If you lower the volume of an high rms material to match the one of a lower material, if the mastering engineer made a good work you won't notice a difference or even find a difference in dynamic.*
Only if you have access to initial non processed material and compare to processed you'll hear a difference.
You could in finding different release of the same material however as each time their is a rerelease each time it is mastered again...
Biggest difference you'll find is between vinyl and digital from same material.
Here is where i am about it:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mus...ts-peaks-data-genres-music-2.html#post6157069
Really crazy situation as i have a very very nice digital chain!
* only an analysis through a meter could tell you for sure.
Only if you have access to initial non processed material and compare to processed you'll hear a difference.
You could in finding different release of the same material however as each time their is a rerelease each time it is mastered again...
Biggest difference you'll find is between vinyl and digital from same material.
Here is where i am about it:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mus...ts-peaks-data-genres-music-2.html#post6157069
Really crazy situation as i have a very very nice digital chain!
* only an analysis through a meter could tell you for sure.
I'm sure it will. Right now it's close enough to audacity from a GUI perspective to make me cocky and far enough away to frustrate. Just have to climb the first couple of walls.
I'm just intrigued about some aspects of 'dynamics' and what makes certain recordings sound dynamic and others flat and lifeless. Eventually might inform my DIY or at least make sure the amplifiers and speakers I build/mod are up to the task. And inform one of my stranger collecting habits
Now can anyone recommend a recording of Handel's Zadok the priest that is not compressed to oblivion? I know it was originally written for a small choir, but with larger numbers when they come in live several internal organs run for cover. My copies on vinyl are sadly lacking.
Bill, I'm sure you'll get around just fine. I had to opposite path, from Goldwave I learned Audacity. It took some getting used to because overall they are very similar, but details and controls are different.
Audacity is easier for multitrack. GW has a nice batch command that can save a lot of time processing multiple files. I use both, depending on what I need to do.
The Goldwave de-click is the best I've found so far, if used on the "Relaxed" setting. I've made Relaxed the default de-click setting now. It cleans up LP recordings nicely with no artifacts that I can hear. I find overall/spectrum noise reduction to have fewer artifacts in Audacity, Goldwave can ring and get sour if pushed at all. GW has very good volume matching, normalizing and stereo tools.
Audacity is easier for multitrack. GW has a nice batch command that can save a lot of time processing multiple files. I use both, depending on what I need to do.
Interesting the center channel isn't working out with wave guide speakers. I also listen to wave guide point source speakers and have excellent imaging. There is depth that extends beyond the wall in front of me on many recordings but this depth collapses a bit with the visual que of the wall. I find imaging not so good though if I go left and right of center and was hoping that a center would expand the 'good zone'.
On an optimistic note its amazing how far generally this forum has come over the years, when I first came here a lot of the tools that are now cheap and commonplace like calibrated measurement mics where 'exotic'. The Toole papers on desirable characteristics of speakers didn't exist. Finite element tools and high quality loudspeaker design tools where not free and accessible and horns where a 'dark art'. Now the only thing that stops you making a speaker as good as any commercial one is the time your willing to devote to it.
On an optimistic note its amazing how far generally this forum has come over the years, when I first came here a lot of the tools that are now cheap and commonplace like calibrated measurement mics where 'exotic'. The Toole papers on desirable characteristics of speakers didn't exist. Finite element tools and high quality loudspeaker design tools where not free and accessible and horns where a 'dark art'. Now the only thing that stops you making a speaker as good as any commercial one is the time your willing to devote to it.
I feel the same, that the center image will go left and right with me if I move, which is why I thought a physical center channel would place the center image dead solid in the middle. But that really wasn't the case at all. There was not a single metric where having the center was advantageous.
I also agree on how far this forum has come. I was just thinking this the other day, that this forum is a very mature, and impressive place. I am still thankful to Geddes for blazing the trail on waveguides. He put up with so much flack for the last 10 - 15 years. But he was unwavering on the facts, and now look what we have with Marcel's thread. Building off Geddes work, he has developed a better waveguide than anyone in the entire audio industry...
I have a 610mm version hopefully coming my way quite soon.
I also agree on how far this forum has come. I was just thinking this the other day, that this forum is a very mature, and impressive place. I am still thankful to Geddes for blazing the trail on waveguides. He put up with so much flack for the last 10 - 15 years. But he was unwavering on the facts, and now look what we have with Marcel's thread. Building off Geddes work, he has developed a better waveguide than anyone in the entire audio industry...
I have a 610mm version hopefully coming my way quite soon.
