+++ Audacity V3.0 Download Link +++

Thanx for the heads up Jim.

Thanks Jim !

Wow, this should be on everyones list. thanks for the heads up.

Thanks Jim. Audacity is absolutely one of the best audio tools available.

Except for nearly all the commercially supported DAWs, IMO.

I downloaded 3.0 and my opinion is unchanged. Great for the hobbyist who wants to spend a lot of time fiddling around to get everything right. Useless for pros who bill by the hour and are on deadlines. When Time=$$$, Audacity is the most expensive DAW there is. Second place still belongs to Reaper.

Audacity is still free, true, and still worth every penny.

A little harsh, but accurate. A lot depends on what level of user you are. I use an audio editor every day so I’m very skilled and can make any of several work. My DAW does something different.

Most of the time my workflow is BIAB, then DAW, then stereo audio editor.

You still need different tools for different functions. It also follows that if all you have is a hammer, ...

Yes, I too have and use multiple DAWs and audio editors. In any week 3 to 12 new projects are released for online worship these days.

If Studio One or Audition needed you to go through the levels of nit-noid tinkering that Audacity requires, you'd be an unhappy camper.

For me, Audacity exists so that, when a student (or choir or band member during this pandemic) tells me he/she wants to use it, I can look at it again and make other recommendations. Unfortunately, I have to support what others use to generate the tracks I combined into the finished project.

One look at this page is enough to cause "Oh hell no!" from me.

New in 3.0


Then I downloaded to see it was even worse than that.

audacity is simple for simple tasks. i would never dream of using it for music the way I use RB. but for recording 'what you hear' like radio programs or streaming music, normalising the file and converting to mp3 its ideal.

i know it does lots of other things but i'm not prepared for the learning curve when i have RB

All.
my opinions.
1.audacity.
i think its great that products like audacity exist.
anything that helps people with limited funds get their musical ideas down is wonderfull imho.
when i read all these "daw software debates" on the net i often think to myself "i bet the hitmakers of the past and platinum and gold record record producers and songwriters woulod "still" produce hits if they only had one daw product. eg audacity in this case".
"because thats their brilliance".

the music biz is crazy imho. but ive been around the block enough and interracted with enough people in it way more talented than i , so i know its more than the gear/rigs used.
if audacity was the only brand available i'm 100 per cent sure that the george martin/beatles combo would still produce "brilliance". they would probably be really happy
with not haveing to worry bout limited no of traks.

frankly "for me" , i like their early more raw songs eg on the "with the beatles" album. i like the energy of these early songs.

2. Reaper.
all i can say bout reaper , haveing been a user since 0.99 release is, and i'm not trying to influence anyone away from their current daw "love".
just read the write ups on it by sound on sound mag on their web site, and goodness knows how many other reviews of it. "then" peruse the many helpfull videos at reaper.fm done by grammy winner kenny Gioia . and read the zillions of comments on the web by people whove moved to it from other daw platforms.
(there are also interesting threads along the lines of "can you produce a great record useing only reapers built in plug ins".)
or, if really sceptical go to reaper.fm and ask users there why they moved to reaper.
once again, i believe the martin/beatles combo would still produce hits if reaper was the only software available.

ps. a thread that stunned me this week re apple and daw work. anyone know anything ?
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/1347895-audio-drivers-userspace-end-mac-proaudio-era.html

best.
oldmuso

I personally consider Audacity more an audio editor than a DAW. The program has several feature deficiencies I believe a DAW requires. I dislike that Audacity has little MIDI compatibility. As far as I know Audacity can not accommodate Acidized audio loops.

At the same time I really do not consider Audacity to be an audio editor in the strictest sense of the term. I believe editors should not require storage folder creation but instead rely on whatever storage container the audio file is stored in.

However, it is very good at performing the tasks I ask it to perform.

