Re: split stereo by channel and silence

i hadn't thought it all the way through like you have so that does help
some thanks, this will end up a script for multiple files, but currently
i'm just playing with one. I did tried to split by silence first but
background noise on the left channel(mostly left, might have been the
combined noise some too) made it so there was only 3 files, if i increase
the noise % it breaks it up better but then i start to chop off words from
the right side. while if i split on silence after i spilt the channels i
get  2 left( unless i increase the noise % which doesn't end up hurting
this side, for this file not sure about other files) and 15 right files.

another thing i just thought of, is it possible to split on the silence of
just 1 channel while the file is still stereo? then if i remove chopping
off the silence, i'd still get the 15 right files, and alot of little files
for the left side between the 15 right files, and i'd then just combine the
files in-between what gets determined to be good right side files, and that
should be the left side

thanks again for the help

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 4:13 AM, Jeremy Nicoll - ml sox users <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2017-06-27 01:07, jlnichols wrote:
>
>> i have stereo wav files, which each channel is different speakers in a
>> conversation.  trying to figure out how best to split a stereo file by
>> both
>> its channel and silence, but still know the order the files should be
>> played
>> in to hear the conversation has a whole.
>>
>
> If you leave it as a stereo file and split by silence you'll get a
> sequence of
> smaller files in play order, divided up whenever neither person is
> talking.  So
> essentially
>
>    both001.wav
>    both002.wav
>    both003.wav
>
> (for that your sox command is going to have to contain: "both%3n.wav" I
> think,
> though you might need %5n or %7n or something if there's going to be a huge
> number of these files created).
>
> Most of these files should only have one person speaking in them, but
> clearly
> there's going to be some with both.
>
>
> I'd then run the sox  stats  effect on each of those files, piping the
> output
> into a script/program.  Stats tells you the sound level in each channel of
> a
> file.  You'd need (by experiment, probably) to find out for yourself what
> the
> levels are in a file where one or other person is silent.  It should then
> be
> possible for your script/program to decide if that stereo file contains
> only
> the left channel person speaking, or only the right, or both.
>
> I would use that info to rename each of the 'both' files, so eg
>
>    both103.wav
>
> could become
>
>    voice103L.wav  or  voice103R.wav  or  voice103B.wav
>
> Then you'd have a set of files like
>
>    voice001L.wav
>    voice002L.wav
>    voice003R.wav
>    voice004L.wav
>    voice005L.wav
>    voice006B.wav
>    voice007L.wav
>    voice008R.wav
>    voice009L.wav
>    ...
>
> To listen to just the lefthand person, you'd want to copy the files with
> "L" and "B"
> in their names elsewhere, to get:
>
>    voice001L.wav
>    voice002L.wav
>    voice004L.wav
>    voice005L.wav
>    voice006B.wav
>    voice007L.wav
>    voice009L.wav
>    ...
>
> To listen to just the righthand person, you'd want to copy the "R" and "B"
> files:
>
>    voice003R.wav
>    voice006B.wav
>    voice008R.wav
>    ...
>
> To listen to the whole thing with both people, just listen to the whole
> 'voice' set of
> files.
>
>
> Now, if you think about the "just lefthand person" COPY of the
> voicennnx.wav files, ie:
>
>    voice001L.wav
>    voice002L.wav
>    voice004L.wav
>    voice005L.wav
>    voice006B.wav
>    voice007L.wav
>    voice009L.wav
>     ...
>
> obviously although these files contain all of the left person's
> contributions to the
> discussion, the "B" files do also contain the right person interrupting.
> If that was
> annoying then ON THIS SET OF COPIED FILES ONLY you could run on each of
> the B files
> the command like:
>
>   sox voice006B.wav voice006L.wav remix 1
>
> to get a left-channel only copy of what was in the B file.  So then you'd
> have
>
>    voice001L.wav
>    voice002L.wav
>    voice004L.wav
>    voice005L.wav
>    voice006B.wav        chunk 6, both people
>    voice006L.wav        chunk 6, left person only
>    voice007L.wav
>    voice009L.wav
>     ...
>
> and you could delete this copy of the voice006B file if you were sure you
> didn't need
> it.
>
>
> Does that help?
>
>
> --
> Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Sox-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-users
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot

_______________________________________________
Sox-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-users