View Single Post
Old 12-27-2019, 03:32 AM   #237
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
The frequency resolution of the Spectrogram in the bass and lower mids is very very bad. Even if I set in the "freq log" to 10. 10 should be the default setting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers View Post
My fingers are still crossed for a much higher res (more bins) view for certain selected items (as an option) as although it's not bad for things like creative work on drums,the current low bin amount and distribution really doesn't work well at all for dialogue work in film (just tried it) or cutting unwanted sounds out of say a classical record.
I agree that, at present, REAPER's spectrogram does not work well for fine editing of individual frequencies, since the frequency resolution is far too low.

It would be very helpful if REAPER could use a higher FFT size for the spectragrams. Either as a default, or if possible, as a per-item setting.

Here is a comparison between REAPER and RX7's spectrograms for the same piece of music:

REAPER:


RX7:


The RX7 spectrogram is obviously much sharper in the frequency domain, and much more informative.

RX7 offers advanced options such as "Adaptively sparse" analysis, and I don't know how difficult it would be to program these for REAPER.

However, even when using only the most basic settings, a spectrogram can be vastly improved by simply tweaking the FFT size. My guess is that REAPER uses an FFT size of 256 samples, since RX7 and Audacity's spectrograms look very similar to REAPER's, if they use that FFT size (and only basic analysis).

Here is Audacity's version, with an FFT size of 4096. Although not as good as RX7, it is a big improvement over REAPER:

juliansader is online now   Reply With Quote