28 Mar
2005
28 Mar
'05
7:19 p.m.
Hello all - was just now reading some discussion about Jamin - was just
wondering, how are people responding to Jamin? are they liking it? are
people liking the way it sounds? getting good results? complaining?
raving?
just got curious is all.
---------------------
Aaron Trumm
www.nquit.com
-----------------------
28 Mar
28 Mar
7:35 p.m.
I'm obviously biased (and I'm using the latest CVS version) but I really
like JAMin. Right now I am in the process of mastering a CD for a
friend of mine. He's got a Roland VS2000 and I can unequivocally say
that JAMin stomps all over the Roland mastering software in that thing.
There is just no comparison - which is why I'm using JAMin ;-) The only
thing I'd like to add to JAMin right now is a variable (0-3ms low, 0-2ms
mid) delay on the low and mid bands. Hear that Steve - nudge, nudge,
wink, wink, hint, hint...
Jan
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 15:40, Aaron Trumm wrote:
Hello all - was just now reading some discussion about
Jamin - was just
wondering, how are people responding to Jamin? are they liking it? are
people liking the way it sounds? getting good results? complaining?
raving?
just got curious is all.
---------------------
Aaron Trumm
www.nquit.com
-----------------------
7:54 p.m.
Trying to learn:
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 00:41, Jan Depner wrote:
The only
thing I'd like to add to JAMin right now is a variable (0-3ms low, 0-2ms
mid) delay on the low and mid bands. Hear that Steve - nudge, nudge,
wink, wink, hint, hint...
What musical advantage do you get if some bands are delayed? What effects do
you get with that? Where is this needed/wanted?
Until now I only know that it might be good to delay the rear-channels of
surround-recordings to widen the distances...
Arnold
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
9:06 p.m.
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 16:54, Arnold Krille wrote:
Trying to learn:
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 00:41, Jan Depner wrote:
Read a description of what the BBE sonic maximizer does or read the
docs on any decent crossover. There are good reasons to delay the lows
and mids and it does make a difference. You may not want to use it all
the time but it is handy in many situations. It has nothing to do with
acoustic delays based on speaker location.
Jan
The only
thing I'd like to add to JAMin right now is a variable (0-3ms low, 0-2ms
mid) delay on the low and mid bands. Hear that Steve - nudge, nudge,
wink, wink, hint, hint...
What musical advantage do you get if some bands are delayed? What effects do
you get with that? Where is this needed/wanted?
29 Mar
29 Mar
10:20 a.m.
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 02:12, Jan Depner wrote:
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 16:54, Arnold Krille wrote:
Thanks, just read some google-results (BBE-homepage and more) and tried to do
some tests with galan...
It seems handy sometimes, altough my tests with galan where more or less
catastrophal. Thats why I think someone with knowledge should/could implement
it into Jamin.
Another idea which came to my mind is kind of a speaker-managament system,
which seems to not exist under linux. Maybe adding hi/mid/lo-outputs to Jamin
would help filling this gap...
Arnold, who has learned something today...
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 00:41, Jan Depner
wrote:
Read a description of what
the BBE sonic maximizer does or read the
docs on any decent crossover. There are good reasons to delay the lows
and mids and it does make a difference. You may not want to use it all
the time but it is handy in many situations. It has nothing to do with
acoustic delays based on speaker location. The only
thing I'd like to add to JAMin right now is a variable (0-3ms low,
0-2ms mid) delay on the low and mid bands. Hear that Steve - nudge,
nudge, wink, wink, hint, hint...
What musical advantage do you get if some bands
are delayed? What effects
do you get with that? Where is this needed/wanted?
11:57 a.m.
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 07:20, Arnold Krille wrote:
Another idea which came to my mind is kind of a
speaker-managament system,
which seems to not exist under linux. Maybe adding hi/mid/lo-outputs to Jamin
would help filling this gap...
You're the second person to ask about that. Steve says no.
Personally I'm kind of intrigued by the idea. It would work for DJing
but I don't think you could use it for live sound because there is a
minimum of 10ms (I think) delay in JAMin. Actually, if you can crank up
three instances of JAMin and solo each band you can already do this.
The system overhead would only be... ridiculous ;-)
Jan
12:40 p.m.
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 17:03, Jan Depner wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 07:20, Arnold Krille wrote:
Where does the delay come from? Is it from the "Fast lookahead limiter"?
If one would really use the three-band-outputs one would either need three
limiters (perhaps even controlled by one master-limiter which gets the full
signal) or drop limiting.
