Community of Sexsoundlovers

I have since made ​​some overnight recordings.
It is very time consuming and boring, to scan this to sexsounds afterwards.
Does anyone know a good way to automate this? Is there a program like "Find sexsounds in my Soundfiles.exe" or something ?
Or can anyone say what analysis settings I have to do in Audacity, so that moans and screams are found automatically?

Ah, the chase after the chase...

I don't know of any program that can be trained to recognise and scan for sex sounds. Also, the vast majority of noise reduction filters will mangle the environment and only make the tell-tale signs harder to hear, so here's a few techniques I use:

1. Increase the playback rate. I don't know Audacity, so not sure of the exact steps you'd need to get this happening in that, but most decent audio software has a way of increasing the playback speed without cranking the pitch at the same time. I'd advise taking a few captures you know contain content some way after the start of the file and practicing with those to determine the max speed your ears/software can cope with. I started out using this at 3x, but can spot the good stuff at over 5x now, sometimes as high as 10x on a good clear recording. That's an hour covered in 6 minutes with no skipping past potential action. Once you discount a few unlikely hours, it can have you smashing through content pretty quickly.

2. If you can cope with the thought that once in a while you might miss a moan or two, you could skip through with an organised approach. When I'm doing this, I tend to jump ahead on the timeline by a minute, listen for 3-5 seconds, then jump another minute. If I suspect I might be approaching something, I'll narrow the skips to 30, 20, or 10 seconds depending on what's necessary for that recording. I'm sure small nuggets of goodness have passed me by using this method, but I think if you've got hours and hours to sift through then it's a reasonable trade off that'll still allow you to spot the longer/clearer stuff and have a life that occasionally involves doing other stuff other than listening for other peoples stuff...

3. If you're recording in a regular environment, experiment with some previous recordings to see whether you can spot any patterns or similarities in the transients/waveform of the audio that might allow you to zoom out and take a quick scan through sections at a time to determine which bits of audio need closer attention. For me, this has been the least reliable method unless we're talking about a seriously clean recording with low background noise and minimal random noises in the environment.

Failing all that, get a little setup going with someone mental enough to enjoy this thankless task.

Good luck!

Sc0tt-UK

Hi Scotty,
thank you for your detailed answer.
Increasing the playback speed is a good idea. But I did not find a way in Audacity to do this. So I tried another program named 'Wavepad Sound Editor'. This program makes a max. speed of 2x. Which program do you use ?

You can change the playback speed in Audacity by using the slider in the top left corner. It only goes to 3x though. I highlighted it in this screenshot:

7inch wrote:Which program do you use ?

I'm mostly using Logic X nowadays, but that's because working with audio pays the bills here. Perhaps other people can chime in with cheaper options...

Thank you, pbody,
I know this option, but it is unsuitable, because it cranks the pitch. So it makes it impossible, to hear the typical sounds.

Hi 7inch and all others,

I'm using foobar as a music player. And as most of the foobar users I love that player.
Not at last for it's great ability to enhance it with different modules.

I'm using the waveform seekbar module to see a graph of the file being played.
Thats enough for me personally. It can be downloaded here: http://www.foobar2000.org/components/vi ... ve_seekbar

There are other modules/DSPs in addition which might be interesting for you.
The first one is the "skip silence" DSP (see attached screenshot) which is already included in foobar. May be worth a try.

The second one is the Effect DSP (http://www.foobar2000.org/components/vi ... dsp_effect) which seems to offer tempo adjustments as you wanted it.

Hope this might help you or anyone else out
Best regards,
jinhui

Word Recognition Program has existed in the '70s.
Certain words -that not write down because I do not want to attract attention - automatically filtered from the conversation.
Using this model, should write out a software with a programmer.

Have we among us who can speak an IT professional manner?

I think the problem you will have with a looking at the waveform to spot active areas and on skipping silence is that a lot will depend on the audio levels. A lot of the files here are very quiet and if you just look at the waveform in audacity, you will miss a lot of the sounds. And I also think that the plugins to skip silence is going to suffer from the same fate. In audacity you can change the tempo, and maintain the pitch. If you go too happy doing this, like most things, it starts to sound really bad, but it will let you listen to an overnights worth of recording in less time.

However I propose a better solution for you and for anybody else who can do all night caps that stand a good chance of catching something. Perhaps our fearless leader can set up a new board here and anybody can upload to it, but only a few people can download, but the idea would be that people with more time or better ways of doing things can do the work, snip any good parts out, and than move them (crediting you, of course) over the the active board they would belong in. I think the raw files should not go to the general public right away in case any personal or identifying info is in them. That would need to get snipped out before it went to the general public.

Thoughts?

Well, I still think looking at waveforms is handy. I mean if you have an overnight recording that's about 8 hours long and you want to find where the action is then visually scan the waveform and when you find a loud part where there's some sex you've narrowed down the search area greatly and you can roll back a bit from that and find the start.

There are a lot of caps here that if you look at them in audacity they don't hardly wiggle off the line, and most of the bigger wiggles are not the sounds you are looking for. You could try filtering and amplifying, but you are going to bring the noise up as well. I really think for picking faint sounds out of the background the human ear and the human brain are the best tool, and I suspect people would be willing to do the work.