Adaptive Noise Reduction

Can someone please give me a fairly simple explanation of when and how to use AA's Adaptive Noise Reduction vs. the Standard Noise reduction?  Thanks.

This is purely a personal POV - I haven't found a single occasion when I'd want to use the adaptive NR in preference to the 'proper' one at all. Period. I think that the development time spent on this (and MIDI) could have been better spent elsewhere.

I think it goes without saying that every regular (lurker or contributor) on this forum respects your opinions (which you might or might not agree that you possess . . . never quite sure how your views on 'belief' apply to 'opinion'), Steve.  But for those of us who grew up in a world where chaos is slightly more respected (usually out of necessity) then is apparently the case of your universe, one extra sentence, merely as a pointer to how/why adaptive NR fails to be 'proper' . . . would have been appreciated

Proclamations are fine, and I have also failed to find a use for adaptive NR, I did one test and was underimpressed . . . but as with any application of the depth of CEP/AA I frequently assume, when I'm underimpressed by a feature, that it either does not really support the way I work, (For example, in EV, while I use band limited compression quite a bit I do not, typically, find a need for the Izotope multiband compressor, though if I ever got around to using AA in automated mixing I can see where it would be useful in MV) or I have failed to understand its specific demographic, rather then that it needs to be consigned to the dust bin because it fails to be 'proper'.  Fails the sniff test.

Creating a 'thing' during the mix process (as opposed to merely attempting to capture a snapshot of an event via the record process) frequently entails using a less then transparent 'process', that produces less then pristine results, in ways the device/process was never intended by its designers.  Without seeing 'how' it might be so, it occurred to me, as I read Steve's post, that Adaptive NR might be one of those tools whose broken use was more valuable (to me) then its intended use.

I presume the adaptive NR came out of the SoundBooth development, where it was clearly intended as an easy option for non-audio-specialists.  We may choose to use it when it does a good enough job, or to use more controllable* tools whose operation we understand and can thus use to best effect.

Paul

* I nearly wrote "more sophisticated", but then realised that that probably applies to the adaptive tool!

But for those of us who grew up in a world where chaos is slightly more respected (usually out of necessity) then is apparently the case of your universe, one extra sentence, merely as a pointer to how/why adaptive NR fails to be 'proper' . . . would have been appreciated

The original question was 'when and how', not 'why'. But if you really want to know why I think this, it's because on every track I've tried it on, I can hear it working. Being adaptive, of course, this is inevitable. And the more 'exposed' the track is, the more audible these effects are.

Without seeing 'how' it might be so, it occurred to me, as I read Steve's post, that Adaptive NR might be one of those tools whose broken use was more valuable (to me) then its intended use.

This might well be the case - couldn't argue with it being, in effect, an 'effect'. That would then end up as a 'how' question to answer, and since neither of us has got any idea of how it will be used in that context, because we don't yet know what the purpose will be, I can't comment any further.

never quite sure how your views on 'belief' apply to 'opinion'

Since I don't have any beliefs, they can't! My opinions are based only on my own experience, or the experience of others that I trust. In this instance, though, it is my own experience.

And incidentally, I think that Paul's surmisal of the background to adaptive NR is very likely to be correct, although I can't confirm it.

Indeed, I think it's mainly for video where the background noise is variable in nature and intensity.   The desire by video people for wind noise reduction is akin to the desire by audio people for vocal removal - well, some...