Which doesn't mean to drop the limiter from jamin but to drop it (i.e. don`t
use it) from the outputchain of the three bands.
So the signalchain could be something like this (one channel):
Input, EQ and X-over as usual
| | |
Comp Comp Comp
| | |
|-out_low |-out_mid |-out_high (this line would be the change in jamin)
| | |
Boost, Limiter and (stereo)output as usual
But if Steve says "no" it seems as if one has to provide patches for the ones
wanting this. :-(
But if one doesn't need the fancy gui and levelmeter-feedback I find it easy
to build something similar with galan/ams...
And even with 10ms delay, why shouldn't it be used for PA? If every signal
goes thru Jamin no one will notice the delay since (on big enough events) no
one will hear an original signal. And the musicians on stage only get their
non-delayed, non-jamined monitor mix and perhaps some reflections from the
buildungs (which are delayed with or without jamin in use)...
Arnold
PS: Even if my comments sound reasonable, I am only semi-professional
technician for little, weekly gigs called services in church...
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Another idea which came to my mind is kind of a
speaker-managament
system, which seems to not exist under linux. Maybe adding
hi/mid/lo-outputs to Jamin would help filling this gap...
You're the second
person to ask about that. Steve says no.
Personally I'm kind of intrigued by the idea. It would work for DJing
but I don't think you could use it for live sound because there is a
minimum of 10ms (I think) delay in JAMin. Actually, if you can crank up
three instances of JAMin and solo each band you can already do this.
The system overhead would only be... ridiculous ;-)
1:17 p.m.
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 09:40, Arnold Krille wrote:
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 17:03, Jan Depner wrote:
If you bypass the limiter you could avoid the delay. I'm just so
used to using the limiter that I never think about turning it off.
Jan
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 07:20, Arnold Krille
wrote:
Where does the delay come from? Is it from the "Fast lookahead limiter"?
If one would really use the three-band-outputs one would either need three
limiters (perhaps even controlled by one master-limiter which gets the full
signal) or drop limiting.
Which doesn't mean to drop the limiter from jamin but to drop it (i.e. don`t
use it) from the outputchain of the three bands.
So the signalchain could be something like this (one channel):
Input, EQ and X-over as usual
| | |
Comp Comp Comp
| | |
|-out_low |-out_mid |-out_high (this line would be the change in jamin)
| | |
Boost, Limiter and (stereo)output as usual
But if Steve says "no" it seems as if one has to provide patches for the ones
wanting this. :-(
But if one doesn't need the fancy gui and levelmeter-feedback I find it easy
to build something similar with galan/ams...
And even with 10ms delay, why shouldn't it be used for PA? If every signal
goes thru Jamin no one will notice the delay since (on big enough events) no
one will hear an original signal. And the musicians on stage only get their
non-delayed, non-jamined monitor mix and perhaps some reflections from the
buildungs (which are delayed with or without jamin in use)...
Another idea which came to my mind is kind of a
speaker-managament
system, which seems to not exist under linux. Maybe adding
hi/mid/lo-outputs to Jamin would help filling this gap...
You're the second
person to ask about that. Steve says no.
Personally I'm kind of intrigued by the idea. It would work for DJing
but I don't think you could use it for live sound because there is a
minimum of 10ms (I think) delay in JAMin. Actually, if you can crank up
three instances of JAMin and solo each band you can already do this.
The system overhead would only be... ridiculous ;-)
1:51 p.m.
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 18:23, Jan Depner wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 09:40, Arnold Krille wrote:
Hehe, until now I never had the problem to limit my live-mixes. Normally there
is more need to push the highs on quiet passages or compressing the voices to
equalize head-movement on the lavalier-mics. And to bring the volumes of
speach and music more in line...
Seems as I will test Jamin on my next live-mix. ;-)
Arnold
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
And even with 10ms delay, why shouldn't it be
used for PA? If every
signal goes thru Jamin no one will notice the delay since (on big enough
events) no one will hear an original signal. And the musicians on stage
only get their non-delayed, non-jamined monitor mix and perhaps some
reflections from the buildungs (which are delayed with or without jamin
in use)...
If you bypass the limiter you could avoid the delay. I'm just
so
used to using the limiter that I never think about turning it off. 
7:37 p.m.
If you bypass the limiter you could avoid the delay.
I'm just so
used to using the limiter that I never think about turning it off.
Is there any reason why we could not either have it possible to tweak
the look ahead time or just turn off the lookahead? I understand that
the priority is mastering, not live sound. But hell, aside from the
delay, it's such a killer live sound last stage app, why limit it's
application?