I played with it for a week when moving from four track cassette to computer. It was too fiddly and mystifying for me so I quickly left it behind and took up Cakewalk Pro Audio 9.3 which I quite enjoyed for about 5 years as it was fairly intuitive PLUS I bought the manual. I moved to Reaper in 2010 to facilitate collaboration and have enjoyed it since.
Audacity doesn't do anything I can't do in Reaper.
I used to use WAVEREPAIR to record LPs for conversion to CD and I retain it for the occasional lopping of beginning/end when I've forgotten to edit properly when rendering in Reaper IF I've dithered to 16bit/144.1 1st.
Downplaying Reaper is corksniffing in the main.

it's a good piece of software but as with all 'public domain' software it seems to lack any real support. Questions get the stock reply 'read the manual' often followed by a detailed description of which paragraph is relevant. In almost 100% of cases it would be quicker to answer the question

Yep



I hear you. When you're on a deadline and Reaper isn't behaving, just call Tech Support at …

Oh wait, no you can't. Reaper doesn't have phone support. It's cheapware and you don't expect it so there it is.

BIAB, DP, Pro Tools, Logic and many others do. Yes, even Logic.

Mike Halloran.
re "cheapware" and no phone support comments.
i feel i must comment in reply about reaper and its superb capabilities that have served me well for around 14 years now.
other users like pipeline can verify my comments.
and there are loads of other pg users also, useing it.
1. at no time in my useage have i ever had a problem with reaper where i needed phone support. in fact ive found it so very easy to use i dont think ive ever had to ask for a rapid answer on the user forum (at reaper.fm).
ive found also phone lines can get tied up, as my wife experienced "for the umpteenth time " THIS WEEK with a big (not music product) organisation.
if i ever DID have a problem the reaper user forum is so heavily populated by users from all over the world, from what ive seen over the years, a rapid reply would be forthcoming.
ive had so many problems over the years with various organisations phone support , you have no idea.
ie waiting for ages.
2. imho (and ive worked in the past with some brilliant high level software engineers way better than i ) reaper is a superb piece of software engineering.
(note i have no ties to the cockos company that develops it in any way whatsoever. just a registered user like i am with pg.)
it was even brilliant way way back when i first tried it at 0.99 version.
its now at version 6. if memory serves me well even the versions before version 2 had such features as automation/folders/small footprint includeing running from a usb drive/dongle free/mixing dx and vst plug ins (i can well remember useing pg's nice dx plug ins in early versions, and still do)/a raft of free plug ins that lots of people thought were the bees knees includeing pros, and still do/pdc if i remember/plug in resource useage/advanced audio routing/tuning out of pitch/ripple editing for radio ? and goodness knows what else etc etc etc. the list of features is endless even before version 2.

at that time competitors did not have various of the foregoing features , thus your comments absolutely stun me.
i would respectfully suggest you go on the reaper user forum, and ask both pro and non pro users from all over the world why they love reaper like i do.
or an INDEPENDENT FORUM like www.gearslutz.com music computers section and ask the same question.

(i also love my wife, biab and realband, and steak and kidney pie, and shelby mustangs and caterham sports cars lol << which i cant afford.)

my prediction. the reaper steamroller will continue.

all the best to you.
oldmuso.

Everyone has their personal preferences and specific needs. I use Audacity for almost every song I post. I find it does everything I need it to. And I am using using Audacity 3.0. But have used the previous versions prior to the 3.0 release a short while back.

Perhaps my needs are considerably less demanding than most of you. But I am very pleased with it.

Below is a song I recorded a few days ago using nothing but BIAB 2021 (Windows version). I sent the tracks directly from the BIAB chord input sheet to Audacity 3.0. After working the tracks over a bit in Audacity, I posted to Soundcloud and used their mastering software (it's an upgrade option at SoundCloud). I am very happy with the results. My wife is the vocalist. The backing tracks have been "touched" by nothing but the BIAB chord input sheet (no RB), Audacity and the Soundcloud mastering option. I think it came out really nice.

The vocal was recorded through an AT2035 condenser mic into a Peavey Nashville 112 Guitar amp. I use the Peavey amp in lieu of a mixing board because I prefer the sound "color" it gives our vocals. I use the headphone-out of the amp and plug it straight into my desktop's mic-in port and record the vocals directly into Audacity and then adjust the vocal in Audacity. I then blend the vocals with the BIAB tracks already loaded into Audacity. I then send to a premade desktop folder as both a WAV file and a high bit rate MP3. I then upload to Soundcloud when I want to.

Audacity is the closest thing I use to a DAW. But, again, perhaps my needs are far lesser than those of other folks. But, I do like the final sound I get using Audacity. So far, we've had 28 songs picked up for one opportunity or another using this very method. Not a single one of them went through a traditional DAW.