Last edited:
Pano,
Thank you. I will give it a try. Atm i use Izotope RX which is incredibly powerful ( with the last versions even more as it became the defacto standard in movie industry) but time consuming. If it could be faster...
Mindsource, unvaluable was what i wanted to say ( priceless is bad french translation!).
Like you and Kipman! This place is amazing. The loudspeaker dedicated forum of course but all others are just incredible too.
I hope it is not mature and this is just the beginning ( 20 years old is a young age).
To be honest with the advent of simulations tools and dedication of peoples it could only got better and better.
There is so much knowledgable members from amateur to reference. Most of them disinterested and able to work together despite cultural differences and opinions. A real lesson of life.
Impossible to list all the people i would like to thanks everytime i come here.
PRR ( i learned A LOT from PRR on Prodigypro/Groupdiy and here about electronic and i'm always in disbelief of the amount of things the guy master), Mr Geddes, N.Pass, SpeakerDave,the mod team,... the list is endless.
Thank you. I will give it a try. Atm i use Izotope RX which is incredibly powerful ( with the last versions even more as it became the defacto standard in movie industry) but time consuming. If it could be faster...
Mindsource, unvaluable was what i wanted to say ( priceless is bad french translation!).
Like you and Kipman! This place is amazing. The loudspeaker dedicated forum of course but all others are just incredible too.
I hope it is not mature and this is just the beginning ( 20 years old is a young age).
To be honest with the advent of simulations tools and dedication of peoples it could only got better and better.
There is so much knowledgable members from amateur to reference. Most of them disinterested and able to work together despite cultural differences and opinions. A real lesson of life.
Impossible to list all the people i would like to thanks everytime i come here.
PRR ( i learned A LOT from PRR on Prodigypro/Groupdiy and here about electronic and i'm always in disbelief of the amount of things the guy master), Mr Geddes, N.Pass, SpeakerDave,the mod team,... the list is endless.
You could try setting up your speakers by the linked method. Go to Post #2 and follow along exactly as described. If done correctly, the center image shouldn't move from side to side with you when you move.
Sumiko master set-up process - AudioAficionado.org
Given there is now a market (albeit small) for real time vinyl de-clicking I have wondered about calling Cedar and seeing if they would license some of the code and how much they would charge. Even 3 or 4 generations old should do the trick.
^ I wonder if Cedar is still active? I thoughts they had been part of Merging or another DAW maker for a long time now.
20/15 years ago it was THE thing about restauration. But it wasn't cheap at all!
Try to see but i fear they won't accept. However it could be nice if they could produce a stripped down version in plug in. With regain of interest in vinyl there is a market with amateurs even if a niche, i agree.
Pano i don't use a recent version of RX mine run on XP! I think it is 6 or 7... and is a relic of my professional days ( as most of my gear!).
Compared to recent one it is somewhat limited but enough for my needs. Take a look at second hand market it happen to have some older licence on sale from time to time. You don't have the bell and whistle but it is very competent piece of software since it's birth.
Izotope could to same thing too: a small plug with decliking, rumble and surface noise optimised treatment could be very nice ( they could have Riaa too, but it won't be as fun as to have different pre with different character!).
Offline treatment like the one in GW have to be tryied and compared: there is no reason it won't be as efficient. It could even be 'better' in some ways. Usually the limitations i've seen are the one you mentioned: you have to source other tools for different treatments.
20/15 years ago it was THE thing about restauration. But it wasn't cheap at all!
Try to see but i fear they won't accept. However it could be nice if they could produce a stripped down version in plug in. With regain of interest in vinyl there is a market with amateurs even if a niche, i agree.
Pano i don't use a recent version of RX mine run on XP! I think it is 6 or 7... and is a relic of my professional days ( as most of my gear!).
Compared to recent one it is somewhat limited but enough for my needs. Take a look at second hand market it happen to have some older licence on sale from time to time. You don't have the bell and whistle but it is very competent piece of software since it's birth.
Izotope could to same thing too: a small plug with decliking, rumble and surface noise optimised treatment could be very nice ( they could have Riaa too, but it won't be as fun as to have different pre with different character!).
Offline treatment like the one in GW have to be tryied and compared: there is no reason it won't be as efficient. It could even be 'better' in some ways. Usually the limitations i've seen are the one you mentioned: you have to source other tools for different treatments.
