Version Originale 1 Audio Free Download

[Danny Hosford]

Everyvariable in the data set ranges between 0 and 1, except for loudness. To make sure every variable was on the same scale, I normalized the loudness over each pair of albums to range between 0 and 1.

I chose to exclude metrics like liveness, which detects the presence of an audience within a track (none of the songs were recorded live), and things like tempo, key, and time signature which remain consistent between both versions.

For each song, I generated a graph showing the audio metrics for Taylor's Version and its first version. If a variable on the graph only shows one album cover, it is because the values are so similar that the points overlapped.

I always wanted a music video for this song (hint hint, Taylor if you're reading this)! From the opening chords of Taylor's Version, the acoustic guitar sounds more prominent, and the overall track feels less produced than the first version. The data reflects this, with Taylor's Version receiving a higher acousticness score.

One pattern I've seen in the data is the difficulty to recreate similar valence ("musical positiveness") when the first version has a very high score (0.789 out of 1). You'll see this concept also apply to songs further down the ranking.

I've always thought "Forever & Always (Piano Version)" was so clever, because the non-piano version sounds like a completely different song. It's amazing how the same lyrics can be felt so differently.

Similar to "Forever & Always (Piano Version)," "State Of Grace (Acoustic Version) (Taylor's Version)" is louder, though with a nearly identical acousticness score between both versions. Taylor's voice sounds more full and forward in Taylor's Version.

I read a few comments from Swifties who said Taylor's Version sounds like someone reflecting on a sad love story from their past, where the first version sounds more raw and in the moment. I thought that was an interesting analysis to pair with the Spotify data, given the lower valence score of Taylor's Version (0.132 TV vs 0.337).

The first version has a gentle, subtleness to it, where Taylor's Version amps up the vocals, and backing instruments. I particularly like the stylistic vocal changes Taylor made, especially on words like "photograph," adding an extra riff.

When I first heard "White Horse (Taylor's Version)," I did a double take when the chorus came in. The drums hit much harder in Taylor's Version, changing the vibe of the song. While Taylor's Version doesn't quite have the gentleness of the first version, the added energy showed me the song in a new light.

The first version of "Stay Stay Stay" has one of the highest valence scores across all the songs in the data set (0.928 out of 1). Such a high "musical positiveness" can be difficult to capture in a new recording, but Taylor still does a great job!

What a marvelous tune, indeed! While the energy score for Taylor's Version is slightly lower, the rest of the metrics are so close that the album covers on the graph overlap each other. Very impressive!

Taylor closely captures the high acousticness and low valence score. I find it interesting that Taylor's Version has a slightly lower valence score (0.232 vs. 0.261), (as if it were possible to make it sound even sadder)!

Am I slightly salty that it was performed for the first time so soon after my Eras tour show? Maybe. But I'm happy for the millions of Swifties that will get to scream "a band of thieves in ripped-up jeans got to rule the world."

Another top ten favorite of mine, I think Taylor captures the energy and happiness of the first version. This song definitely takes me back to high school, and it is a new perspective hearing it with Taylor's more mature vocals.

Every metric looks very close, with the biggest difference being the lower acousticness of Taylor's Version. The instruments in Taylor's Version do have more of a presence, especially the drums in the second chorus.

That aside, I do think Taylor's Version has a similar audio vibe to the first version. Though, the increased volume on the spoken and distorted vocals in the verses gives them an extra level of presence.

I don't get why it has to have access to the original files instead of copying the files like on Adobe Premiere or Audacity, and not sure if the previous versions of the files are stored somewhere. I closed the app after I saved the files.

The modification I did was pitch shifting so it was easier to retrieve the likes of the original, although I forgot the pitch I used for one of the files and cannot get the exact pitch of the original voice. Even if I could perfectly shift the same interval of pitch (for example shift +5 semi tone after -5 semi tone) I suspect the data with the effect get some losses through the modification.

Can I set up the application to avoid overwriting the original files completely? If not, to avoid overwriting the original do I need to do either: 1. make copies of any original file, 2. only work on Multitrack mode?