No matter your needs, preferences, and wants, good luck to everyone with their music.

Alan

If you're interested, here's the link to our latest song (it's a 1960s era Bosaa Nova): https://soundcloud.com/alananddi/you-remix

Nice testimonial for Audacity. I love using Audacity for single track waveform screen shots. The GUI or interface really lends itself to focusing attention on the track waveform instead of the program.

As with everything, Audacity is a nice tool to have in your production toolbox.

Hi Alan, what a gorgeous song! Di did a great job with the vocals! Thanks for sharing it and for sharing your workflow.

I like Audacity, as well, and have downloaded the new version.

Anyone else having a problem recording an audio stream with the new Audacity? I'm still trying to set the options, no luck yet. I have NCH Soundtap as a backup recorder, but still....(I do a bit of bouncing back and forth.)

+1 for what Alan said ^^

I stand by my opinions of both. Time=$$$ and I make my living doing music online and collaborating with about 40 others in the process.

I don't care who else uses them. I download from time to time but they offer nothing to me. if they did, I'd jump in a second.

I do find it amusing that the fanboys mention both at every opportunity and some can't do so without ++ links in every post ++ as if there's something to be proved by this — I think that's silly. Those who use ProTools, DP, Logic, Cubase Pro, FL Studio, BitWing and other pro DAWs tend not to do that.

Use whatever gets the job done and if the freeware and cheapware do it, I'm ok with that.

I don't understand why you and others feel threatened when I say that pro studios tend to use professional tools. I'm certainly not threatened by what you use.

The object here is to make music. I'm doing fine and I hope you are, too.

Mike.
let me reply.
1. i dont feel threatened when people say "professional tools".
in fact i have high respect for the big recording studios of yore that produced decades of great hits/music.
its also sad that so many that produced those fantastic hits have gone out of business.
(in ways due to the project studio and tech.)
its also sad that so much recording engineering talent has been lost or retired etc etc. the same goes for session musician/songwriting talent.
talent which i lament that i just dont hear in lots of top 50 charting songs today. ok maybe the occasional song i like. but thats about it. i rarely hear song hooks that grab me today. like china grove or mercury blues or heartbreaker or panama.
2. let me be clear. although ive been round the recording block more than a few times ; i'm not inferring i'm any great talent/recording or mixdown engineer/or post or mastering engineer/or songwriter etc etc.
the only reason ive done slews of songs in my life is because its in my creative soul at my core.
like an itch that is always bugging me to write a song lol.
ive certainly no desire to be "big" because i like to lead a very peacefull creative life with my lovely wife.
maybe my songs are junk. i dunno. but creating them is loads of fun.
3. mike ive used everything to do songs. from grrreat gear in big studios down to total junk gear. from 24 trak classic 2 inch multitraks and massive consoles down to 10 doillar mics.
the only reason i'm a "fanboy" as you say of reaper is it just works for me day in/out. in fact thinking about it in 14 years of use i dont think ive had one crash (i'm thinking hard. maybe a bad plug in once.)
that is jolly good in my book.
also let me say reaps was one of the first daw's that incorporated certain features before some of the major names if i remember. i think pdc being one feature.
4. if i'm so wrong about reaps mike why have so many people (includeing many "pros") moved to it from other daws ?
if you want to spend a hilarious sunday afternoon some time. read up on gearspace.com (formerly gearslutz) as well as other recording forums and the web , and type in the following....
"reaper versus xxxxxxx" where xxxxxxxx is another daw name.
talking of "pros" then type in "tafkat dawbench xxxxxxx" where xxxxxxx is the competitor daw name. if you read those dawbench reports youll see that reaps is often cited as the performance standard against which other daws are measured in very in depth testing.
also reapers extensive features and tools have been extensively documented in such publications as sound on sound.
eg reaps native plug ins and various tricks.

and thats all i'll say.
i wish you too happy times creating.

best.
oldmuso.

Always look at it if interested—or don't if you're not.

As to making your own recommendations, do it if you feel like that would help others. If you haven't actually looked at it then you are not helping anyone by parroting the fanboy hype.

Hi Al. I'd like to use the highlighted comments I've made from your post to foster some deeper discussion into Audacity and BIAB.

