R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.  (Read 3392 times)

hexfix93

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #15 on: October 16, 2005, 07:14:45 am »

well i don't know if this is true for sure or not, but from what i have gathered and read, the more gain changes, up or down, it doesnt matter if its decrease or increase, you get more math errors, more data loss, and it adds up. if its just the main fader that gets the gain decrease instead of all the channel sliders, it makes more sense to me that becasue more gain decreases from all the tracks would add up more errors than just turning down the main one...

let me know if i am way off, i could be, that is just what i think so far from what i have read. because the more db you change over all, the more damaged the sound becomes..

and seriously, when i leave my channel faders alone, or turn em up a bit, and crop the main/master, it sounds louder, and more present, like there is more volume to the sounds, when i turn down all the channels, and turn the master up to 0 and mix that way, i think the sound sounds more distant.. more plastic like... just from my ears in cubase, it could be just cubase too.. i dunno how they do the math for their mixing pre master fader...

i havent done any science to prove or disprove this, its just what i hear...

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #16 on: October 16, 2005, 08:51:11 am »

Denny W. wrote on Sat, 15 October 2005 20:40

compasspnt wrote on Fri, 14 October 2005 19:31

At the risk of being repetitive, I will take this opportunity to say once again that recording from the first instance at lowered levels (speaking here only of the digital domain) will make everything sound better.  There is no need to go near the red, or even the yellow.  Don't even approach the problem area.

With analogue tape machines, of course, it's another kettle of fish.


Is how far under 0db a platform dependant decision or is there a good rule of thumb in your mind where you like to see the peaks fall?




You can play it safe on all platforms and deliver a 24 recording that is between -10 and -3 dBFS on the highest peak with no problems or loss of resolution or sound, and it may very well sound better at the end of the game. Especially if the mastering engineer uses any analog processing or the recording goes through any further analog stages priot to the release medium. If it is mastered totally digitally, if the files are floating point, and  if the mastering engineer uses a floating point workstation and reduces level digitally prior to conversion to fixed point and dithers to 24 bits at that time... then probably the point of "level" is academic.

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

HansP

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 165
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #17 on: October 16, 2005, 09:26:03 am »

let me mention that a wave editor (e,g, audition) will show intersample overs in the waveform display, and this should eradicate any doubt about the accuracy of the particular meter tools. you can see it precisely and then you can listen to it at once, or note the cue points and listen on the test CD player how it translates.
Logged

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2005, 09:39:23 am »

HansP wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 09:26

let me mention that a wave editor (e,g, audition) will show intersample overs in the waveform display




Really? For this to happen the editor has to have considerably more intelligence than my SADiE...  The waveforms are drawn from the true digital level. And even if a waveform is upsampled in your editor (that would be the only way to get intersample peaks in a waveform) how can you judge by the waveform if the intersample peak is +0.3 dB or +1.5 dB? In my opinion, only an oversampling meter can accurately judge those peaks, and furthermore, even that is open to interpretation, as the nature of the filtering that the meter uses may not produce the same degree of peaks as the filters in an MP3, broadcast, or outboarrd sample rate converter. In the end, it is an approximation of the intersample peaks that will be produced.

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

Ronny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #19 on: October 16, 2005, 02:15:30 pm »

bobkatz wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 09:39

HansP wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 09:26

let me mention that a wave editor (e,g, audition) will show intersample overs in the waveform display




Really? For this to happen the editor has to have considerably more intelligence than my SADiE...  The waveforms are drawn from the true digital level. And even if a waveform is upsampled in your editor (that would be the only way to get intersample peaks in a waveform) how can you judge by the waveform if the intersample peak is +0.3 dB or +1.5 dB? In my opinion, only an oversampling meter can accurately judge those peaks, and furthermore, even that is open to interpretation, as the nature of the filtering that the meter uses may not produce the same degree of peaks as the filters in an MP3, broadcast, or outboarrd sample rate converter. In the end, it is an approximation of the intersample peaks that will be produced.

BK



I wouldn't underestimate Audition. It does a lot of stuff that progs 10 times the cost do. It's not only a viable product, but is a great entry level DAW prog and I recommend it to the newbies on my recording groups when they are looking for their first DAW editing and multi-track program.