11:18 p.m.
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:36, Iain Duncan wrote:
There's a bypass button for each component. Just bypass the
limiter.
Jan
If you bypass
the limiter you could avoid the delay. I'm just so
used to using the limiter that I never think about turning it off.
Is there any reason why we could not either have it possible to tweak
the look ahead time or just turn off the lookahead? I understand that
the priority is mastering, not live sound. But hell, aside from the
delay, it's such a killer live sound last stage app, why limit it's
application? 
30 Mar
30 Mar
8:04 a.m.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 08:25:24PM -0600, Jan Depner wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:36, Iain Duncan wrote:
There's a bypass button for each component. Just bypass the
limiter.
Bypassing the limiter doesnt change the latency, theres quite a lot of code
to make sure it doesnt :) otherwise there would be a glitch when you
bypassed it, and it would be hard to do AB comparisons.
- Steve
If you
bypass the limiter you could avoid the delay. I'm just so
used to using the limiter that I never think about turning it off.
Is there any reason why we could not either have it possible to tweak
the look ahead time or just turn off the lookahead? I understand that
the priority is mastering, not live sound. But hell, aside from the
delay, it's such a killer live sound last stage app, why limit it's
application? 
3:38 p.m.
There's a bypass button for each component. Just bypass the
limiter.
Bypassing the limiter doesnt change the latency, theres quite a lot
of code to make sure it doesnt :) otherwise there would be a glitch
when you bypassed it, and it would be hard to do AB comparisons.
- Steve
4:31 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 07:23:19PM +0200, Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Steve, there is actually a glitch in time when you main bypass. Could
that be changed to the non-glitching behaviour of bypassing the
limiter?
That glitch is just the change in amplitude (I think, at least with the
CVS version), its much less serious than the glitch you get from changing
the latency suddenly.
- Steve
There's a bypass button for each component.
Just bypass the
limiter.
Bypassing the limiter doesnt change the latency, theres quite a lot
of code to make sure it doesnt :) otherwise there would be a glitch
when you bypassed it, and it would be hard to do AB comparisons.
- Steve
6:56 p.m.
Steve, there
is actually a glitch in time when you main bypass.
Could that be changed to the non-glitching behaviour of bypassing
the limiter?
That glitch is just the change in amplitude (I think, at least with
the CVS version), its much less serious than the glitch you get from
changing the latency suddenly.
- Steve
8:02 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 10:55:05PM +0200, Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Steve, it's a glitch in _time_, it's clearly audible (CVS from just
now). To nail it down I did
jack_metro -b 120 -> jamin -> ardour (set tempo to 120)
and recorded a track of it, like 4 beats non-bypassed, 4 beats
bypassed ... Visually aligned the non-bypassed beats with Ardour's
beatlines. It's clearly visible too: The bypassed beats are ~1800
frames early.
OK, thats a bug. I can reproduce it here, so I'l try to figure out whats
wrong.
- Steve
Steve, there is actually a glitch in time when you
main bypass.
Could that be changed to the non-glitching behaviour of bypassing
the limiter?
That glitch is just the change in amplitude (I think, at least with
the CVS version), its much less serious than the glitch you get from
changing the latency suddenly.
- Steve
7:44 a.m.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 05:40:10PM +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 17:03, Jan Depner wrote:
No, its postly the EQ and crossover.
- Steve
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 07:20, Arnold Krille
wrote:
Where does the delay come from? Is it from the "Fast lookahead limiter"?
Another idea which came to my mind is kind of a
speaker-managament
system, which seems to not exist under linux. Maybe adding
hi/mid/lo-outputs to Jamin would help filling this gap...
You're the second
person to ask about that. Steve says no.
Personally I'm kind of intrigued by the idea. It would work for DJing
but I don't think you could use it for live sound because there is a
minimum of 10ms (I think) delay in JAMin. Actually, if you can crank up
three instances of JAMin and solo each band you can already do this.
The system overhead would only be... ridiculous ;-)
29 Mar
29 Mar
7:29 p.m.
You're the second person to ask about that. Steve
says no.
Personally I'm kind of intrigued by the idea. It would work for DJing
but I don't think you could use it for live sound because there is a
minimum of 10ms (I think) delay in JAMin. Actually, if you can crank up
three instances of JAMin and solo each band you can already do this.
The system overhead would only be... ridiculous ;-)
Why is there a min 10ms delay? Any way around that? That might just rule
it out for my live application, which would be too bad 'cause the
interface looks so nice.