I have Audacity 2.4.2 and it's sufficient to meet my meager needs for capturing and editing audio. I currently have Studio One Pro and Cakewalk available along with RealBand if I'm in need of a DAW. I also have three stand-alone, hard disk digital recorders that each have proprietary DAW firmware and digital effects. However, with BIAB projects, I rarely have need to use any of these to complete a song project and find it faster, easier and quite beneficial to stay totally in BIAB.

Three tools permit me to create complex and complete songs in just BIAB. They have been included in the program for many years, roughly since 2014 as far as I can determine. Although they're longtime features of the program, other than myself I've never seen a song posted that was created with this triple combination of tools.

I'd like to introduce you folks to these tools since it's my experience that BIAB offers more versatility and retains all of the unique and exclusive capabilities of the BIAB program that are lost when BIAB files are exported to Audacity or another DAW. RealBand has much of BIAB's capabilities but not all. It's also a faster workflow not to have to open a song project in RB and frozen tracks can be maintained rather than regenerated by staying in BIAB rather than moving to RB.

The first tool and most pertinent to this conversation is the BIAB Audio Editor. I'd like you to share a bit more with us what you mean when you say you "work over the tracks a bit in Audacity". I've found that I can do all of the basic editing and more using the BIAB Audio Editor than I can in Audacity or any of my DAW's. The BIAB Audio Editor is very robust and is on par with my most advanced stand-alone digital recorder's built-in complete proprietary DAW. I'm interested to learn what you may be doing in Audacity that can't be done in BIAB's Audio Editor. If any interest is raised in this conversation, I'll be glad to share some specific and unique results that can be accessed because an audio track is still in BIAB and hasn't been exported to a DAW.

The second tool is the Performance Track. The Performance Track allows any sound media recognized by BIAB such as RealTracks, RealDrums, WAV/WMA/MP3/MP4 audio, MIDI, SuperMidi, HI-Q Midi, Loops or any combination of these media to be converted to audio for editing on the Audio Channel and then converted so that the edited audio can reside on any of the other BIAB Mixer Legacy Tracks. (Bass, Piano, Drums, Guitar, Strings, Melody and Soloist). With their introduction this year, the 16 new Utility Tracks are now also included.

The third tool is the RealTrack Medley Feature. The Medley Feature provides a 10 channel, RealTrack sub-mixer to each of the seven BIAB Mixer's Legacy Channels. This feature allows the user to have over 70 total RealTrack instruments in a single render of a BIAB song. Combined with Performance Tracks mix capabilities, the total can run into the hundreds. With the addition of Utility Tracks, the total is literally in the thousands. Don't let these remarkable numbers throw you off. The reality is this capability is another way of saying BIAB functions as a multi track digital recorder or DAW. Many DAWs can have an unlimited track count and are only limited by the PC CPU power. In BIAB, tracks are not limited to 8 which has been a myth since 2014.

As I said, I'm interested to compare and challenge BIAB against Audacity and see if BIAB can meet the challenge. It's a solid bet for me because I've yet to find a situation in my workflow where it's not up to the task but I've never seen it used by someone else and their workflow in Audacity, Reaper or other DAW's including RealBand.

I hope there's some interest, questions and comments.

EDIT: I forgot to mention your song. It's great. A wonderful performance by Mrs. Di and you did an fantastic re-mix. Enjoyed it.

Charlie
thanks for mention of creating a BIAB project using the BIAB Audio Editor, Performance Track RealTrack Medley Feature

i'm going to research these topics using the online manual and whatever videos i can find
i'm probably have ?s after the research

may i suggest you create a Udemy course detailing your workflow from idea to completed song

thanks for all the help you provide via these forums

Thanks for commenting. It's likely a bit soon to consider a Udemy course but I appreciate the suggestion. The Audio Editor will be familiar to anyone familiar with Audacity or a hardware, stand-alone digital multitrack recorder like the Tascam DP-24 or Zoom R-24. There is one 'surprise' hidden in the Audio Editor that most don't know is there.

If interest is shown and some discussion evolves, this would be a good candidate for a PG Music tutorial video.

Since the Audacity 3 release, the company has been bought by Muse Group, overseen by Martin Keary, the new head of design at MuseScore.

This should be very good news. Mr. Keary has been an outspoken critic of stupid things that Audacity and MuseScore do so poorly. Perhaps with him at the helm, both might finally become good.

