another marque tool bug this time lasso

when using the lasso marque tool to either cut amplitude or use the single click noise reduction method, i find that the signal outside the lasso generates a huge amount of nose, where this problem does not feature as part of the standard marque tool.

the lasso part of the marque tool was the main highlight for me for the upgrade but now it seems this feature is near useless? who bug tested this software?

kb.

who bug tested this software?

Larry The Locust

Mark

i think the locust would have done a better job

kb

when using the lasso marque tool to either cut amplitude or use the single click noise reduction method, i find that the signal outside the lasso generates a huge amount of nose, where this problem does not feature as part of the standard marque tool.

Since a click is inherently a wide-bandwidth artefact, trying to use the lasso tool to eliminate one will almost certainly result in a mess. This is not the way 'fill single click' (aka repair transient) is supposed to work at all. It's waveform-related, and only works effectively on the entire waveform in the time domain.

Steve thanks for the reply but you have missed the point...the click i was trying to remove was a short bandwith click and the marque tool as standard coped perfectly well as mentioned it is only the lasso method which completely failed,

the lasso as mentioned also completely failed when trying to reduce amplitude by 3db yet again the standard marque tool was fine(unless trying to fix a signal below 100hz starting at 1khz)...the point of my post is that the standard marque tool has no problems with such methods yet the lasso does, i feel the lasso tool is near useless as it is.

Steve thanks for the reply but you have missed the point...the click i was trying to remove was a short bandwith click and the marque tool as standard coped perfectly well as mentioned it is only the lasso method which completely failed,

Actually it's you that's missed the point about clicks - completely.

then please explain on topic why the std marque tool worked in the fashion i explained and the lasso tool did not. personally i dont think you explained this?

kb

the lasso as mentioned also completely failed when trying to reduce amplitude by 3db yet again the standard marque tool was fine(unless trying to fix a signal below 100hz starting at 1khz)...the point of my post is that the standard marque tool has no problems with such methods yet the lasso does, i feel the lasso tool is near useless as it is.

Well, I've just tried this, and it works absolutely perfectly here - you can reduce or increase the lasso area amplitude by any amount you want. You may have a screwed installation.

thanks, but try repeating the effect several times using F3,

anyone else had this issue?

kb

then please explain why the std marque tool worked in the fashion i explained and the lasso tool did not. personally i dont think you explained this?

I explained it - you clearly didn't understand it. This 'narrow bandwidth' click of yours doesn't exist - or it's not a click. Any click is a unit step, and has inherently a wide bandwidth. This does depend somewhat on the length of it, but you'd still treat it as a temporal artefact - find the click in the waveform, and highlight that and remove it.

thanks, but try repeating the effect several times using F3,

I tried it 10 times, using F3 and moving the selection about over the spectral view - wherever I put it, it was fine.

anyone else had this issue?

Nobody else has reported any problems at all with the lasso, only you. Which is why I suspect that you may have an installation problem...

has anyone else tried this?

kb

did the noise outside the lasso multiple many times?

No it didn't - I cut out a slightly higher level than you did, so that it was clearly visible, but nothing in the surrounding waveform changed at all. How long in time was the selection you were lassoing?

1500 samples, 1khz-5khz repeating 20 times highlights the issue the most.

kb

If you are saying that repeatedly cutting the same small section results in the levels immediately surrounding the area to apparently rise, then this isn't surprising - that's exactly what the repeated application of a filter would do - you've dramatically increased the skirt slope, and this will make the filter tend to ring at these frequencies. This will look like an increase in noise, but in fact it's just the filter skirt ringing. This also happens when you apply the notch filter very precisely and deeply to one frequency - you tend to get a vestigial remaining, but at a slightly higher or lower frequency - for the same reason. This is determined by the Laws of Physics, not Adobe.