What would be the best host for SC4s and para eqs if I want sub 10ms delay?
Thanks
Iain
7:37 p.m.
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:28, Iain Duncan wrote:
I wasn't really thinking clearly at that point. I think you can get
rid of that 10ms delay by bypassing the lookahead limiter.
Jan
You're the
second person to ask about that. Steve says no.
Personally I'm kind of intrigued by the idea. It would work for DJing
but I don't think you could use it for live sound because there is a
minimum of 10ms (I think) delay in JAMin. Actually, if you can crank up
three instances of JAMin and solo each band you can already do this.
The system overhead would only be... ridiculous ;-)
Why is there a min 10ms delay? Any way around that? That might just rule
it out for my live application, which would be too bad 'cause the
interface looks so nice.
What would be the best host for SC4s and para eqs if I want sub 10ms delay?
7:47 p.m.
Why is there a
min 10ms delay? Any way around that? That might just rule
it out for my live application, which would be too bad 'cause the
interface looks so nice.
What would be the best host for SC4s and para eqs if I want sub 10ms delay?
I wasn't really thinking clearly at that point. I think you can get
rid of that 10ms delay by bypassing the lookahead limiter.
11:19 p.m.
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:46, Iain Duncan wrote:
And I wasn't getting through my eleventy-billion emails before replying
or I would have seen you answer it already. Oops! Sorry.
That's OK, I didn't get through my eleventy-billion either so I
answered it again ;-)
Jan
Why is there a min 10ms delay? Any way around that?
That might just rule
it out for my live application, which would be too bad 'cause the
interface looks so nice.
What would be the best host for SC4s and para eqs if I want sub 10ms delay?
I wasn't really thinking clearly at that point. I think you can get
rid of that 10ms delay by bypassing the lookahead limiter.
30 Mar
30 Mar
5:06 a.m.
On Wednesday 30 March 2005 04:26, Jan Depner wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:46, Iain Duncan wrote:
You both need email-clients with thread-view ;-)
Arnold
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
And I wasn't getting through my
eleventy-billion emails before replying
or I would have seen you answer it already. Oops! Sorry.
That's OK, I
didn't get through my eleventy-billion either so I
answered it again ;-)
28 Mar
28 Mar
8:10 p.m.
*laugh* i wasn't asking YOU Jan! ;)
actually I was :) just wondering what kind of feedback you'd gotten and
stuff.
I'm obviously biased (and I'm using the latest
CVS version) but I really
like JAMin. Right now I am in the process of mastering a CD for a
friend of mine. He's got a Roland VS2000 and I can unequivocally say
that JAMin stomps all over the Roland mastering software in that thing.
There is just no comparison - which is why I'm using JAMin ;-) The only
thing I'd like to add to JAMin right now is a variable (0-3ms low, 0-2ms
mid) delay on the low and mid bands. Hear that Steve - nudge, nudge,
wink, wink, hint, hint...
9:54 p.m.
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 18:52, Aaron Trumm wrote:
Actually I'm planning on going to 4 parametric controls in addition
to the 2 shelving controls.
Jan
Mostly
positive, and the inevitable requests for more features ;-)
yeah, like five bands - I bet everyone wants five bands, DON'T they? *waves
a watch in front of your face*....five...bands....
29 Mar
29 Mar
3:22 a.m.
Jan Depner wrote:
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 18:52, Aaron Trumm wrote:
Actually I'm planning on going to 4 parametric controls in addition
to the 2 shelving controls.
Jan
Why limit things like this? Why not optional shelving controls, and as
many parametric bands as we want? And as many compression bands as we want?
--
e. j. branagan
the MUSE § Nashville, TN
Mostly
positive, and the inevitable requests for more features ;-)
yeah, like five bands - I bet everyone wants five bands, DON'T they? *waves
a watch in front of your face*....five...bands....
11:22 a.m.
New subject: [Jamin] Re: [linux-audio-user] repost: curious about jamin feedback
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 00:22, e. j. branagan - the MUSE wrote:
Jan Depner wrote:
Look at the code. This is not trivial, especially considering that
all of the parametric data must be saved and allow undo. Also, look at
the screen real estate. We've been trying to avoid bloatware. If you
look at the competing commercial offerings I don't believe any of them
have 6 parametric controls. I also don't recall any with more than
three bands of compression.
Jan
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 18:52, Aaron Trumm wrote:
Actually I'm planning on going to 4 parametric controls in addition
to the 2 shelving controls.
