Skip to main content
Recent Posts
Scientific Discussion / Re: Have a working 'expander' based on DolbyA (not same design) -- works well.
Last post by punkrockdude -
I haven't used it myself but I contacted a person that uses Dolby A and I Think he has contacted you. I really appreciate what you are doing even though I have not used your software since I do not have any Dolby A encoded material. I do look forward to try out your future compressor you talked about earlier. I also love that you software is available to Linux and hopefully your compressor can be a LV2 or/and VST plugin.
Scientific Discussion / Re: Have a working 'expander' based on DolbyA (not same design) -- works well.
Last post by jsdyson -
Regarding my disgust as to the quality of some of the available recordings, and finding that they were like left with DolbyA encoding intact -- yes.  That is 99% of the reason why I decided to write my own decoder.  I like challenges.  Plan to start working on SR (much more of a challenge) soon.

Regarding proof of operation/accuracy:  Yes -- an audio professional along with a golden-ears expert (for proof) has worked with me on perfecting the DolbyA decoder to be very compatible (but not bug compatible.)  So, SOME of the results of my SW decoder are better (cleaner/smoother sound -- minimal intermod -- no harmonic distortion from FET or diode gain control like the newer DolbyAs (FET) or the original (diode).)  The SW decoder has NONE of the typical defects of a SW compressor/expander regarding a harsh kind of sound.

I have been working on this for months, barely got it working credibly (kind of) about 2mos ago.  Then, a recording expert started participating (he wanted backup for his DolbyA units and probably computer environment software.)  He and I worked on making the gain curves nearly perfect (generally less than 0.5dB static error on all 4 channels, including the screwy 9k-20k channel.)
The SW doesn't use a simple attack/release scheme like a DolbyA schematic (and various patents) might imply, but uses something that strongly mitigates most mathematically unnecessary intermod, and produces a generally smoother/more accurate sound than either another commonly avaialble DolbyA SW decoder and real DolbyA units.  However, the audible attack/decay fits hand in glove with the real DolbyA.  (interestingly, even the distortion from the true LF on Simon&Garfunkel Scarborough Fair moduating with the gain control is removed because of the good matching for the decode operation.)

So, this has been acid tested with real (proven) DolbyA material and compared with real DolbyA units.  Also, very often, if material is NOT DolbyA encoded, but DolbyA is used to decode -- the sound becomes quite defective (including expander effects, terribly decreased HF, etc.)

So, if you listen to the examples on the repository, and find that the sound is reasonably good - then the original material was either DolbyA encoding somewhere in the processing chain or there was a similar sidechain compressor being used.

Please enjoy -- and the SW is available if you want.

Scientific Discussion / Re: Have a working 'expander' based on DolbyA (not same design) -- works well.
Last post by krabapple -
So , your presumption is that  as much as half of what your are purchasing is Dolby A encoded material  that was NOT decoded during mastering... and that's why you've developed a software decoder?

Your best demonstration would be to record something using Dolby A NR, then decode it with both a Dolby A decoder and your own software, and compare the results.

Audio Hardware / Re: Subwoofer advice needed
Last post by krabapple -
Subwoofer placement -- choosing where you put it/them -- is actually important, and significantly affects the results.  If you have no time or inclination to find the optimal spot systematically, a corner is often recommended as the default, as it 'activates' the most modes in a room.

3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Columns UI
Last post by gob -
Just wondering if there's any known performance issues between CUI's spectrum analyzer and WASAPI playback. The audio is fine, but the spectrum analyser is extremely choppy when outputting to any WASAPI device. I seem to recall there being a fix for this.
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: [Not my release] foo_uie_panel_splitter
Last post by fabiospark -
Is there a way to know the vertical space used by an auto wrapped text?

I have a "performer" field that sometimes gets quite populated and
I would liket to check if it can be shown into four lines otherwise
I would add a "... and others" at the end.

To do so I need to know how many lines the wrapped text is going to use
but the wrapping is done by the panel itself (thankfully) so I don't have
a way to know that by myself.

Audio Hardware / Re: Subwoofer advice needed
Last post by Fairy -
Just to let you know. I've been to a good hifi store where I have bought my CM10's and NAD and I ordered the B&W DB4S subwoofer. Quite a new model. A bit (a lot!) above my initial budget, but it's so damn advanced compared to the average subwoofer. No dials and switches, everything happens inside the amplifier via a bluetooth connection. You can set a lot more parameters.

Only problem left... I have to wait till wednesday or thursday before my sub arrives  :-[  :-[
Scientific Discussion / Re: Audio Summing Algorithm
Last post by Nikaki -
You just add the sample values. Nothing special needed. If you exceed 1.0, you can just clip when you convert the final result to integer samples, or divide every sample in the final result so that the highest peak is 1.0.

If you want to guarantee that there won't be any clipping during the mixing, you would need to divide the samples by the amount of streams to be mixed.

There are results for this on the net. You might want to search for "mixing audio samples clipping."
Scientific Discussion / Re: Wrote some scripts that partially undo early Exciter type devices
Last post by jsdyson -
Here is the current (functioning) source for the 'unexciter' code.  It does work, and does remove some of the nasal quality of some of the older recordings.  It runs exceptionally slowly and is not algorithmically optimized.  This is more of a sound effect (or undoing the sound effect) rather than a recovery/decoding program.  That is -- there is a slight change in the sound of a recording, and the results are middling at best.  The only places where it seems to be of substantial benefit are for ABBA recordings (pure DolbyA ones -- not the CDs from Polar,etc) and also it seems like the old Herp Alpert/Brasil'66 really benefits.  Otherwise, it is more of a 'tone control.'

Is this worth it?  Probably not, but I had advertised that I was working on this, and trying to be honest/transparent about the semi-bust for this development (the DolbyA decoder and compressor/expander on the other hand are fantastic.)

The program takes standard input/output redirection for .wav files (16 bit, 24 bit or 32bit floating point, any sample rate between 44.1k through 192k or higher -- but 88k through 192k are best.)   Higher sample rates are slower (lots more fine grained calculations.)
The best options for cleaning up/correcting old recordings are the following:
--width=1.414 --hilb=-1.0 --dr=0.156
Since I am not really supporting this, and there is likely very little interest (has to be used on Linux -- didn't do a Windows port) -- the explaination of the args are thus:
--width is the M/S Side expansion before subtracting the hilbert of the signal.
--hilbert is the proportion of the hilbert added/subtracted, -1.0 means subtract 100% of the hilbert of the M/S expanded version.
--dr is the proportion of the weirdly phase shifted signal that is effectively subtracted from the signal.

Bugs:  not necessarily very useful, considering the dreadfully slow runtime, the results might be  inverted (by mistake.)
Benefit: forced me to rewrite the filter infrastructure so that it can adjust to any sample rate -- now the new filter code benefits the psuedo-DolbyA decoder and soon will benefit my super nice expander and useful compressor.  (BTW, an example of the results of my expander is the almost total uncompressing of 'Shake it Off' -- my expander can do incredibly high expansion ratios without jerking...)  The site of the examples is:

The ABBA example on the site (SOS) was un-(Aphex)-Excited.

I try to follow through with implications that I make -- and attached is the current (working and functioning) source code for the unexciter.

SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018