Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:51:31 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

FWIW what prompted this was someone saying it was a good idea to always
normalise so the max came to -0.5dBFS. I was then pointing out this
could
be a mistake if you only looked at the sample values - for reasons shown
on
the page I reference above. The question then became, what does CEP
actually display? Does it show the user a waveform that would allows
them
to see if this problem was causing their output to exceed 0dBFS or not
for
arbitrary waveforms?


Jim.

Personally, I would not trust software like CEP at anywhere close to
OdBFS.
I have seen .wav files made on CEP (which the person who made them claims
are
*clean*) that are considerable clipped when uploaded to to mastering DAW.

Iain



Finger trouble, I think, Iain. I've been using first CEP then Audition
for a long time and I've never seen anything like that.


If it had been overshot a couple of dB with the traditional
10 or even 6dB headroom no harm would have been done. As
it was, his material was rejected.

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:12:14 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Is that so? I didn't know it was unique. I really only use Audition
because I have sort of grown up with it throughout its CoolEdit
incarnations, and I now use it more or less by instinct.''

But AFAIK this Centre Channel Extractor does not exist in CEP Pro
(or at least in the beta testers version that I am familiar with)

Did it only appear once Adobe bought it? I'm glad they did something
more useful than just making the interface "pretty".

It seems so. There were several Beta versions of CEP but none AFAIK
have the centre channel extractor. Under what pull down menu is it to be
found on Audition?

This is not commonly found on other audio software either.
I think that some versions of ProTools can do it.

Iain

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:52:13 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:12:14 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Is that so? I didn't know it was unique. I really only use Audition
because I have sort of grown up with it throughout its CoolEdit
incarnations, and I now use it more or less by instinct.''

But AFAIK this Centre Channel Extractor does not exist in CEP Pro
(or at least in the beta testers version that I am familiar with)

Did it only appear once Adobe bought it? I'm glad they did something
more useful than just making the interface "pretty".

It seems so. There were several Beta versions of CEP but none AFAIK
have the centre channel extractor. Under what pull down menu is it to be
found on Audition?

This is not commonly found on other audio software either.
I think that some versions of ProTools can do it.

Iain



Effects then Stereo Imagery

d

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 17:30:14 -0000, "David Looser"
wrote:

When I digitize vinyl I tend not to trim (except at the finish of a
side, I leave the needle drop in place).

Er... why? Isn't one of the nice things about a CD copy that you can get rid
of the thump as the needle hits the disc and the "snap crackle and pop" of
the lead in?

If you leave them in, the distortions of vinyl are less noticeable
afterwards :-)

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:30:28 +0000, Laurence Payne
wrote:

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 17:30:14 -0000, "David Looser"
wrote:

When I digitize vinyl I tend not to trim (except at the finish of a
side, I leave the needle drop in place).

Er... why? Isn't one of the nice things about a CD copy that you can get rid
of the thump as the needle hits the disc and the "snap crackle and pop" of
the lead in?

If you leave them in, the distortions of vinyl are less noticeable
afterwards :-)

Oh the power of the mind. The psychology of perception is a very
interesting subject and shows just how easily we can be misled.

--
Chris Isbell
Southampton, UK

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

FWIW what prompted this was someone saying it was a good idea to
always normalise so the max came to -0.5dBFS. I was then pointing out
this could be a mistake if you only looked at the sample values - for
reasons shown on the page I reference above. The question then
became, what does CEP actually display? Does it show the user a
waveform that would allows them to see if this problem was causing
their output to exceed 0dBFS or not for arbitrary waveforms?


Jim.

Personally, I would not trust software like CEP at anywhere close to
OdBFS. I have seen .wav files made on CEP (which the person who made
them claims are *clean*) that are considerable clipped when uploaded to
to mastering DAW.

That seems to support my feeling that a lack of the actual reconstructed
shape being displayed means the user can easily be blissfully unaware of
the problem they create when they scale up the loudness to get as close to
0dBFS as they can.

