Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bob Olhsson]

Ronny wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 11:47

While we are talking about float, I'm wondering how important it is to not go over -0dbFS, once you are in float. There is no clipping until the DAC with normal processing, so theoretically as long as you attenuate the final processed signal to not output at the DAC above -0dBFs, it shouldn't degrade the signal if you are a dB or two over at a processors output, or should it?

Depends on the signal processing. Because something is float in and out doesn't mean it's float internally. Just as with analog gear, testing a signal path with tones is a really good idea before jumping to any conclusions about gain structure.

[dcollins]

Ronny wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 09:39

Absolutely not, trajectory has to do with path and nothing to do with time.

But grasshopper, there is no path without time!  

(Zen hot dog vendor joke here)

Quote:

IMHO, pan trajectory is a correct term to describe the path of the sound anywhere across the stereo or surround image.

You can call it a "deli sandwich" too, but a static pan-pot
doesn't have a trajectory! It only has amplitude, just one leetle value......

I admit to being a stickler for the correct terms, and do wince at the "Db," "1Khz," "Cd mastering," "annie," etc...

DC

[dcollins]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 14:54

Depends on the signal processing. Because something is float in and out doesn't mean it's float internally. Just as with analog gear, testing a signal path with tones is a really good idea before jumping to any conclusions about gain structure.

Since there seem to be more problems at the top of the scale than the bottom, why not just run low digital levels?

DC

[Bob Olhsson]

dcollins wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 23:31

Since there seem to be more problems at the top of the scale than the bottom, why not just run low digital levels?

Doesn't there always need to be some kind of an esoteric mystique? Maybe the floating point code ought to have been written with green ink to reduce jitter.

[Ronny]

dcollins wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 00:27

Ronny wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 09:39 Absolutely not, trajectory has to do with path and nothing to do with time. But grasshopper, there is no path without time!   (Zen hot dog vendor joke here) Quote: IMHO, pan trajectory is a correct term to describe the path of the sound anywhere across the stereo or surround image. You can call it a "deli sandwich" too, but a static pan-pot doesn't have a trajectory! It only has amplitude, just one leetle value...... I admit to being a stickler for the correct terms, and do wince at the "Db," "1Khz," "Cd mastering," "annie," etc... DC

Why don't you write a book and get everyone to say pan track 2 left to -2.38 amplitude.

[dcollins]

Ronny wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 23:19

Why don't you write a book and get everyone to say pan track 2 left to -2.38 amplitude.

Are you getting any of this?

DC

[Ronny]

dcollins wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 02:40

Ronny wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 23:19 Why don't you write a book and get everyone to say pan track 2 left to -2.38 amplitude. Are you getting any of this? DC

What, that pan is time or that pan is amplitude? I think most people on this forum know a pan pot works, DC. Trajectory merely means path and in the sense that authors and designers use it, it's typically location of an instrument in the stereo or surround field. Time is not significantly relavent as that depends on the distance of the speakers to the listener. Path is relative to amplitude in this context, trajectory is path. It's much easier to describe pan settings as to location, than it is to amplitude. We all know that when you vary the amplitude of the signal between two speakers, the ghost image shifts, but how many people do you know that say set X amplitude on the L speaker and Y amplitude on the R speaker?  

[bblackwood]

Ronny wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 04:03

Trajectory merely means path and in the sense that authors and designers use it, it's typically location of an instrument in the stereo or surround field. Time is not significantly relavent as that depends on the distance of the speakers to the listener. Path is relative to amplitude in this context, trajectory is path. It's much easier to describe pan settings as to location, than it is to amplitude. We all know that when you vary the amplitude of the signal between two speakers, the ghost image shifts, but how many people do you know that say set X amplitude on the L speaker and Y amplitude on the R speaker?

It's a discussion of semantics. DC's point is that trajectory is simply the wrong term to use here, and it's a vaild point. It might sound good but it's the incorrect use of the word, that's all...

[jfrigo]

It may seem a silly thing to discuss but...

Trajectory is probably not the best way to describe panning. Trajectory indeed is a path whereby the location of a thing changes with time. It's moving. The trajectory of sound does not change with the panpot. The speakers have certain dispersion characteristics that can vary with frequency and amplitude, but the sound propagates from them in the same way no matter where the panpot. They don't all of a sudden deflect the soundwave in a different direction or at a different speed (hey, let's have a refraction pot!). What happens is that the sound in one side or the other is louder, but the trajectory of the soundwave doesn't really change.

OK, semantics aside, probably the easiest way to get the idea across is to use the analogy of a clock. That's easy to understand and in widespread use, as in, "pan the acoustic guitars to 2 and 10 o'clock." Some also use degrees to describe it. This makes sense since the degrees on a circle also are analogous to the rotary panpot.

