pan, reverb, etc. It's really only a little harder than what you have already done.

Like your channel and your stuff. Keep it up.

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by lpa53

To edit or not to edit. That is the question.

I suppose I should be recording guitar and vocals separately and processing them, but I've been creating my Youtube videos simply by using the raw output from my ZOOM Q3HD.

I've tried doctoring the audio a bit using Audacity but am not sure it's worth the effort or even produces an acceptable sound.

I've posted two versions of the same piece, one with raw audio and one that has bass boost, reverb, and volume edits made in Audacity. After all that work, I tend to prefer the raw audio.

After recording, I noticed that the settings on the ZOOM had the lo-cut on and sample rate and bit length set at the lowest. Are there recommended settings for these to get the best audio in a small room with the ZOOM only about 5 feet away?

Any thoughts?

Raw ZOOM Q3 Audio >

Audio with Audacity Edits >

(couldn't get the videos to embed correctly...)

The bass boost raises the sound of your foot taps which I find distracting.

I always used my Q3HD with lo cut off, recording level high, 44.1/16 WAV.

I have way too much stuff around here in the way of recording gear, so I generally connected some kind of mic system to the Q3HD in order to get the mic closer to the source. Of course the lack of a mic preamp on the Q3HD was a problem. One relatively simple and inexpensive technique I used was to connect the headphone out from my Zoom H2n to the line in of the Q3HD: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2010/...t-the-zoom-h2/

Fran

[lpa53]

Thanks for all the tips. And I agree with the "less room" thoughts, which I myself believed to be one part of the problem. Unfortunately, having removed all the carpet in my small house and refinishing the original wood floors, I'm surrounded by hard surfaces wherever I go.

To raise the ZOOM's level and angle downward, I'll have to get a new support. Perhaps that will be put on my Christmas list. Until then, for the next attempt I'll at least move to a larger room and use the settings that have been recommended.

Onward ...

[FolkRock Rules]

I'm sure glad lpa53 started this thread.

Originally Posted by Fran Guidry

The bass boost raises the sound of your foot taps which I find distracting.
I always used my Q3HD with lo cut off, recording level high, 44.1/16 WAV.

Learned something new today.

I have way too much stuff around here in the way of recording gear, so I generally connected some kind of mic system to the Q3HD in order to get the mic closer to the source. Of course the lack of a mic preamp on the Q3HD was a problem. One relatively simple and inexpensive technique I used was to connect the headphone out from my Zoom H2n to the line in of the Q3HD:

That link led to viewing a couple more of your HomeBrewedMusic pages, and a note to myself about adding an MA-2 adapter to the other accessories I bought for my Q3HD.
I almost bought an H4N, but went for the Q3HD instead. Now I'll be looking into ways to maybe use the audio interface I recently got (Behringer UMC202HD) to run other mics into the Q3HD. (I think it would beat lugging around a laptop for recording at open mics, etc.)

Thanks for the info, Fran. (And thanks, lpa53, for asking the questions I didn't know that I needed to ask. )

[rick-slo]

Raw sounds better because it is clearer and cleaner. You probably could improve the sound with some post recording higher quality processing, but not likely with the software that comes with Audacity.