Skip to main content

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Recent Posts
11
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by Defender -
1. Please add a separator between channels. I drew a rough picture of how I see it.
There's a 1 pixel gap between the bars. You want it bigger?

In the current version 0.7.5.4 there sometimes is no gap at all. Maybe he had that situation, since Kor5n said he draw a picture with a gap.

Might be a good idea to make the interbar gap configurable.
12
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by kor5n -
There's a 1 pixel gap between the bars. You want it bigger?
Yes! I don't see him. And on the Spectrum it is clearly visible.
There's an RMS window setting that goes up to 5 seconds to smooth the RMS calculation independent of the chunk size.
Unfortunately, this is not at all what I expect to see... Please see how your setting is applied in comparison with what I want to get in the end.
Perhaps I'm thinking incorrectly. Or I turn on the wrong setting.
Sorry if Google Drive links are not allowed.
Another user in the thread has no problem with it even though I did not change anything. Could it be a GPU driver setting?
I have an Intel Arc video accelerator, you can expect anything from it. All graphics applications on the system are allowed maximum performance. To be fair, on the AMD Radeon R9 390X the module behaves similarly.
13
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by misio -
I had read that gearspace thread before...
There is a lot of info on internet about RMS+3 AES17 standard.
https://gearspace.com/board/mastering-forum/358907-s-aes17-not.html
https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=56155
https://discourse.ardour.org/t/calculating-rms-in-digital-audio/109812?page=2
But if you do not agree with the AES17 you can make a petition to the Audio Engineering Society to change the standard.
Do not forget to sent a mail to Steinberg (and also to other companies) to change theirs meters in Nuendo DAW  ;D
https://steinberg.help/nuendo/v8/en/cubase_nuendo/topics/loudness/loudness_master_meter_r.html
14
Opus / Re: Opus v1.5.2
Last post by NetRanger -
Opus-tools v0.2-34-g98f3ddc (using libopus 1.5.2)
Built on April 13, 2024, GCC 13.2.0
16
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by pqyt -
Hello! I really like your work!
Thx
1. Please add a separator between channels. I drew a rough picture of how I see it.
There's a 1 pixel gap between the bars. You want it bigger?
2. The RMS level should be averaged not over time, but over the size of the FFT block. Let me explain:
Averaging over time causes the peaks to twitch unnaturally, as if the computer is unable to render. When I set the block size to more than 16384 in the "Transform - Fourier Transform" settings, the RMS indicator move smoothly and beautifully. And also the current numerical value of RMS does not change so often, I have time to understand what is happening.
Unfortunately, with this setting, the peak indicator also begins to “smooth out”, so I ask you to make this setting only for RMS.
There's an RMS window setting that goes up to 5 seconds to smooth the RMS calculation independent of the chunk size.
And one more thing: the maximum rendering speed is 63-64 frames per second with a monitor (and settings) limit of 100 ::)
Another user in the thread has no problem with it even though I did not change anything. Could it be a GPU driver setting?
17
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by Case -
I had read that gearspace thread before, I think multiple times too. But I had not had the IEC 61606:1997 standard mentioned there until your links the other day. The IEC paper tells procedures how to measure analog devices, the AES17 paper tells how to measure digital equipment.

Neither describe how to calibrate an RMS meter or what RMS meter should show. They specify how to measure the performance of the device and how to report the results. The AES paper says that if you use the measurement techniques from the paper you should mention that in the footnotes of the data.

And the papers report terminology they use to describe the tests. That's very important so anyone testing things using these means can perform the tests identically.
These papers don't say anywhere that the 997 Hz full scale sine wave should be reported as having RMS of 0 db FS.

What they do tell you to do is to use the 997 Hz sine as reference level against which to report the dB differences in some of the tests.

Basically the reason RMS meters should lie and show 3 dB more is because Bob Katz says that's how all ancient RMS meters worked. I can't find any historical evidence to suggest that to be true. Here's for example some very ancient RMS meter that clearly doesn't match 0 dB RMS to 1 volt: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4vEAAOSwh5ViDSJT/s-l1600.jpg
18
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by kor5n -
Hello! I really like your work!
I have several suggestions to improve the visual style of the indicator:
1. Please add a separator between channels. I drew a rough picture of how I see it.
2. The RMS level should be averaged not over time, but over the size of the FFT block. Let me explain:
Averaging over time causes the peaks to twitch unnaturally, as if the computer is unable to render. When I set the block size to more than 16384 in the "Transform - Fourier Transform" settings, the RMS indicator move smoothly and beautifully. And also the current numerical value of RMS does not change so often, I have time to understand what is happening.
Unfortunately, with this setting, the peak indicator also begins to “smooth out”, so I ask you to make this setting only for RMS.
And one more thing: the maximum rendering speed is 63-64 frames per second with a monitor (and settings) limit of 100 ::)
Sorry for the poor English, I try to express my thoughts as best as possible.
19
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_vis_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by wojak -
Not anymore.
What do you mean? The source still shows peak is divided by 1/sqrt(2) when converting the float to dB, which adds 3 dB to its value.
I thought you meant the dBCorrection factor. That's gone.

If the peak is not supposed to be corrected by 1/sqrt(2), I'll remove it.


It seems that you already know what is causing the wrong Peak (not RMS) measurings. Please bring back the pre 0,7,5,3 version of Peaks (it was OK).