Last edited:
I read through this. Personally I don't think it's a great setup routine for me for a couple reasons. First is that I don't rely on my LR channels for bass, I use multiple subs for that. Second is that with waveguide speakers, there's good reason to use the 'cross-firing' setup. So my speakers are about 3m from me, in an equilateral triangle, and toed in 45 degrees. I let Audyssey XT32 figure out the rest and it does an impeccable job.
The issue of the center image moving is simply one of physics and the change in time - amplitude with position. I hope that once I get larger waveguides, with directivity control down to almost 500hz, that the cross-firing setup will work over a wider coverage area.
Thanks for the suggestion though!
Side note - Hopefully this isn't seen as too inflammatory: I noticed that the person who posted the setup routine on the forum you linked to has a ton of 'high end' equipment, McIntosh and such, including expensive cables. I'm at a point where I honestly can't take anyone seriously who does that.
If anyone wants to add ambience to their system - If you have an older receiver that has Dolby Pro Logic II, then use directivity controlled speakers for your main LR, so you get a clean 'pure' signal then put a pair of small speakers on top facing the front wall. Hook them up to the surround channels and turn on Pro Logic II Movie. Movie adds a delay >10ms to the surround channels where music doesn't. I found this to add a fantastic level of ambience and immersion to the sound field via late reflections, while the waveguides still maintain a clean image free of early reflections.
I was slightly disappointed when I got a Dolby Surround receiver because it does not send the full signal to the surround channels, so it didn't create that full, balanced effect when reflecting off the front wall. It instead chops up the frequency band, isolates certain sounds, and then does some phase and delay magic. The silver lining is that if you use surround speakers as actual surround speakers in DS then the surround effect is miles ahead of old Pro Logic II for surround use.
I was slightly disappointed when I got a Dolby Surround receiver because it does not send the full signal to the surround channels, so it didn't create that full, balanced effect when reflecting off the front wall. It instead chops up the frequency band, isolates certain sounds, and then does some phase and delay magic. The silver lining is that if you use surround speakers as actual surround speakers in DS then the surround effect is miles ahead of old Pro Logic II for surround use.
Last edited:
Yes, but, I wonder if the method could work to a degree, it seems a compromise, but if the room is "loaded equally" by this method the level difference takes precedence over the time difference for localisation. I agree, it's mainly about the bass though.
CEDAR Audio Ltd | About CEDAR
Looks like Cedar are still going. 31 years on from a PhD project at Cambridge university.
Looks like Cedar are still going. 31 years on from a PhD project at Cambridge university.
Maybe, I think for imaging though you want to remove the room, not 'load it equally'. For late reflections this may matter more or less, I'm not sure.
You beat me to it Bill. Yes CEDAR is still strong in the broadcast world, at least in the US. Maybe only they can afford it.
Bill I found a plug-in that might interest you. A bit $$ for a hobby, but reading the info page might give you some insight and leads about better ways of measuring dynamic range.
MAAT DROffline MkII
I stumbled across the software after watching some videos that use the MAAT correlation meter seen here:
MAAT 2BC multiCORR
It's clever in that it gives you a real time 1/3 octave view of stereo phase, as well as an overall balance meter. It could be interesting to analyze some recordings that seem to have good natural space verses some that don't. Maybe it would reveal a thing or two about the recordings.
Bill I found a plug-in that might interest you. A bit $$ for a hobby, but reading the info page might give you some insight and leads about better ways of measuring dynamic range.
MAAT DROffline MkII
I stumbled across the software after watching some videos that use the MAAT correlation meter seen here:
MAAT 2BC multiCORR
It's clever in that it gives you a real time 1/3 octave view of stereo phase, as well as an overall balance meter. It could be interesting to analyze some recordings that seem to have good natural space verses some that don't. Maybe it would reveal a thing or two about the recordings.
Hi, well at least you read the post describing how to set speakers. It's likely very hard to get one's head around the whole idea when one has not heard music with speakers set up in this fashion. I understand that. I am fortunate to have come across this method at RMAF 2007.
Then over time I learned how to do the procedure somewhat well, though it took a long time to get perfect. And in fact I never got it perfect until I came upon the post in the linked thread. That post tells one what to actually listen for when doing the procedure. I did it perfect the very first time following this, with no later tweaks or anything.
Be careful to not confuse the message with the messenger as you have done in your last two quoted sentences. They are mutually exclusive and have nothing to do with one another. The speaker set up method works with any speaker in any room, and there is nothing expensive about it. The only thing required is the setup song, which works very well. But lacking that one could just use any mono piece and any music piece with an easy to hear steady bass line.
Anyway, like I stated at the beginning, you at least read the post.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.