[POETRY] Introducing Irony by Maxwell Bodenheim-ag

Short Poetry Collections, Short Story Collections, and our Weekly Poetry Project
Post Reply
erieston
Posts: 75
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 4:53 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by erieston » October 28th, 2019, 4:45 pm

Sections 01 and 13 PL OK! :thumbs:

Section 03* PL Notes:
º01:31 - In "given to moods of understanding," there seems to be some kind of strange cut in the middle of "moods".

Section 10 and 12 PL Notes:
º Beautiful recordings, but at the end you should state that "This recording is in the public domain"; I hear "this poem is in the public domain" at the end of each.
At the end, say: "End of poem. This recording is in the public domain." [For 23-32 say, End of STORY. This recording is in the public domain."
Section 15* PL Notes:
º00:26-28 - I hear a stumble: "Herald's of a-reckless solitude. . ."

Section 17* PL Notes:
º01:14-16 - I hear "Her black hair. . ." instead of "Hear black hat. . ."

Section 18* PL Notes:
º00:14 - I hear "Pacing down th-late sky. . ." instead of "pacing down the sky. . ."

* For each of the asterisked audio clips: I hear a sort of tinny/mechanical echo throughout each of these poems and the audio clips sound like they are very heavily distorted.

Checker: All Passed :clap:
If a Deaf person swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap? :lol:

Muzika
Posts: 10
Joined: October 23rd, 2019, 8:24 pm

Post by Muzika » October 28th, 2019, 6:54 pm


silverquill
Posts: 11679
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA

Post by silverquill » October 28th, 2019, 9:35 pm

Thanks!
I've put this in the MW Ready for PL.

erieston
Posts: 75
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 4:53 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by erieston » October 29th, 2019, 11:53 am

Section 05 PL Notes:

º I hear "Librivox dot com" instead of "Librivox dot org" in the disclaimer.
silverquill wrote:
October 20th, 2019, 3:13 pm

At the beginning of the recording, read the abbreviated "LibriVox disclaimer":
"[Poem title], by Maxwell Bodenheim, read for LibriVox.org" by [your name] or some variation on that, adding date, location, your personal URL, etc., if you wish.
Section 06 PL Notes:

º01:19 - I hear "significance that shoots behind it," instead of "significance that shoots beyond it."

º hear some bumping/shuffling noises in the background throughout the poem. You could maybe try to reduce these by using the noise reduction feature on audacity.

Checker: All Passed :clap:
If a Deaf person swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap? :lol:

adr6090
Posts: 1838
Joined: May 31st, 2016, 11:05 am
Location: Cottonwood, California

Post by adr6090 » October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm

Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
erieston wrote:
October 28th, 2019, 4:45 pm
Sections 01 and 13 PL OK! :thumbs:

Section 03* PL Notes:
º01:31 - In "given to moods of understanding," there seems to be some kind of strange cut in the middle of "moods".

Section 10 and 12 PL Notes:
º Beautiful recordings, but at the end you should state that "This recording is in the public domain"; I hear "this poem is in the public domain" at the end of each.
At the end, say: "End of poem. This recording is in the public domain." [For 23-32 say, End of STORY. This recording is in the public domain."
Section 15* PL Notes:
º00:26-28 - I hear a stumble: "Herald's of a-reckless solitude. . ."

Section 17* PL Notes:
º01:14-16 - I hear "Her black hair. . ." instead of "Hear black hat. . ."

Section 18* PL Notes:
º00:14 - I hear "Pacing down th-late sky. . ." instead of "pacing down the sky. . ."

* For each of the asterisked audio clips: I hear a sort of tinny/mechanical echo throughout each of these poems and the audio clips sound like they are very heavily distorted.

Checker: All Passed :clap:
April

erieston
Posts: 75
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 4:53 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by erieston » October 29th, 2019, 5:03 pm

adr6090 wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
I fear that using noise reduction 3 times is what caused the tinny-sound to appear. If you amplify or reduce noise too much the audio can become distorted and therefore have a “mechanical” or tinny echo. Since the readings are not long I would suggest just rereading them and try not to use noice reduction or amplification more than once or twice (LibriVox has awesome videos that you can watch that can explain in more detail if you need a visual guide) and only amplify or reduce as needed.

I’m sure the MC and BC also have helpful tips as well to help.
If a Deaf person swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap? :lol:

silverquill
Posts: 11679
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA

Post by silverquill » October 29th, 2019, 8:31 pm

adr6090 wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
Hi, April.
I’m stepping in here and marking these as PL OK.

I’ve listened to these and under standard PL criteria they are quite acceptable.

Could the audio be better? It almost always can because few of us have professionl studios and equipment. But we don’t expect or require perfection. Some ambient background noise is expected. My personal practice, though, is to use one pass of low pass of low level noise reduction because I still pick up a bit of fan noise. (I have permission to turn off the noisy appliance}. Only if there is still something significant remaining will I do a second pass, using a second noise sample. I find to low level passes cause less distortion than one heavy pass.

The is just a small amount of distortion in your audio, and I have good ear phones. So, you can take the remarks as suggestions, but certainly no need to re-record all of these.

Thanks for your contributions.

