12 Feb
2016
12 Feb
'16
8:39 p.m.
Hello,
In learning more about Ardour, recording and mixing in general...
Ardour has recently added the capability for the monitor to also have
plugins just like any regular track. What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
Cheers.
12 Feb
12 Feb
8:49 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:39 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com <jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com>
wrote:
Hello,
In learning more about Ardour, recording and mixing in general...
Ardour has recently added the capability for the monitor to also have
plugins just like any regular track. What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
(listening) room correction would be one of the most obvious cases.
10:35 p.m.
Le 12/02/2016 20:49, Paul Davis a écrit :
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:39 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<mailto:jonetsu@teksavvy.com> <jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<mailto:jonetsu@teksavvy.com>> wrote:
Hello,
In learning more about Ardour, recording and mixing in general...
Ardour has recently added the capability for the monitor to also have
plugins just like any regular track. What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
(listening) room correction would be one of the most obvious cases.
What kind of plugin do you promote to do that room correction?
10:41 p.m.
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 21:34:54 +0100
fred <f.rech(a)yahoo.fr> wrote:
Le 12/02/2016 20:49, Paul Davis a écrit :
> (listening) room correction would be one of the
most obvious cases.
What kind of plugin do you promote to do that room
correction?
Good question. Another one would be how are the room corrections
managed regarding the final mix ? To this I would tend to think that
monitor room corrections would be acknowledged as being temporary eg.
people would explicitly know that what they hear is not final (well,
it's not since this is not the final mix, but you know what I mean).
Or, is it possible to actually make room corrections while maintaining
fidelity to what is recorded ? Is there a way to calibrate this ?
OK, make that three more questions :)
Cheers.
10:46 p.m.
Le 12/02/2016 22:41, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com a écrit :
What kind of plugin do you promote to do that room
correction?
Good question. Another one would be how are the room corrections
managed regarding the final mix ? To this I would tend to think that
monitor room corrections would be acknowledged as being temporary eg.
people would explicitly know that what they hear is not final (well,
it's not since this is not the final mix, but you know what I mean).
please, go
further in your "final mix" point!
13 Feb
13 Feb
12:03 a.m.
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 21:46:50 +0100
fred <f.rech(a)yahoo.fr> a écrit:
Le 12/02/2016 22:41, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com a écrit :
> temporary eg. people would explicitly know that
what they hear is
> not final (well, it's not since this is not the final mix, but you
> know what I mean).
please, go further in your "final mix"
point!
As far as I see it, a final mix would be done using a variety of
outputs. As I am not familiar with room correction (hence the asking)
I am not sure at all that a final mix would be done on a set of
monitors plus room correction. Fons' reply tend to say that room
correction is something that can be measured and calibrated.
Headphones would be another, and common, output to make a final mix.
Even though at first thought I would believe that headphones would not
need any correction, I remember that some people make a business
selling headphone calibration software for specific headphone brands.
Then ideally the mix would also be run in mono using a single
(calibrated ?) speaker. And a pair of cheap PC speakers. Then a CD
would be made, and played in the car. Actually there is a recording
studio in Montreal that has a car fitted with a car sound system for
their customers to listen to what it sounds like in a car. Now I do
not know if several brands of cars are used :)) And calibrated at
that ? :)
12 Feb
12 Feb
11:36 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 04:41:36PM -0500, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com wrote:
Good question. Another one would be how are the room
corrections
managed regarding the final mix ? To this I would tend to think that
monitor room corrections would be acknowledged as being temporary eg.
people would explicitly know that what they hear is not final (well,
it's not since this is not the final mix, but you know what I mean).
If I understand correctly what you mean, then I must disagree.
The purpose of room correction is to improve your monitoring.
So if it's done well, your monitors plus room plus correction
become the reference. The whole point is that the correction
provides better monitoring, and then there is no reason to
ever switch it off, regard it as 'temporary', or think that
without correction you'd get a better mix. It becomes part
of your studio, and users shouldn't even know it's there.
Or, is it possible to actually make room corrections
while maintaining
fidelity to what is recorded ?
The whole point of room correction (in a recording studio) is
to improve the fidelity, to get a more objective monitoring.
Of course you could set up a room correction by manually
tweaking things until you get a more pleasing result on
an existing mix, but by doing that you'd just be fooling
yourself. That's not how it should be done.
Is there a way to calibrate this ?
Use the measurements and procedures as explained in the DRC
manual. You end up with two (for stereo) impulse responses
which can be used by any convolution engine, e.g. jconvolver.
Logically any room correction should not be part of the
(Ardour or other) session - it's part of your studio, and
must not be used anywhere else. So I'd keep it external,
and not in a plugin.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
13 Feb
13 Feb
12:10 a.m.
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 22:36:58 +0000
Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
If I understand correctly what you mean, then I must
disagree.
The purpose of room correction is to improve your
monitoring.
So if it's done well, your monitors plus room plus correction
become the reference. The whole point is that the correction
provides better monitoring, and then there is no reason to
ever switch it off, regard it as 'temporary', or think that
without correction you'd get a better mix. It becomes part
of your studio, and users shouldn't even know it's there.
I see. Setting this up would include playing sine waves of various
frequencies and detecting room behaviour, so to speak.
