23 Feb
2004
23 Feb
'04
1:40 p.m.
Hi,
I haven't read all of this thread but if you're
talking about designing a LADSPA plugin from JAMin
components, there's probably no need for the
crossover. If there's no technical reason for
including it, I'd consider leaving it out.
Assuming I know what's being discussed, I would
suggest a plugin processing chain that doesn't have a
visual/graphic spectrum analyzer. I say that because
if the tool is useful, it'll get used in every channel
strip and the computational expense might add up in a
hurry--just guessing.
<bable>
I don't find spectrum analyzers to be useful. I
suspect the real issue is learning to hear. I'm
wondering if visuals are a distraction from listening
and seductive to implement because learning to hear is
not easy.
Is the spectrum analyzer the thing in HDEQ that shows
equalization response in realtime? I like Jan's
parametric style controls in the HDEQ but I'd be
perfectly happy if the realtime response stuff was
pulled out.
For two reasons, I've recently begun using the other
EQ ; I don't like the visual distraction and sometimes
the controls of HDEQ get a little sticky. I think Jan
stated that the granularity of the HDEQ for controling
the 1024 bands is greater so I'll go back to using it.
</babble>
I never use limiting in channel strips during prints
or mixing. I'm not sure why but I don't. I use lots of
compression during prints and mixing.
The gain stages of the compressor might be all that's
needed in a plugin. I'd drop the Boost. Perhaps if
it's several plugins then the input and master output
are interesting. That seems right.
Is capturing files and burning CDs also being
discussed? Then DAO is all that's needed. Being able
to fill the text fields is pretty interesting. Text
fields include; producer, artist, date, titles, etc.
They are useful with cddb and promotion of the
product.
I think Steve eluded to the difficulty of mastering
more than one multitrack source in a session. At one
time I thought the Ardour Chunks could accomplish this
task. I'm not so sure anymore. Many Chunks from
distinct sessions could be "imported" to a mastering
session. But then how to adjust settings in specific
kick drums of different songs...It seems like a mess
and alot of work. I doubt the capability would climb
the Ardour roadmap ladder but if it was possible, it
would rule.
Anyway, I just quickly read part of this thread and
those are a few quick thoughts. Gotta run, sorry my
responsed aren't thought out better.
BTW, seeing the JAMin module bypasses is great. They
are seriously useful.
ron
--- Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 2004-02-22 at 09:23, Steve Harris wrote:
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
If you didnt need the crossover (or didnt need it
to be linear phase) you
could quarter the CPU load.
- Steve
That's the crossover that splits the audio for the 3
compressors,
correct? I think that probably can go in a Channel
Strip application
since it's usually just a single band compressor. In
the case fo the
Waves Channel Strip I pointed out earlier it
supports a number of
different configurations, but the main two path
choices look like this:
input->EQ->Compressor->Gate->Gain
or
input->Compressor->EQ->Gate->Gain
and then side chain control for both the compressor
and the gate
separately coming for selectable places inside the
plugin with filters
to control what gets into the actual side chain
signal.
The only real advantage of a Channel Strip is that
everything you need
is there in a single screen. You don't have to call
up 3-4 different
plugins to look at the things you want to work on.
It also allows side
chain control in ways that aren't very easy using
separate plugins.
Anyway, I don't know if this 1023 band EQ, as part
of a channel strip or
even by itself, makes sense as a plugin. It was just
a comment that
seems to have gained far more air time than I ever
intended.
- Mark