I am also wondering if the CEP waveform display is even a sinusoidal
spline. Might just be something simple like a cubic as that is trivial and
quick for a programmer. Just reach for your copy of 'Recipies in
Language' then copy the required routines into your program.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

In article , Don Pearce
wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:51:31 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


Personally, I would not trust software like CEP at anywhere close to
OdBFS. I have seen .wav files made on CEP (which the person who made
them claims are *clean*) that are considerable clipped when uploaded
to to mastering DAW.


Finger trouble, I think, Iain. I've been using first CEP then Audition
for a long time and I've never seen anything like that.

Perhaps because you are aware that it is wise to keep the signal levels
down and avoid any samples going above about -4dBFS.

This issue was publicised for professional audio engineers a few years ago
when some papers on it appeared in AES journals and conferences. But I
continue to wonder how many people working with audio are totally unaware
of these problems. Particularly given the established religious belief that
'louder is better'!

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

CEP and overshoots was Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:51:31 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Personally, I would not trust software like CEP at anywhere close to
OdBFS. I have seen .wav files made on CEP (which the person who made
them claims are *clean*) that are considerable clipped when uploaded
to to mastering DAW.


Finger trouble, I think, Iain. I've been using first CEP then Audition
for a long time and I've never seen anything like that.

I've been wondering if you might like to help with an experiment to check
this out. If I were to put up a couple of short LPCM WAV files of, say, a
'waveform from hell' or an offset impulse, could you look at them with CEP
and find the peaks in the zoomed in reconstruction waveforms?

I can predict what actual peak levels to expect. So if what you see agrees
with that it will tend to support that CEP can show a decent waveform. But
if the peak falls short it will show that it isn't reliable as a display
for overshoots.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

CEP and overshoots was Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:03:34 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:51:31 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Personally, I would not trust software like CEP at anywhere close to
OdBFS. I have seen .wav files made on CEP (which the person who made
them claims are *clean*) that are considerable clipped when uploaded
to to mastering DAW.


Finger trouble, I think, Iain. I've been using first CEP then Audition
for a long time and I've never seen anything like that.

I've been wondering if you might like to help with an experiment to check
this out. If I were to put up a couple of short LPCM WAV files of, say, a
'waveform from hell' or an offset impulse, could you look at them with CEP
and find the peaks in the zoomed in reconstruction waveforms?

I can predict what actual peak levels to expect. So if what you see agrees
with that it will tend to support that CEP can show a decent waveform. But
if the peak falls short it will show that it isn't reliable as a display
for overshoots.

Slainte,

Jim

Yes of course. Go ahead - I'll be interested.

d

Dual mono vs. mono mono interrogative...
 

On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:35:54 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

FWIW what prompted this was someone saying it was a good idea to
always normalise so the max came to -0.5dBFS. I was then pointing out
this could be a mistake if you only looked at the sample values - for
reasons shown on the page I reference above. The question then
became, what does CEP actually display? Does it show the user a
waveform that would allows them to see if this problem was causing
their output to exceed 0dBFS or not for arbitrary waveforms?


Jim.

Personally, I would not trust software like CEP at anywhere close to
OdBFS. I have seen .wav files made on CEP (which the person who made
them claims are *clean*) that are considerable clipped when uploaded to
to mastering DAW.

That seems to support my feeling that a lack of the actual reconstructed
shape being displayed means the user can easily be blissfully unaware of
the problem they create when they scale up the loudness to get as close to
0dBFS as they can.

I am also wondering if the CEP waveform display is even a sinusoidal
spline. Might just be something simple like a cubic as that is trivial and
quick for a programmer. Just reach for your copy of 'Recipies in
Language' then copy the required routines into your program.

Slainte,

Jim

What Iain is describing here is, I think probably not related to the
visual display. When setting levels it is not usual practice to look
at the screen and judge when the waveform is close enough to the peak.
You use the maths within the programme and choose your peak level that
way. Then you will listen to what you have created before saving it.

If a job reaches the mastering DAW with gross clipping as Iain
describes, then that procedure has not been followed and something
nasty has gone on. At a guess I would say that all the work was done
in floating point, which is a good idea as you don't have to dither
intermediate stages (that noise can build up), then the final
requantisation was done without regard to the fact that the peaks were
well above FS. Just my guess.

d