I'm not trying to get on your case Ronny, just having a light-hearted, geeky discussion with my mastering buddies on the 'net, yourself incuded.

As for the topic of the thread, rnicklaus had it pretty well summed up on the first page. Mix it how you like it to sound, don't limit for level, leave a little room, send it at the the same (hopefully high) resolution you mixed it etc. These are pretty common-sense guidelines that are easy to follow and should yield good results.

[jfrigo]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 23:10

Doesn't there always need to be some kind of an esoteric mystique? Maybe the floating point code ought to have been written with green ink to reduce jitter.

I made the background of my computer desktop green so my DAW would sound better. I also got the shatki stone plug-in.

[Ronny]

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 09:20

Ronny wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 04:03 Trajectory merely means path and in the sense that authors and designers use it, it's typically location of an instrument in the stereo or surround field. Time is not significantly relavent as that depends on the distance of the speakers to the listener. Path is relative to amplitude in this context, trajectory is path. It's much easier to describe pan settings as to location, than it is to amplitude. We all know that when you vary the amplitude of the signal between two speakers, the ghost image shifts, but how many people do you know that say set X amplitude on the L speaker and Y amplitude on the R speaker?   It's a discussion of semantics. DC's point is that trajectory is simply the wrong term to use here, and it's a vaild point. It might sound good but it's the incorrect use of the word, that's all...

Well gee Brad, I asked what the proper use of the term may be and got no answer other than an inscinuation that I don't get it. Can you come up with a more correct term to desribe where an instrument is panned in the mix? Everyone I know understands what it means when a manufacturer or designer speaks in terms of pan trajectory including DC. The important thing is that the communication is understood, not the terms, as we have as many terms for things as we do cultures and countries, in all walks of life.

[minister]

dcollins wrote on Mon, 02 January 2006 23:27

I ... do wince at ..."annie,"

really?  i cried during "annie"

[Ronny]

jfrigo wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 13:46

It may seem a silly thing to discuss but... Trajectory is probably not the best way to describe panning. Trajectory indeed is a path whereby the location of a thing changes with time. It's moving. The trajectory of sound does not change with the panpot. The speakers have certain dispersion characteristics that can vary with frequency and amplitude, but the sound propagates from them in the same way no matter where the panpot. They don't all of a sudden deflect the soundwave in a different direction or at a different speed (hey, let's have a refraction pot!). What happens is that the sound in one side or the other is louder, but the trajectory of the soundwave doesn't really change. OK, semantics aside, probably the easiest way to get the idea across is to use the analogy of a clock. That's easy to understand and in widespread use, as in, "pan the acoustic guitars to 2 and 10 o'clock." Some also use degrees to describe it. This makes sense since the degrees on a circle also are analogous to the rotary panpot.

Quote:

I'm not trying to get on your case Ronny, just having a light-hearted, geeky discussion with my mastering buddies on the 'net, yourself incuded. As for the topic of the thread, rnicklaus had it pretty well summed up on the first page. Mix it how you like it to sound, don't limit for level, leave a little room, send it at the the same (hopefully high) resolution you mixed it etc. These are pretty common-sense guidelines that are easy to follow and should yield good results.

Personally I've always used the o'clock way to relate it myself and never heard of people calling it pan trajectory before NASA landed on the moon, or at least not before Star Trek came out. Maybe it's a space age thing, who knows. I'm not going to stop saying it, because people understand what it means and it's commonly used. I didn't invent the word, I'm mainly concerned with the communication. We're only talking about a ghost image in the stereo field, guys, amplitude and time does not have to be discussed to say, "how do you like the pan trajectory on the flute player?" What's a better way of saying it Jay? "How do you like the degrees on the flute player?" They'll confuse it with temperature. How about "How do you like the clock settings, I placed on the flute player?"

Let's hear the correct term, I'm still waiting.  

[bblackwood]

Ronny wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 17:08

Let's hear the correct term, I'm still waiting.

Umm, how about 'pan'?

[Ronny]

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 18:40

Ronny wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 17:08 Let's hear the correct term, I'm still waiting.   Umm, how about 'pan'?

Pan by itself doesn't describe location. The "incorrect" term under discussion is "pan trajectory".

This is ridiculous and nit picking in my book. To correct somebody for saying annie instead of analog is ridiculous. I have more things to bring to this forum than correcting people for what I personally think is improper for communication, especially when it's not the communication that is lacking. We all come from different locales and different levels of formal education, use different terms to say the same thing. Pan trajectory, pan path, pan setting all say pretty much the same thing. Pan amplitude, pan time, yeah ok, those are new ones on me, but when you hear me say pan trajectory you'll know that I'm talking about location of an instrument in the sound field.