Jan
Why limit things like this? Why not optional shelving controls, and as
many parametric bands as we want? And as many compression bands as we want? Mostly
positive, and the inevitable requests for more features ;-)
yeah, like five bands - I bet everyone wants five bands, DON'T they? *waves
a watch in front of your face*....five...bands....
7:41 a.m.
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 04:52:25PM -0800, Aaron Trumm wrote:
5 bands means (scratches head) 50% higher CPU load. Maybe next year ;)
- Steve
Mostly
positive, and the inevitable requests for more features ;-)
yeah, like five bands - I bet everyone wants five bands, DON'T they? *waves
a watch in front of your face*....five...bands....
3:34 a.m.
Aaron Trumm wrote:
*laugh* i wasn't asking YOU Jan! ;)
actually I was :) just wondering what kind of feedback you'd gotten and
stuff.
How about separate outputs on the low, mid and high bands so I can run
the output to my tri-amped stereo PA system? i.e. make jamin a
real-time EQ/COMP/Xover/Limiter for live PA work? I already run two
effects loops through jack-rack, and record on one PC and have 3 more
PC's coming real soon. A single-channel version of jamin to EQ/compress
vocal and bass channels and such would be nice too. I guess what I'ld
really like is a cross between jamin and the dbx DDP, with a built-in
(optional) 2, 3, or 4 band xover.
--
e. j. branagan
the MUSE § Nashville, TN
I'm obviously biased (and I'm using the
latest CVS version) but I really
like JAMin. Right now I am in the process of mastering a CD for a
friend of mine. He's got a Roland VS2000 and I can unequivocally say
that JAMin stomps all over the Roland mastering software in that thing.
There is just no comparison - which is why I'm using JAMin ;-) The only
thing I'd like to add to JAMin right now is a variable (0-3ms low, 0-2ms
mid) delay on the low and mid bands. Hear that Steve - nudge, nudge,
wink, wink, hint, hint...
7:45 a.m.
New subject: [Jamin] Re: [linux-audio-user] repost: curious about jamin feedback
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 12:33:54AM -0600, e. j. branagan - the MUSE wrote:
How about separate outputs on the low, mid and high
bands so I can run
the output to my tri-amped stereo PA system? i.e. make jamin a
real-time EQ/COMP/Xover/Limiter for live PA work? I already run two
effects loops through jack-rack, and record on one PC and have 3 more
PC's coming real soon. A single-channel version of jamin to EQ/compress
vocal and bass channels and such would be nice too. I guess what I'ld
really like is a cross between jamin and the dbx DDP, with a built-in
(optional) 2, 3, or 4 band xover.
Hmm... I have to say no to that one. JAMin is a mastering tool, if it can
be used for other things (eg. it would make a good FM radio pre-processor
with no changes whatsoever) without affecting its suitability for mastering
then thats fine, but those kinda of features aren't helpful for master and
so just add user confusion and code complexity.
- Steve
28 Mar
28 Mar
7:48 p.m.
On Monday 28 March 2005 23:40, Aaron Trumm wrote:
Hello all - was just now reading some discussion about
Jamin - was just
wondering, how are people responding to Jamin? are they liking it? are
people liking the way it sounds? getting good results? complaining?
raving?
just got curious is all.
I like Jamin, it works great even with the standard-settings.
I just master a live-recording I did yesterday and it altough it is just a
quick-and-dirty master jamin improved it a lot even with very conservative
settings.
And since the last ardour beta can do _non-faulty_ tocs, making cd's is no
pain any more. If only I could get my cdrdao to burn the tocs...
Arnold
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
8:07 p.m.
oh wow - about the TOCs - can you explain that in ardour? I haven't used
that beta yet (probably build it again tonight actually)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arnold Krille" <arnold(a)roederberg.dyndns.org>
To: "A list for linux audio users" <linux-audio-user(a)music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] repost: curious about jamin feedback
29 Mar
29 Mar
7:55 a.m.
Last Monday 28 March 2005 22:40, Aaron Trumm was like:
Hello all - was just now reading some discussion about
Jamin - was just
wondering, how are people responding to Jamin? are they liking it? are
people liking the way it sounds? getting good results? complaining?
raving?
It rocks ;-)
cheers,
tim hall
http://glastonburymusic.org.uk
7179
days inactive
7181
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
34 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Aaron Trumm -
Arnold Krille -
e. j. branagan - the MUSE -
Iain Duncan -
Jan Depner -
Steve Harris -
tim hall -
Wolfgang Woehl