The current plan is for both to remain free — or free-ish as MuseScore is currently.

We'll see.

Tantacrul: I am now in charge of Audacity

Mike, Thanks for sharing the video link. It was great to meet some of the developers behind Audacity.

Alan,

Here's an Audacity story.

I had a neighbor down the street who went to NC State to study chemical engineering. He was/is a jazz genius in addition to being a chemical engineer. A killer keyboard player and a great kid. We jammed all the time. On weekends when he didn't have anything to do, he might tear his car down in the front yard, replace his brake pads for fun and put it all back together in just a few hours before doing his homework. That kind of kid.

He recorded a perfect facsimile cover version of Toto's Africa playing all the instruments and singing all the parts using Audacity 2 and a simple Radio Shack style mixer. It sounded just like Toto.

Then Toto played Raleigh. Somehow, my buddy bumped into Steve Lukather after the show and asked if he could play the cover on his iPhone for him and Lukather said sure. Apparently, Lukather said afterwards: "Dude, that is the most awesome cover of my song that I have ever heard. Where did you record that?"

"In my bedroom. On Audacity."

"Who's playing?"

"It's all me."

"Singing?"

"Me."

They bonded.

I am sure there is a lesson to be learned there somewhere.

Maybe Pat Metheny said it best:

"Man, I don't know about you, but me, I'm all about listening to people who know how to play."

Ok, I'll bite. What lesson?

Any DAW or stand-alone multitrack or even the original PortaStudio (1979) or a TEAC 3340S (1972) could have made that possible.

I think that was the lesson. It is not the tool but the person using the tool. As you pointed out great music can be recorded using many different tools such as Audacity, any DAW, stand-alone multitrack, Reel to Reel, etc.

If I'm wrong then someone can correct me.

Though I have Presonus Studio One and love it, there are somethings that are just much more easier in Audacity.

...Deb

Mario, you are a sage my friend. A true prophet.

Getting very warm there.



I would love to hear what others say about the "lesson."

Of all the recording devices mentioned (or any tool for that matter), the one feature that none of them can possibly provide, which the leader of Toto immediately recognized was:

[____________________________________________]

Fill in the blank here.

and almost everything else is not.

The day that it supports MIDI input, I might be able to change my mind. Ok, a multitrack tape recorder doesn't either but that's not a DAW and Audacity claims to be one.

And before someone rushes to tell me why I'm mistaken, you can't use a MIDI keyboard directly within Audacity as the app does not have the ability to record or write MIDI files nor communicate with a MIDI keyboard. The ability to import/export MIDI files aka Note Tracks is not the same as direct MIDI support.

Note Tracks as of April 13 2021

You are correct, but there are also a number of things that Audacity can't do that a DAW can.

This is from a google/bing search:

By strict definition, Audacity is a DAW (digital audio workstation) as it is audio software capable of recording, editing and producing audio files. However, due to its basic features, it is better described as a simple audio editor, lacking the functionality of more advanced DAW software.

This is from Audacity's opening page:

Audacity is an easy-to-use, multi-track audio editor and recorder for Windows, macOS, GNU/Linux and other operating systems.
Developed by a group of volunteers as open source.

So if going by strict definitions then BiaB is a notation program. We all know that it is not but because it has limited notation functions it could be called a notation program, at least this is what the "experts" say.

I agree with you that in reality Audacity is not a DAW, regardless of what the experts call a DAW.

{edit} but it is a useful tool to have in your tool box.

Talent

Ouch, that water is hot Jim!

"...the freeware and cheapware...fanboy..."
Don't forget that Reaper can be both free or cheap so perhaps it's wine in a box sniffing
rather than cork sniffing.
BUT if you really have that slant shouldn't you be bagging BIAB too? Oh, that's right, it's expensive.

Mike,
You've probably have some serious/significant skill and talent with a DAW but, personally, I don't take advice from folk who don't display their wares. I need to weigh the evidence with the testimony.

Those I was collaborating with at the time demonstrated Reaper's value when used by someone experienced with it. I have modest means but, after using Reaper for three months, paid for it as it demonstrated it's value for my purposes.
I used Audacity to teach recording to 12 year olds...it worked a treat within that circumstance as children aren't afraid to experiment/try/hit the button whereas I'm a little too old for that.

rayc.
much as i love reaps too i also think that pg's own powertraks is a superb deal also at 50 bucks.
ive lost count the number of times that bars view in powertraks rescued a session to fix up things ages ago.
(bars view isnt known by lots of people and tricks one can do with it !)
chock full of features includeing some really deep great midi features i used to like to show to people in days of yore that had spent loads of money on recording software
that didnt have some of the deep midi features of powertraks.
i started on powertraks , imho a superb product thats got better and better over the years.
in summary ..yes there are bad cheap products in the world BUT there are also excellent cheap products as well.
and powertraks and reaps are two great products imho.

my call is neither reaps nor powertraks are going away anytime soon and will continue getting better and better.
(psst pg LOL LOL powertraks on raspberry pi !)

best
om

Could you ask that in English please?

My signature displays my hardware and the apps I use. What are you missing?

I am quite upfront that what I use saves me time. I bill for my time and the apps I use save me money. Audacity, Reaper and MuseScore (and Dorico, Overture, Notion, Encore — all of which I have licenses for as well) do not.

Why do I have to explain to you?

Mike,
your response is a perfect encapsulation to make my case for me. Making a list? Checking it twice? Are you gonna find out what's cheap & what's nice?
Clearly you like what you have and a fair dollop of sophistry helps almost anyone do the same. You're not persuasive: pedantry rarely is. You're not influential: harping rarely is. You're not able to accommodate the views of others without giving your considered opinion in a way that reinforces your self worth. Crikey, live long and prosper.

Interesting JAOM,
I've not encountered it. I'm not disposed against it and will, based on your recco, give it a look. I am comfy with Reaper at present and do very little MIDI, (as little as I can get away with), but will give it a looksee when time permits.
I agree these "cheapies" aren't going anywhere soon and with Reaper being fully Apple Silicon ready/compliant they've an eye on the future and a user/developer base that's happy to push its boundaries.
Stay well.
THANKS

Rayc.
g'day mate.
if you have biab you also have realband included which incorporates (and pg can correct me on this..just ask pg support) all the nice powertraks features as far as i know. but realband has the added auto accompaniement features of course.
thus you have all of the deep features of powertraks re midi etc as far as i know in realband.
i dont use midi as much now cos of real traks. but midi can be very very usefull.
if you want to delve into midi a lot further i would suggest going through all the pg vids // faq's etc on this pg site. and rb vids of course.
and at reaper.fm are a slew of midi reaps vids by grammy winner kenny gioia and also on you tube. at the reaps site just clik on vids. lots of them.
ps if not done so check out the reaper stash...
its huuuuuge.lol at reaper.fm

every happiness mate. ive lived all over the world.
hope to visit aussie some day with my wife.
OM

Clearly, you don't actually read my posts. That's ok. I'm not writing for you.

Mike, I think the problem is that you don't actually take in what other people write. Your post is pure projection flavoured with sophistry...(How about those grapes? Sour enough for ya?).
It appears, to me, you read others while deciding how to respond to/counter them. In other words you're reading of the words of me, for example, is an aggressive defensive preparation activity.
I am aware that you're not writing for me. That's easily divined as you are, most certainly, writing for you.
Your realm on the technical side of things is an important one and I do hope your efforts are fruitful. Sadly all science & knowledge needs the adjunct of good communication skills if it is to be embraced. That need, the ability to reach and explain to the grunt like me, is reasonably important.

Thanks,
I subscribe to Kenny and am, almost, able to ignore his phrasing now.
He's very good at explaining and demonstrating in simple terms.
Bite sized phrases and bite sized knowledge.

Australia was a wonderful country...we've been heading down the hole for a decade though. Perhaps by the time you & your good wife visit we'll have or heads held high again.
THANKS!

Rayc.
yeah those vids are good.
other "cheap daws" i'm keeping my eyes on are mixcraft,
samplitude music studio by magix and the harrison mixbus
product based on ardour i believe. <<harrison big studio console emulation in software.

you live in a beautifull country ray.
best
oldmuso

Anyone using Ableton... Just downloaded Live Lite version. A free licence was provided with my purchase of Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol / S49 Smart Keyboard Controller. not sure yet if I'll use it, but it does interface nicely with the S49 controller...

Here's the You Tube video that walked me through trouble-shooting "Audacity will not record." As you might have guessed, it is in the system settings and the program preference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc6te_50myg