[geoff]

On 23/02/2020 8:02 am, lid wrote:
On 21 Feb 2020 16:24:46 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

wrote:
On 21 Feb 2020 12:30:08 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

If I were you I'd try to do some processing to improve intelligibility rather
than worrying about fidelity. High pass everything below 200 Hz or so,
then low-pass everything above maybe 6KHz, and consider sticking a presence
boost in there. You might then consider an expander and fiddling with the
threshold on the expander to try and boost the voice out of the noise.

I think you are worried about entirely the wrong thing here.

The actions on the source WAV file must be such as to maintain
authenticity. If I start changing and deleting parts of the audio
file, that would render the output file as different from the source
file, and make it untrustworthy.

I don't know about UK law, but as soon as you have made a transfer to
MP3, or even a transfer to flat PCM, your file is no longer admissible in
court. Rules of evidence in the UK are likely different but you can hire
any one of a number of excellent forensic audio people there who can create
an audition file which is separate from the traceable reference file (which
is what is normally done for courtroom proceedings in the US).

I need this audio file for two purposes.

1) to present to a court or tribunal in support of proceedings, as
evidence. For this I would submit the source WAV file, unedited, apart
from being clipped.

2) to post to a web page in a public-facing role. This should be an
MP3 file, preferably indistinguishable to the average human ear from
the WAV,


Thanks for finally explaining the context.

But careful - Surely # 2) would compromise # 1) ?

geoff