Unix Software for Recording Prose?

Dan Lyke asks: "Friends and I have gotten into reading short stories to each other. I'd like to start recording these. There are tons of decent audio recording apps out there for music and sound effects, but what I really want is something more oriented around recording prose; organize a longer recording session into sequences of "takes", with the edit decision list made in mostly real time (ie: that sentence was good, or re-take from the last checkpoint). A prototype is only a few tens of lines of wrapper code around one of the command line recorders, but I'd rather be building on other's efforts. Anyone out there got suggestions for Un*x recording apps centered around spoken word and prose?"

Re:Naturally

[Espressoman]

Have you not heard? Code is reusable now...

Recording audio is recording audio...

[stubear]

It doesn't matter what the audio is, working with a digital audio workstation and/or multitrack edtor is the same for all recorded sounds. You need to better understand the workflow I think, the program doesn't need to change for such a tiny niche idea.

My suggestion would be to record your prose sessions and name them accordingly. Once you have all your source files, begin to sift through them and add region markers to the tracks, labelling them accordingly. Then go back and begin to cut and paste different regions together into one master track. Once you have your master track you can begin to smooth out the transitions between takes, sweeten the audio and save out a final audio file.

By approaching the recording session this way you aren't wasting time going back and forth between recording and editing, allowing you to focus on getting the audio perfect the first few tries and learning how to sweeten audio better in post production.

Now, I am not saying that recording music uses the same gear and setup as recording speech, I'm just saying the process is very similar, especially on a DAW or similar prosumer recording application on the PC. Micing properly is key to recording a successful audio session.

Re:Recording audio is recording audio...

[yasth]

Actually his idea is intersting and with enough effor could be pulled off. The way I'd implement it would be to have electronic text, and then a real basic form of speech recognition to link the wav file to the text. That way you could find the pauses in the speech and at a button press move back the cursor to the last pause and resume reading. A more significant problem is that unless you chose the stories carefully it is probably illegal to distribute the files.

Re:Recording audio is recording audio...

[stubear]

Ummm...if the audio app has a waveform disaply you can find the pauses quite easily. Throw in real-time scrubbing and it's nearly idiot proof. Speech recognition would only overcomplicate a fairly simple process.

Re:Recording audio is recording audio...

[dacarr]

The problem with speech recog. is that it's still somewhat lacking that I've seen. It will either recognize speech or wreck a nice beach.

Instead, have your script in email or another text format, and sync that with waveforms like the other respondent to this message suggested.

Re:Recording audio is recording audio...

[Gordonjcp]

That becomes my new sig...

Snack Sound Toolkit

[pcrook345]

You could take a look at the Snack Sound Toolkit [speech.kth.se], which was originally developed to work with Tcl/Tk. It can now be accessed from Python and Ruby as well. There are a number of example programs included; with a little copying and pasting, you could probably create the application you desire.

Once it's completed, you can bundle your application into standalone form, so your friends don't have to install the toolkit or Tcl/Tk to use your program.

Good luck!

How about vi?

[BluBrick]

Until quite recently prose was recorded using tools such as "quill", "pen", or "chalk" and "parchment", "paper", and "slate". Although not directly portable to *nix, there are a number of close equivalents.

I would highly recommend vi as a suitable tool for recording prose. It runs on most operating systems, unix-like and otherwise. I believe there is even a version for EMACS!

Or did you want to record performances of prose?

Obligatory ed response

[Guppy06]

When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi *and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like, 'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.

Ed, man! !man ed

ED(1) UNIX Programmer's Manual ED(1)

NAME
ed - text editor

SYNOPSIS
ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ]
DESCRIPTION
Ed is the standard text editor.
---

Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed because it's ED!

"Ed is the standard text editor."

And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929 /bin/ed
-rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970 /usr/ucb/vi
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990 /usr/bin/emacs

Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed. Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K; and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!

"Ed is the standard text editor."

Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:

[damn lameness filter]

Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm the novice with verbosity.

"Ed is the standard text editor."

Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.

ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!

When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!! Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!

TEXT EDITOR.

When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their "edlin" on a UNIX standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.

Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!

?

Re:Obligatory ed response

[BluBrick]

In the words of Nelson the Wise:

Ha Ha!

The lameness filter kicked in while trying to submit a post extolling the virtues of ed(1).

There is a god! (and he uses vi)

Uhm, I'm sorry, but how incompetent are you?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, there are numerous ways of recoding audio in *nix.

The easiest would be 'cat /dev/audio > ./prose.raw'. or 'cat /dev/dsp > ./prose.raw'.

Easier solution

[billcopc]

Here's the lazy solution: just email the stories to each other and run them through the M$ speech synthesizer for fun. Then you don't have to worry about doing re-takes.

But seriously, any half-decent recording software will let you do this. Whether it's prose, or rap, or a bunch of powder-nosed sampler whores that need 42 takes to get each line right, the machine doesn't care what your voice sounds like. It's going to take whatever you dare input through the mic, and let you edit until your ears bleed. Sound forge, Cool Edit.. heck there are others but those are my faves.

Now tell me more about these short stories ? Typically the only short stories I'd share with my buddies are the ones involving alcohol, drugs and gratuitous sex =)