I'm afraid that there's a certain degree of 'caveat emptor' to this. Audition has two modes of operation, and these are determined by which view you're in - multitrack view is non-destructive, like Premiere, but Waveform view isn't - it works by modifying files. And it's been lik

I'm afraid that there's a certain degree of 'caveat emptor' to this. Audition has two modes of operation, and these are determined by which view you're in - multitrack view is non-destructive, like Premiere, but Waveform view isn't - it works by modifying files. And it's been like that forever. If you had done your pitch-shifting in Multitrack view, you would have had to create a mixdown or export of the result, and your original would have been untouched.

No you can't force Audition only to work in a single mode - the basis of its operations preclude this, and it would be vastly less flexible if it did; that would hack off a lot of people! If you want to do pitch-shifting (or anything else, come to that) in Waveform view, and retain the original files, then you have to use 'save as' and rename the files suitably, or put them in another location. Better yet, do what we always recommend, and don't ever work on original files, but make a copy and edit that. This is good practice, whatever you do - even with non-linear editing.

When working on audio in the Waveform view the first thing I always do after opening the file is to do a Save As so I am not working on the original file. I also try and give the new file a suitable suffix to denote what relationship it has with the original ie. FileXXX.wav is Saved As FileXXX_Edit.wav. Or in your case FileXXX_PS for Pitch Shift for instance.

Outside the film industry, the term "dubbing" commonly refers to the replacement of the actor's voices with those of different performers speaking another language, which is called "revoicing" in the film industry.[1][further explanation needed] The term "dubbing" is only used when talking about replacing a previous voice, usually in another language. When a voice is created from scratch for animations, the term "original voice" is always used because, in some cases, these media are partially finished before the voice is implemented. The voice work would still be part of the creation process, thus being considered the official voice.

Films, videos, and sometimes video games are often dubbed into the local language of a foreign market. In foreign distribution, dubbing is common in theatrically released films, television films, television series, cartoons, anime and telenovelas.[6]

In many countries dubbing was adopted, at least in part, for political reasons. In authoritarian states such as Fascist Italy and Francoist Spain, dubbing could be used to enforce particular ideological agendas, excising negative references to the nation and its leaders and promoting standardised national languages at the expense of local dialects and minority languages. In post-Nazi Germany, dubbing was used to downplay events in the country's recent past, as in the case of the dub of Alfred Hitchcock's Notorious, where the Nazi organisation upon which the film's plot centres was changed to a drug smuggling enterprise.[7] First post-WWII movie dub was Konstantin Zaslonov (1949) dubbed from Russian into the Czech language.[8] In Western Europe after World War II, dubbing was attractive to many film producers as it helped to enable co-production between companies in different countries, in turn allowing them to pool resources and benefit from financial support from multiple governments. Use of dubbing meant that multi-national casts could be assembled and were able to use their preferred language for their performances, with appropriate post-production dubs being carried out before distributing versions of the film in the appropriate language for each territory.[7]

Automated dialogue replacement (ADR) is the process of re-recording dialogue by the original actor (or a replacement actor) after the filming process to improve audio quality or make changes to the originally scripted dialog. In the early days of talkies, a loop of film would be cut and spliced together for each of the scenes that needed to be rerecorded, then one-by-one the loops would be loaded onto a projector. For each scene the loop would be played over and over while the voice actor performed the lines trying to synchronize them to the filmed performance. This was known as "looping" or a "looping session". Loading and reloading the film loops while the talent and recording crew stood by was a tedious process. Later, video tape and then digital technology replaced the film loops and the process became known as automated dialogue replacement (ADR).[10][11]

In conventional film production, a production sound mixer records dialogue during filming. During post-production, a supervising sound editor, or ADR supervisor, reviews all of the dialogue in the film and decides which lines must be re-recorded. ADR is recorded during an ADR session, which takes place in a specialized sound studio. Multiple takes are recorded and the most suitable take becomes the final version, or portions of multiple takes may be edited together.[12] The ADR process does not always take place in a post-production studio. The process may be recorded on location, with mobile equipment. ADR can also be recorded without showing the actor the image they must match, but by having them listen to the performance, since some actors[who?] believe that watching themselves act can degrade subsequent performances. The director may be present during ADR, or alternatively, they may leave it up to a trusted sound editor, an ADR specialist, and the performers.

3a8082e126