• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

PSA: Audacity

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
:(

So... what's out there that does what Audacity does and is better behaved (and/or, ideally, truly "open source")?
I don't know of anything. Audacity wasn't quite up to real DAW though it would suffice. It was like that for so many things. Not optimum for making test signals, but you could do it. Ditto for format conversion..........so on and so forth.

I can use a DAW for any recording (like Reaper which I pay for). I can use some other softwares for making test signals. A couple different things can do okay for spectrograms and FFTs. But none of those are all conveniently in one package. Or none to my knowledge. So I hope someone knows of a software that has been overlooked.
 

L5730

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
669
Likes
436
Location
East of England
Reaper, as great as it is doesn't allow sample editing on the waveform. There are reasons why this has never been implemented, but in such cases where I need to do this, I have found Audacity rather quick and easy to use. With a self scripted batch file, unpack it as a portable to the RamDisk and run from there. Make my edits, close and the program gone again.
Yes, sample editing could be done in Audition, but it's a much bigger program. I much prefer Reaper for all my normal uses, and don't mind having to edit a waveform in another editor.

It's a shame that these kinds of things happen. Companies sneaking in data collection crud. Tiresome.
 

L5730

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
669
Likes
436
Location
East of England
There is a 10 year old Audacity version compiled with ASIO support that works pretty well...
I think that is around v 1.5 or something. With WASAPI on later versions, (say v2.x) it's unnecessary. It's also a compiled version by an individual and that makes it a potential issue in itself. Are you getting the clean one made by that person or an infected one made by someone else - after all the ASIO version isn't 'legit' in terms of licencing so it's a bit underground, in a way. Compile from source and things should be safe though, but that is effort.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,588
Likes
38,291
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
can we come up with the last verified version that is "clean"?

I'm using 2.2.1
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,588
Likes
38,291
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
I see this:

"For the purposes of this Notice, WSM Group with registered office at Moskovsky pr-t,40-1301, Kalingrad Russia, 236004 (“Audacity”, “us”, “we”, or “our”) acts as the data controller for the Personal Data that is collected via the App and through the App. As a data controller, Audacity is responsible for ensuring that the processing of Personal Data complies with applicable protection law, and specifically with the General Data Protection Regulation.


Personal Data Audacity will collect includes:


  • OS version
  • User country based on IP address
  • OS name and version – which they collect for app analytics
  • CPU – which they collect for “improving our App”
  • Non-fatal error codes and messages (i.e. project failed to open)
  • Crash reports in Breakpad Minidump format.
  • Data necessary for law enforcement, litigation and authorities’ requests (if any) – which Audacity will collect for legal enforcement.

Audacity’s reason for collecting the OS name and version is: Legitimate interest of WSM Group to offer and ensure the proper functioning of the app.


Audacity’s reason for collection data necessary for law enforcement is : Legitimate interest of WSM Group to defend its legal rights and interest."
 

001

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 21, 2020
Messages
538
Likes
947
Pardon my ignorance, but I'm using 3.02 and I have specifically blocked all traffic with the built in firewall on Win10. Even though on their forum, the team has stated "Up to, and including the current Audacity 3.0.2, Audacity software has no network code and is incapable of connecting to the Internet."
I have not experienced any loss of functionality, even when editing fies on my nas. [smb connection]
I can't see any connections being made when I monitor traffic using 'Tinywall' [gui for Win10 built in firewall].
Like I said, I may just be speaking out of ignorance, but I'm not experiencing any spying.
 

Propheticus

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
431
Likes
644
Location
Vleuten, Netherlands
can we come up with the last verified version that is "clean"?

I'm using 2.2.1


In a new statement clarifying the main concerns:
  • Selling Data & Sharing - We do not and will not sell ANY data we collect or share it with 3rd parties. Full stop.
  • Data Collection - Data we collect is very limited.
    • IP address - which is pseudonymised and irretrievable after 24 hours.
    • Basic System Info - OS version and CPU type.
    • Error Report Data (Optional) - Sent manually by users as part of an Error Report.
  • Additional Data - We do not collect any additional data beyond the points listed above for any purpose.
[...]

The current version (3.0.2) does not support data collection any data of any kind and has no networking features enabled. (emphasis mine)

Edit: To confirm I've monitored the v3.0.2 using process monitor (sysinternals procmon64.exe) and did not see any TCP or UDP send operations when opening Audacity.
 
Last edited:

threni

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
1,277
Likes
1,519
Location
/dev/null
A slightly different perspective, from a source I find to be generally fair and reliable:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/07/no-open-source-audacity-audio-editor-is-not-spyware/

Includes:
---
This is pretty standard modern application telemetry, of the sort that even other open source applications—such as Mozilla Firefox—include. The biggest problem with this original telemetry statement is that it implies opt-out rather than opt-in data collection; although it's worth noting that even Firefox's telemetry is currently opt-out.
---

It might be standard but that's more a reflection of some people's tolerance of this sort of thing, rather than somehow making it ok. It's precisely why some people don't use Firefox, for example. And it's why a lot of open source software doesn't even have automatic bug reporting; they'd rather you submitted it manually even though this means they get a lot fewer, and less accurate, reports. Sending data onto the internet - whether its to a "tech-giant" or small developer - crosses a line. If you don't need it, don't do it. If you need it, make it really clear up front so every use can decide for themselves.

It reminds me of the time people woke up one morning and discovered that every time they did a check for updates and security fixes on their Raspberry Pi it was contacting Microsoft. "Sorry: I can't understand why you think this was a controversial thing to do" tweeted Eben Upton, the founder of the Raspberry Pi foundation. Yeah, it's a mystery, isn't it.
 

q3cpma

Major Contributor
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
3,060
Likes
4,416
Location
France
A slightly different perspective, from a source I find to be generally fair and reliable:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/07/no-open-source-audacity-audio-editor-is-not-spyware/
Fair, maybe, reliable, not really, it's mostly a website for lusers, after all. Complete with unbeatable arguements such as "it's also a fact of life in 2021" or "others do it too".
Too bad, since I did think Ars wasn't too bad, as it was one of the only mainstream websites that posted about Intel's ICC "competition cripple" function fiasco, even while receiving ad money from them, but I guess it was a long time ago or a lone editor; they probably continued to use proprietary "benchmarks" compiled with it, anyway.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom