Login

0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Officially Licensed 3rd Party Developer Libraries
Free 3rd Party Programs

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby yr » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:56 pm

Relax and take a deep breath. Now go and re-read everything I wrote (and not partial quotes). I think our mutual opinions about each-other are clear and uninteresting to the rest of this forum.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby ngarjuna » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:01 pm

yr wrote:Relax and take a deep breath. Now go and re-read everything I wrote (and not partial quotes). I think our mutual opinions about each-other are clear and uninteresting to the rest of this forum.

Take your own advice and remember who it was that took an otherwise friendly discussion with varying opinions into the mud.
User avatar
ngarjuna
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:04 pm
Location: Miami

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby yr » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:15 pm

Nothing friendly about the term "bizarre" in the context you used it.

I don't believe that the dynamic limitations when using certain presets are always derived from the hardware. In that sense, the R2R is a very user friendly library since it doesn't "ring" that easily.

Once you start adding TB+ instances you need to be more careful though. If you don't trust your ears you can always use the vst analyzer with the "effectchainer" to see what is going on.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby prosodio » Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:50 pm

I have never found any tracks, even in very dynamic ones, where I couldn´t use nebula for digital ringings. I think it´s not a difficult task, even more: aren´t we too much inside analyzing nebula preset´s behaviors? I´m tired of vst analyzers, test tones and the hell... Let´s use our ears, learning to use nebula isn´t so difficult!!!

Greetings
prosodio
User Level X
User Level X
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:55 pm

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby ngarjuna » Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:13 pm

yr wrote:Nothing friendly about the term "bizarre" in the context you used it.

Except that it is bizarre to claim momentary crest factors of > 18dB, a position you have since retracted (because you were never actually talking about crest factors but rather macro level changes).

Also calling something that you find strange "bizarre" isn't unfriendly, it simply means that the notion is unusual:
Merriam-Webster wrote:: strikingly out of the ordinary: as
a : odd, extravagant, or eccentric in style or mode
b : involving sensational contrasts or incongruities
User avatar
ngarjuna
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:04 pm
Location: Miami

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby yr » Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:51 pm

The term "crest factor" is meaningless in this discussion. It's already been dealt with by Bob and should be clear from many of my posts. I can't retract what I never said...

Implying that what I described as part of my work is bizarre or "sensationally contrasting" if you will, is certainly offensive. It's also rather strange when you lack the experience to back what you say and choose to cling to the "crest factor" mantra instead.

If you chose to carry on this "personal debate" try clarifying what you wrote here:

the actual range, the sweet spot in which you can avoid said problematic behavior, is essentially derived from the analog audio path itself
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby ngarjuna » Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:04 pm

yr wrote:The term "crest factor" is meaningless in this discussion. It's already been dealt with by Bob and should be clear from many of my posts. I can't retract what I never said...

Implying that what I described as part of my work is bizarre or "sensationally contrasting" if you will, is certainly offensive. It's also rather strange when you lack the experience to back what you say and choose to cling to the "crest factor" mantra instead.

If you chose to carry on this "personal debate" try clarifying what you wrote here:

the actual range, the sweet spot in which you can avoid said problematic behavior, is essentially derived from the analog audio path itself

Let me try to summarize this slowly so maybe you can keep up this time:
Bob and I were happily discussing the advantages and disadvantages of peak versus average metering.

I made the claim that when a signal is locked in (meaning staying at, since you seem to have missed this concept several times already) at 0VU you aren't very likely to be flirting with 0dBFS because steady state signals don't have crest factors that large.

You came in and objected stating that you have to deal with dynamic changes that big all the time.

I explained that we weren't talking about macro dynamic changes at all but rather momentary crest factor; and that, if your level changes dramatically, then the average changes too (so it doesn't really matter if you're using a peak meter or an average meter in regards to watching macro level changes and was, hence, not related to the discussion that Bob and I were having).

So I questioned again if you were actually dealing with crest factors that big and your bullshit, patronizing answer was that I should use some high end pres and SDCs...

Then, after realizing that you just went on the warpath due to your own misunderstanding, you spent several posts trying to steer the conversation away from that particular fact: claims of unfriendliness, offense, just relax, etc. You want to end a discussion you dragged into the mud as the white hatted voice of reason. Not gonna happen.
User avatar
ngarjuna
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:04 pm
Location: Miami

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby yr » Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:18 pm

You talk about "locked to 0VU signal" in relation to dynamic music (you choose classical as an example) and claim that I'm "uninformed"? That's quite funny. How is it achieved- do you tell the musicians (all 120 of them) to observe the VU meters while playing? or should we compress all tracks to -18rms average prior to using Nebula?
In case you haven't noticed :
http://www.acustica-audio.com/forum/ind ... =40#p16960

You can't expect me to accept your (mis)use of terms, or your unfounded claims about Nebula presets. No need to derail the discussion either- your not having a private chat with Bob and you should be able to defend your views (if you can).

Just try to explain how does a vu meter help you avoid the digital artifacts and how did you come to the conclusion that all presets have the same dynamic-range as their hardware counterparts. Both claims were made by you and are relevant to this thread.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby void » Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:45 pm

Anyway,back on topic...

I have been finding reducing the input pad by 10db and more, and tape booster, resulting in that tape sound being much more noticable and prefer this to trying to get as close to 0dbFS as possible.

Curiously, Adding the same amount to the output dosent equate to equal loudness when you bypass nebuala. Is this to be expected or normal?
void
User Level I
User Level I
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:10 am

Re: 0dbFS and r2r , crank the input?

Postby yr » Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:59 pm

void wrote:Anyway,back on topic...

I have been finding reducing the input pad by 10db and more resulting in that tape sound being much more noticable and prefer this to trying to get as close to 0dbFS as possible.

Curiously, Adding the same amount to the output dosent equate to equal loudness when you bypass nebuala. Is this to be expected or normal?


It depends on how the padin/padout were edited by the developer, and the way a certain preset effects the spectrum. It's normal.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd party libraries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 9 guests

cron