I don't think that it accurately measures intersample peaks though, what the waveform display does is approximate the post reconstruction filter waveform, so that it does show intersample levels above two samples, I would consider this more as a post DAC reference view than an actual intersample peak evaluation, as it takes the amplitude of the waveform and approximates the curve between samples. If two samples are taken where amplitude is above these two samples, the samples will be connected by an arc, instead of a straight line like some of the better DAW progs exhibit. It's quite useful, but not not a real intersample peak indicator that is accurate to the 1/100dB.
Logged
------Ronny Morris - Digitak Mastering------
---------http://digitakmastering.com---------
----------Powered By Experience-------------
-------------Driven To Perfection---------------

chrisj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #20 on: October 16, 2005, 02:47:44 pm »

hexfix93 wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 07:14


and seriously, when i leave my channel faders alone, or turn em up a bit, and crop the main/master, it sounds louder, and more present, like there is more volume to the sounds, when i turn down all the channels, and turn the master up to 0 and mix that way, i think the sound sounds more distant.. more plastic like... just from my ears in cubase, it could be just cubase too.. i dunno how they do the math for their mixing pre master fader...


You could be clipping in the channel faders, and liking it. Small amounts of clipping will add a sort of sparkliness to the sound and if you're stepping on peak levels relative to RMS the 'body' of the sound will seem more solid.

There are better ways to do that, though.

As far as I know Cubase is 32 bit float throughout so I really don't think you could be clipping channel faders- but I haven't seen the code, so I don't know what's up with it. Maybe you're clipping plugins? Are they pre-fader or post? I'd have thought they'd be pre-fader but what do I know? Very Happy

hexfix93

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #21 on: October 16, 2005, 04:23:09 pm »

chrisj wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 12:47


You could be clipping in the channel faders, and liking it. Small amounts of clipping will add a sort of sparkliness to the sound and if you're stepping on peak levels relative to RMS the 'body' of the sound will seem more solid.

There are better ways to do that, though.

As far as I know Cubase is 32 bit float throughout so I really don't think you could be clipping channel faders- but I haven't seen the code, so I don't know what's up with it. Maybe you're clipping plugins? Are they pre-fader or post? I'd have thought they'd be pre-fader but what do I know? Very Happy



It doesn't sound like clipping at all to me.. It sounds more like the wavs are just louder and more present.. not distorting, its not sparkle. It sounds closer, as to where when i turn the channel strips down, it tends to sound more distant.. I honestly think its how cubase does its math...

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #22 on: October 16, 2005, 04:44:45 pm »

hexfix93 wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 16:23

It doesn't sound like clipping at all to me.. It sounds more like the wavs are just louder and more present.. not distorting, its not sparkle. It sounds closer, as to where when i turn the channel strips down, it tends to sound more distant.. I honestly think its how cubase does its math...




Create two files, one with the input faders at +whatever and the master at -whatever and the other with the reverse. Then put the two files in line with eachother in an EDL and play and switch between them. Can you tell the difference? Do they null?

By any chance are you doing any submasters? If Cubase is using the master as a multiplier coefficient for the submasters and for the input faders instead of as a multiplier on the sum, then you can get double attenuation results when you lower the master 3 dB you get 6...  The old Sonic Solutions suffered from that one. And I just read on another forum in the pro sound web that is the case with Pro Tools. I would have to test it.

Anyway, take a test tone and confirm the output of Cubase is identical when you are comparing the two choices.

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

HansP

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 165
Re: Sample Overages! evil demons you can't see.
« Reply #23 on: October 17, 2005, 08:34:53 am »

bobkatz wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 15:39

HansP wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 09:26

let me mention that a wave editor (e,g, audition) will show intersample overs in the waveform display




Really? For this to happen the editor has to have considerably more intelligence than my SADiE...  The waveforms are drawn from the true digital level. And even if a waveform is upsampled in your editor (that would be the only way to get intersample peaks in a waveform) how can you judge by the waveform if the intersample peak is +0.3 dB or +1.5 dB? In my opinion, only an oversampling meter can accurately judge those peaks, and furthermore, even that is open to interpretation, as the nature of the filtering that the meter uses may not produce the same degree of peaks as the filters in an MP3, broadcast, or outboarrd sample rate converter. In the end, it is an approximation of the intersample peaks that will be produced.

BK


I think it's not upsampling but a spline interpolation, which seems not a bad approximation. did someone already do some short math literature about the deviance? this may be important to people who don't have an upsampling peak meter at the moment, but need at least _something_ to look into the problem. with the magnifier buttons the resolution of audition's display can be increased into positive dB values, and little overs become visible.
thx for reminding that it is an approximation, someone else may help to examine how good or bad it is...

Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up