Of course you could set up a room correction by
manually
tweaking things until you get a more pleasing result on
an existing mix, but by doing that you'd just be fooling
yourself. That's not how it should be done.
That's clear.
> Is there a way to calibrate this ?
Use the measurements and procedures as explained in
the DRC
manual. You end up with two (for stereo) impulse responses
which can be used by any convolution engine, e.g. jconvolver.
Googling this gives 'Digital Room Correction'. There is a sourceforge
project:
http://drc-fir.sourceforge.net/doc/drc.html
Can you briefly describe what DRC consists of and what does the
procedure consists of ?
12:14 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com <jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com>
wrote:
this link contains many other links that can explain any level of detail
you want for DRC.
12:46 a.m.
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 18:14:50 -0500
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com> wrote:
this link contains many other links that can explain any level of
detail you want for DRC.
Thanks for pointing it out. I first had the impression (impression
only, not actual browsing !) that it went only in how to operate the
software for people who already know what it consists of. But no,
chapter 4 starts with what seems to be a thorough overview of what DRC
is, with,a s you mentioned, many links. Lots of learning there. I'm
glad I asked ! - wait a minute, I found the link ! :))
Cheers.
12:57 a.m.
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 18:14:50 -0500
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com> wrote:
this link contains many other links that can explain
any level of
detail you want for DRC.
On the informational side it is quite good. On the execution side
though, this is only windows.
Anything for Linux ?
1:12 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:57 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com <jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 18:14:50 -0500
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
"DRC" runs on linux. From the docs:
---
DRC can be compiled either under Win32 or Linux, but because of its
simplicity it will probably work under most operating systems with a decent
C++ compiler with support for the standard template library (STL). The
Win32 executable (drc.exe) is provided precompiled with the standard DRC
distribution under the sample directory, where there are also the
executables for the impulse response measuring tools (glsweep.exe and
lsconv.exe).
A Makefile is provided for Linux and other Unixes, but it has been tested
only under Fedora Core 11. To build the program under Linux usually what
you have to do is just type “make” in the source directory of DRC, where
the makefile resides.
-----------
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM,
jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com> wrote:
this link contains many other links that can
explain any level of
detail you want for DRC.
On the informational side it is quite good. On the execution side
though, this is only windows.
Anything for Linux ?
2:44 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:57 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com <jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 18:14:50 -0500
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
I imagine most audio-based distros have DRC already. Ubuntu Studio does.
--
Brett W. McCoy -- http://www.brettwmccoy.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the rhythm of music a secret is hidden; If I were to divulge it, it
would overturn the world."
-- Jelaleddin Rumi
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM,
jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com> wrote:
this link contains many other links that can
explain any level of
detail you want for DRC.
On the informational side it is quite good. On the execution side
though, this is only windows.
Anything for Linux ?
17 Feb
17 Feb
5:26 p.m.
On 02/12/2016 08:49 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:39 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<mailto:jonetsu@teksavvy.com> <jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
<mailto:jonetsu@teksavvy.com>> wrote:
Hello,
In learning more about Ardour, recording and mixing in general...
Ardour has recently added the capability for the monitor to also have
plugins just like any regular track. What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
(listening) room correction would be one of the most obvious cases.
This ardour user would love to use an UHJ encoder on his ambisonic
master bus (4ch), but finds it doesn't work as the number of available
ports gets reported at zero...
To get back to the OP, basically anything that requires pre-processing
in order to listen is a usecase. Bass management for your crappy 5.1,
matrixing of your M/S location recording that needs to stay M/S for
later production steps, hearing protection with a fast limiter, binaural
rendering of your stereo or 5.1 signals, the list goes on.
I know I'm gonna love this feature as soon as it's working, it's a very
smart thing to have!
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT
http://stackingdwarves.net
12 Feb
12 Feb
11:39 p.m.
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com wrote:
Ardour has recently added the capability for the
monitor to also have
plugins just like any regular track. What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
Plugins can have other uses besides modifying the sound. The use case that
came to me up front was metering or other kinds of visual signal testing.
Ardour does come with a lot of different meters already, but if you happen
to have yet another, there is a place to put it. Why here and not on
master (first thing that came to my mind)? Because monitor gets PFL/AFL as
well as final mix. I am right now working on a guitar track of a small
loop where I have copied the same audio to two tracks and am comparing the
sound, one with plugins and the other with insert to do the
same thing externally. Having one way of scoping/metering and switching
back and forth is handy.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
15 Feb
15 Feb
7:14 p.m.
On 02/12/2016 08:39 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com wrote:
What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
The singer that *always* would like some (alot of) feeel-good-verb comes
to mind...
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
7:26 p.m.
The "monitoring" under discussion is NOT monitoring-for-the-performer.
Ardour will see a lot of work on that stuff later this year.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
On 02/12/2016 08:39 PM, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com wrote:
What would be use cases for
wanting to have a different audio specific to the monitor ?
The singer that *always* would like some (alot of) feeel-good-verb comes
to mind...
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
3000
days inactive
3005
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
18 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Atte -
Brett McCoy -
Fons Adriaensen -
fred -
jonetsu＠teksavvy.com -
Jörn Nettingsmeier -
Len Ovens -
Paul Davis