From: Johnny Rosenberg <gurus.knugum@...>
Subject: Re: my proposal for Johnny
To: Igor Chernenko <igor.chernenko@...>
I have temporarily solved my problems now, by simply giving up. It was
simple… I actually already had a plugin installed that I just didn't find
earlier: ”Fast lookahead limiter” by Steve Harris, which is a LADSPA plugin,
not a Nyquist one. It does exactly what I want, EXCEPT one minor thing: It
delays the signal with about 5 ms, so I just have to make sure that I have
at least 5 ms extra silence at the end of the song and I can't use it on
selections for that reason (the first 5 ms of the selection will be silence,
which is everything else than useful), but I always use it on a whole song
anyway, so that's not a big problem.
I have the source code in C, which is a language that I understand most
parts of. I will someday make my own limiter, probably by modifying Steve's
code or maybe rewriting one from scratch.
Now I want to explain why I think this limiter sounds so great, and I will
do that by giving you an example of a comparison with another limiter.
Load a song in Audacity. Anything will do, but of course it's a good thing
if the sound quality is the best possible. I always use 24-bit wav files (fs=44
100 Hz), but unfortunately I found no way to export to that format, so I
export to 24-bit flac instead, but that's the same sound quality anyway.
Now, apply another limiter that is supposed to work: The ”TAP Scaling
limiter”. I guess most people have it installed, otherwise it's not that
hard to find by google.
Set Limit level to -20 dB and leave the Output volume to 0. As you can hear,
there is a lot of distorsion. On the other hand, we can't expect such a
brutal process as limiting to -20 dB to sound great, but it shouldn't be
Now, undo the TAP limiting. Select the Fast lookahead limiter and do the
Input gain: 0 dB
Limit: -20 dB
Release time: 0.01 s (=10 ms)
Now listen. No distorsion (every change from the original sound IS
distorsion by definition, but this example doesn't SOUND like distorsion, at
least not as heavy distorsion, and that's the important thing to me), but
there are some ”pumping”. The pumping is natural when doing such a brutal
thing like the one we are doing here. If we limit to, let's say about -6 dB
in most cases, the pumping is unlikely to be heared (depending a bit on what
the original sound file looks like).
So when finishing my recordings for my next CD (if there ever wil be one),
this is how I will do it (from what I know at this very moment):
- Record some missing tracks on my external recording equipment (a Roland
- Mix it down using automix and the built in Mastering Tool Kit.
- Export the mix to a 24-bit wav file (the unit is old, made in 2001, so
it doesn't have a USB port, so I have to burn it on a CD-RW).
- Copy and rename the file to my PC, open it with Audacity.
- Make sure there are at least 5 ms silence at the end of the song. if
not, add it.
- Remove DC from signal, by using the ”DC Offset Remover”.
- Study the waveform and use my ears. There are problably a few peaks
that needs to be attenuated.
- Apply the Fast Lookahead Limiter and select some reasonable values.
- Listen to the result. Does it sound as good as I hoped? If not, undo
and try with other values.
- Normalise. The standard Normalise effect can be used for this. Uncheck
the ”Remove any DC offset”, since we did that already.
- When all songs are done, listen to them one by one and adjust their
volumes so the different songs match each other. They should also match the
other CD I made many years ago, especially the remake which is slightly
louder than the original one.
So it looks like I have all the tools I need now to finish my CD the way I
want. Now it's up to me to use them…
Thans for all inputs and ideas. Even ideas not used are ideas and it's fun
learning new stuff and learn how other people think.
2008/12/23 Igor Chernenko <igor.chernenko@...>
> Hi Johnny!
> Don't worry! Take it easy!
> Buddha told that there two causes of suffering.
> The first one is unsatisfied desires.
> The second one is satisfied desires.
> So that, try to formalize your wants.
> Write down something about what you want (in any language you like).
> Then try to define it clearly.
> The goal should be clearly defined.
> Then try to imagine steps with which to achieve the goal.
> Then write down the steps.
> When the step are defined, they can be discussed with other people.
> Do not think much about this. The solution will come without efforts.
> Any efforts could only postpone the arrival of the much desired solution.
> Relax you mind, and the solution will arrive by itself.
> Best regards,
> Except that I'd prefer to write the algorithm in a language that I
>> understand, which is definitely not English, I agree with you.
>> However, right now I feel unbelievable stupid anyway, so I guess the best
>> thing to do right now is to just give up. Maybe I'll feel different
>> tomorrow, perhaps even more stupid, I don't know.