Pending Feature Requests

This locked page is for the use of sysops to transfer feature requests from the Audacity Forum and other sources. They will be reviewed and where appropriate transferred to the Wiki Feature Requests page. For this page, it is best not to summarise, but paste in verbatim, so the context of the suggestion can be understood.

Not yet reviewed

• Default recording scale: When I start recording a new waveform, I'd prefer for it to default to the dB scale instead of 0 to 1.0 display. Also, I notice that in the dB scale, the increments are linear, the spacing between 0, -10, -20, -30 and -40 are evenly spaced. Any other dB or VU meter I've ever seen have a more logarithmic spacing. (Plus 3 votes)
  • Koz comments: I would like to set the defaults, too. I'll see if maybe one of the advanced Alpha pre-1.4 versions has that. Nobody is going to change version 1.2. The spacing is linear, but the numbers are in dB which is logarithmic. -20 dB is ten times less. -40dB is one hundred times less. -60dB is one thousand times less. You're right. The zero to one scale will only take you down to about ten to one (0.1) before you can't read it any more. That's only 20dB.
  • Koz notes: "default to the dB scale instead of 0 to 1.0" - I can set that in the pre-release 1.3.7, so it's possible it's already available in the earlier versions like 1.3.5 or 1.3.6 which you can download now. You can install 1.2 and 1.3 at the same time, but you can't use both at once.
  • WC comments: And I add my vote for this too - the dB scale is a much better option for default IMHO.
  • Original poster adds: In Cool Edit 2000 (and I assume CE Pro and Audition), the waveforms displayed in dB run from -oo (how do you type the infinity symbol?) to 0. A -30dB signal barely shows, but so does a -40. In Audacity, if you set the scale to -36, a -30dB signal looks fairly significant while even -36 looks like dead silence. At -96 and higher scales, the same signal looks like it would be quite loud, while it's actually very quiet (I don't run my speakers at max volume). What I'm saying is that I'd like the option at least for the scale to have a log taper like what I'm used to in CE2k and most other audio devices' meters. Whether tied to waveform display or separate, the same goes for the input/output meters at the top.
  • SteveTF comments: I like my sine waves to look like sine waves and I like my measurements to be in dB (though I'm getting more used to -1.0 to +1.0, and that scale is very useful when developing plug-ins). Add my vote.

• Simplify the lowpass and highpass filter interface: Suggestion to remove the "Filter Quality" control from the lowpass filter and highpass filter. This control is almost never used, and it only applies to the 12dB per octave filter (not 6dB per octave as described). In the vast majority of cases, adjusting the value from the default 0.7 will produce worse results than the default values, so why not just remove the option - anyone that understands and really wants the feature will probably know enough to re-enable it. Removing this option would also greatly simplify the code, which to my mind would be a good thing and would avoid a potential point of confusion for a lot of users.

• Recreate cut track: On all audio and video program there is a very cool feature that enable you to split a track and enables you to shift it around. But the cool thing is to be able to recreate the lost or cut track by simply draging the edge of the split track. I don't know the technical name of this action but it is highly needed in terms of editing and shortening songs or music recordings.

• Video Display: the ability to preview any sort of video file so you can edit its audio it doesn't really matter what is the file type, any file type. The useres will be able to create it from there video program than load the complete audio to the video editing program for final phase. Please make me forget about wavelab and soundboot.
  • SteveTF comments:Some video editors will allow you to export the audio track as a WAV file, which can then be edited in Audacity. If your video editing program does not have that facility, you can probably use a format converter such as the free program SUPER from erightsoft to extract the audio from the video file.
  • Original poster responds: I know that method and i use it, but this method hold only if the video has a sound track already. When I have a silent video i cant make synched sounds.
  • SteveTF responds: Would either of these ideas (from the feature request list on the Audacity wiki) suit what you are asking for? 1) Import audio from video files/transport streams: such as AVI/MPEG e.g. by demuxing (13 votes) 2) Import/play video for synchronised soundtrack editing (3 votes) No need for Audacity to edit the video. Alternatively, Audacity could send/receive SMPTE or MTC timecode data e.g. to VLC or mplayer.
  • PeterS: No further response from original poster

 

Reviewed but not added - discussing internally

• Improving the Noise Removal effect in Audacity by adding the "threshold" control that was used in Audacity 1.2.x and offering both a full version (with the additional slider) and a simplified interface that used a single slider for more/less noise reduction. I think that in the simplified interface, could combine both the "threshold", and the "amount by which the noise should be reduced" in a single slider, and fixed values for "attack/decay" and "smoothing" (probably fixed at the current default values that are used in Audacity 1.3.x). At low amounts of noise removal, the effect would be more like the 1.3.x effect, then as the slider was increased it would become more like the 1.2.x effect. Plus 1 vote
  • SteveTF adds: The upshot of all this, is that it would be good to have the threshold slider back, but in addition to the refinements that we currently have in 1.3.x - If the developers think that this makes the effect too complicated, perhaps with the categorisation of the effects menu, there could be two versions, a simple, and an advanced interface.
  • See this Forum topic.

Reviewed but not added - intending to delete

These pending FRs were posted here but on review, appear to be inappropriate for the reasons stated (for example, the Beta already supports this feature). Unless reasons for adding them/more explanations of usefulness/purpose are given, they will be deleted.