~Larry

erieston
Posts: 75
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 4:53 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by erieston » October 30th, 2019, 2:46 am

silverquill wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 8:31 pm
adr6090 wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
Hi, April.
I’m stepping in here and marking these as PL OK.

I’ve listened to these and under standard PL criteria they are quite acceptable.

Could the audio be better? It almost always can because few of us have professionl studios and equipment. But we don’t expect or require perfection. Some ambient background noise is expected. My personal practice, though, is to use one pass of low pass of low level noise reduction because I still pick up a bit of fan noise. (I have permission to turn off the noisy appliance}. Only if there is still something significant remaining will I do a second pass, using a second noise sample. I find to low level passes cause less distortion than one heavy pass.

The is just a small amount of distortion in your audio, and I have good ear phones. So, you can take the remarks as suggestions, but certainly no need to re-record all of these.

Thanks for your contributions.

~Larry
Thank you for stepping in, Larry; sorry for any confusion on my part.
If a Deaf person swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap? :lol:

adr6090
Posts: 1838
Joined: May 31st, 2016, 11:05 am
Location: Cottonwood, California

Post by adr6090 » October 30th, 2019, 8:54 am

Thank you for your advice though I believe that I will go with what Larry has mentioned & not re record as he has marked them pl okay.
April
erieston wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 5:03 pm
adr6090 wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
I fear that using noise reduction 3 times is what caused the tinny-sound to appear. If you amplify or reduce noise too much the audio can become distorted and therefore have a “mechanical” or tinny echo. Since the readings are not long I would suggest just rereading them and try not to use noice reduction or amplification more than once or twice (LibriVox has awesome videos that you can watch that can explain in more detail if you need a visual guide) and only amplify or reduce as needed.

I’m sure the MC and BC also have helpful tips as well to help.

adr6090
Posts: 1838
Joined: May 31st, 2016, 11:05 am
Location: Cottonwood, California

Post by adr6090 » October 30th, 2019, 8:57 am

Thank you Larry,
I appreciate your marking my sections here as pl okay & I will take your advice to heart.
April
silverquill wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 8:31 pm
adr6090 wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
Hi, April.
I’m stepping in here and marking these as PL OK.

I’ve listened to these and under standard PL criteria they are quite acceptable.

Could the audio be better? It almost always can because few of us have professionl studios and equipment. But we don’t expect or require perfection. Some ambient background noise is expected. My personal practice, though, is to use one pass of low pass of low level noise reduction because I still pick up a bit of fan noise. (I have permission to turn off the noisy appliance}. Only if there is still something significant remaining will I do a second pass, using a second noise sample. I find to low level passes cause less distortion than one heavy pass.

The is just a small amount of distortion in your audio, and I have good ear phones. So, you can take the remarks as suggestions, but certainly no need to re-record all of these.

Thanks for your contributions.

~Larry

lilianelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: November 29th, 2016, 5:36 pm

Post by lilianelizabeth » October 30th, 2019, 4:02 pm

Hello,

Here is section 4:

https://librivox.org/uploads/alg1001/irony_04_bodenheim_128kb.mp3

Time - 2:51

Thank you!

Lilian

adr6090
Posts: 1838
Joined: May 31st, 2016, 11:05 am
Location: Cottonwood, California

Post by adr6090 » October 30th, 2019, 5:04 pm

Larry,
It just dawned on me that I did the corrections and have not posted those so while I do appreciate your marking them pl okay, shouldn't I at least re post so the other errors are correct?
April
silverquill wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 8:31 pm
adr6090 wrote:
October 29th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Hello,
I have just completed my edits for sections 03, 15, 17 & 18.
Not for the sound you mentioned though. I did use the noise reduction 3 times, would you like for me to do that again? Please do let me know & than I will repost the sections.
April
Hi, April.
I’m stepping in here and marking these as PL OK.

I’ve listened to these and under standard PL criteria they are quite acceptable.

Could the audio be better? It almost always can because few of us have professionl studios and equipment. But we don’t expect or require perfection. Some ambient background noise is expected. My personal practice, though, is to use one pass of low pass of low level noise reduction because I still pick up a bit of fan noise. (I have permission to turn off the noisy appliance}. Only if there is still something significant remaining will I do a second pass, using a second noise sample. I find to low level passes cause less distortion than one heavy pass.

The is just a small amount of distortion in your audio, and I have good ear phones. So, you can take the remarks as suggestions, but certainly no need to re-record all of these.

Thanks for your contributions.

~Larry

silverquill
Posts: 11679
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA

Post by silverquill » October 30th, 2019, 9:28 pm

adr6090 wrote:
October 30th, 2019, 5:04 pm
Larry,
It just dawned on me that I did the corrections and have not posted those so while I do appreciate your marking them pl okay, shouldn't I at least re post so the other errors are correct?
April
True.
I was just sampling for the audio issues, assuming these were the corrected files.

slyma12
Posts: 24
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 4:47 pm

Post by slyma12 » October 31st, 2019, 4:45 am

Hallo,
I would like to read section 21 (Pronounced fantasy)

silverquill
Posts: 11679
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA

Post by silverquill » October 31st, 2019, 6:44 am

slyma12 wrote:
October 31st, 2019, 4:45 am
Hallo,
I would like to read section 21 (Pronounced fantasy)
Thank you!
I have added you to the Magic Window

Post Reply