13 Apr
2007
13 Apr
'07
2:16 p.m.
Charles,
I'm learning too, and i thank you all for that.
I'll have to play around with that LADSPA plug-in see what sound i get out
of it.
When you speak of compressing vocals do you mean removing the top and
bottom frequences which then accentuates the mid-range on some systems?
Bearcat
I learned a lot about compression on this thread.
Limited experience
suggests that light-moderate compression improves vocals, and
even heavy
compression can add a lot of oomph to a bass line. The LADSPA
compressor that has produced the best results for me is the Dyson.
Second what Geoff said. As a musician, I've always strived to make
music
pleasing to me and my friends in whatever situation it arises. As
a (newb) audio engineer, I try for the same -- a sound that pleases me.
As a listener/fan, don't listen to what you don't like or what doesn't
sound "good" on your system, but criticising the engineering is a little
silly because nothing will sound good to everybody in every environment.
On 4/13/07, Geoff Beasley <songshop(a)bizmedia.com.au> wrote:
> you know, audio is a totally subjective subject as is music itself; and
audio
> has no other major purpose other than the
reproduction of music.(a
movie consisting only of atmos,fx and dialogue isn't
generally made and
distributed.sound installations are fine but are only available in the
"round".)
just rely on your ears and your heart.
everything else is just science.
g.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
13 Apr
13 Apr
2:31 p.m.
New subject: Questions from an audiophile to some engineers
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:16:44AM -0600, Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
Charles,
I'm learning too, and i thank you all for that.
I'll have to play around with that LADSPA plug-in see what sound i get out
of it.
When you speak of compressing vocals do you mean removing the top and
bottom frequences which then accentuates the mid-range on some systems?
No:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_level_compression
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
2:56 p.m.
New subject: Questions from an audiophile to some engineers
Ah! Ok, thank you Paul. Now i get the idea. I'm just irritated by the
application of it to the entire recording, which seems to be the way some
?studios? are going. I'm not sure at what level of control it's done at.
I concur that most people don't listen to music the way that i do, nor on
the kinds of equipment that i do.
Is it really about selling more music? I'm still not convinced that it
sounds better on average consumer level electronics though. If the
complaint is about some passages being too quiet because there is too much
dynamic range, well that's not the kind of music it's done on anyway is
it? If the idea is to make the whole thing subjectivly louder why not
just leave it to the listener to turn up the volume? Some of the things i
have that are compressed aren't even played on the radio. I can only
really speak to that in the States though so i'd admit i was wrong quickly
on that one.
Bearcat
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:16:44AM -0600, Bearcat M.
Sandor wrote:
Charles,
I'm learning too, and i thank you all for that.
I'll have to play around with that LADSPA plug-in see what sound i get
out
of it.
When you speak of compressing vocals do you mean removing the top and
bottom frequences which then accentuates the mid-range on some systems?
No:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_level_compression
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
3:28 p.m.
New subject: Questions from an audiophile to some engineers
Am Freitag, 13. April 2007 schrieb Bearcat M. Sandor:
Is it really about selling more music? I'm still
not convinced that it
Its not always about selling music but about getting (wider) audience.
Unless you do your music only to torture your relatives on family
reunion... ;-)
sounds better on average consumer level electronics
though. If the
complaint is about some passages being too quiet because there is too much
dynamic range, well that's not the kind of music it's done on anyway is
it? If the idea is to make the whole thing subjectivly louder why not
just leave it to the listener to turn up the volume?
Ever seen a worker in the factory change the volume on his radio with every
song?
A song that is less loud than the others means 3:30 mins of silence for them,
which the radio-station wouldn't allow to happen since they loose listeners
and thus ad-money everytime that song is played.
So: If you want your song to be played on the radio it has to be loud.
Moreover if your song stands out over the other songs in (subjective) loudness
it will be recognized. And that is what you want. So you try to make your
song louder than the others. Only problem is that every other producer tries
the same thing and that is where song are compressed to much and get screwed
by producers that force their technicians to use much higher compression than
most of them want to use...
Some of the things i
have that are compressed aren't even played on the radio. I can only
really speak to that in the States though so i'd admit i was wrong quickly
on that one.
While radio is the primary broadcast if you want your songs to be heard, the
same rule above also applies to CDs. At least to some degree. (But most bands
produce CDs that could be broadcasted directly without asking the band for a
special broadcast-version.)
Yes, you can do recordings completely without compression. Even good old
instruments/classic can be recorded that way. But what do your
wife/kids/neighbors say if you turn up your amp to get the full >80dB
dynamic-range between the silent flute-solo and the big tutti finale? (*)
Think of compression as a tool the same as equalizers. Learn to use them and
use what sounds best. Not every channel needs EQ and compression by default.
But be aware that good compression takes more experience than EQ. And the
characteristics of the EQ change if you put the EQ before the compressor,
which can be desired or unwanted...
Arnold
(*) I do have a recording of Haydn's creation where the passage "And there was
light" has almost that dynamic-range. I can only really listen to that and
enjoy the range on big PA's during soundcheck or on my headphones. (Or when
my wife is on holiday/work...)
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask your
administrator to do so...
4:44 p.m.
New subject: Questions from an audiophile to some engineers
Arnold,
Thank you. Those examples really helped me "get it". I now understand why
it's not such a horrible thing.
Bearcat
Am Freitag, 13. April 2007 schrieb Bearcat M. Sandor:
Is it really about selling more music? I'm
still not convinced that it
Its not always about selling music but about getting (wider) audience.
Unless you do your music only to torture your relatives on family
reunion... ;-)
sounds better on average consumer level
electronics though. If the
complaint is about some passages being too quiet because there is too
much
dynamic range, well that's not the kind of music it's done on anyway is
it? If the idea is to make the whole thing subjectivly louder why not
just leave it to the listener to turn up the volume?
Ever seen a worker in the factory change the volume on his radio with
every
song?
A song that is less loud than the others means 3:30 mins of silence for
them,
which the radio-station wouldn't allow to happen since they loose
listeners
and thus ad-money everytime that song is played.
So: If you want your song to be played on the radio it has to be loud.
Moreover if your song stands out over the other songs in (subjective)
loudness
it will be recognized. And that is what you want. So you try to make your
song louder than the others. Only problem is that every other producer
tries
the same thing and that is where song are compressed to much and get
screwed
by producers that force their technicians to use much higher compression
than
most of them want to use...
Some of the things i
have that are compressed aren't even played on the radio. I can only
really speak to that in the States though so i'd admit i was wrong
quickly
on that one.
While radio is the primary broadcast if you want your songs to be heard,
the
same rule above also applies to CDs. At least to some degree. (But most
bands
produce CDs that could be broadcasted directly without asking the band for
a
special broadcast-version.)
Yes, you can do recordings completely without compression. Even good old
instruments/classic can be recorded that way. But what do your
wife/kids/neighbors say if you turn up your amp to get the full >80dB
dynamic-range between the silent flute-solo and the big tutti finale? (*)
Think of compression as a tool the same as equalizers. Learn to use them
and
use what sounds best. Not every channel needs EQ and compression by
default.
But be aware that good compression takes more experience than EQ. And the
characteristics of the EQ change if you put the EQ before the compressor,
which can be desired or unwanted...
Arnold
(*) I do have a recording of Haydn's creation where the passage "And there
was
light" has almost that dynamic-range. I can only really listen to that and
enjoy the range on big PA's during soundcheck or on my headphones. (Or
when
my wife is on holiday/work...)
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and
send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask your
administrator to do so...
6487
days inactive
6487
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Arnold Krille -
Bearcat M. Sandor -
Paul Winkler