Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,481
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 13/10/2015 8:42 p.m., Trevor wrote:

Rubbish, When someone claims clipping is not clipping simply because
it's level has been post reduced, or that clipping is not clipping
simply because it was done by a "limiter" that is FARRRRR from hair
splitting about definitions, that is about that person not
understanding the basic fundamentals of recording!!!!!


Dunno where how you managed to extrapolate that out of anything I've said.

But you do appear to be claiming that all limiting is 'clipping', which
is crap.

geoff
  #82   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] makolber@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 614
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 4:43:41 PM UTC-4, wrote:
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't
know me at all.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating
clipping: http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result
zoomed in looks exactly like the red lines in that
diagramSo does anyone know what the F- limiting
looks like in a DAW?!


Limiting will maintain the sine wave shape of the WAVEFORM.

Limiting can squash the ENVELOPE (what you see when you don't zoom in)

Mark


  #83   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] thekmanrocks@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,742
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

wrote: "Limiting can and will flat top an envelope but not the waveform. "

Ok, flatten the loudest parts of a whole song envelope. But when I
zoom down in my daw to individual waves what do I see? FLAT
TOPS on the tallest waves!

Explain THAT, professor.
  #85   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] makolber@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 614
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

I'm going to try to distill this down as simple as i can.

Clipping will alter the WAVEFORM and the ENVELOPE. Since the waveform is altered, harmonics are created.


Pure limiting will NOT alter the WAVEFORM (and hence not create harmonics) but limiting will alter the ENVELOPE of course.

over and out....

Mark


  #86   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] makolber@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 614
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 5:02:53 PM UTC-4, wrote:
wrote: "Limiting can and will flat top an envelope but not the waveform. "

Ok, flatten the loudest parts of a whole song envelope. But when I
zoom down in my daw to individual waves what do I see? FLAT
TOPS on the tallest waves!

Explain THAT, professor.


Then you also have clipping

Mark


  #87   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,481
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 9:43 a.m., wrote:
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't
know me at all.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating
clipping:
http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result
zoomed in looks exactly like the red lines in that
diagramSo does anyone know what the F- limiting
looks like in a DAW?!


Depends on the DAW and what it is doing when you implement it's 'hard
limiting'.

If it clips (actually clips) and that's not what you want, tweak the
controls, use a different plugin, or buy a different DAW (or editor).

geoff
  #88   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

In article ,
wrote:
wrote: "Limiting can and will flat top an envelope but not the waveform. "

Ok, flatten the loudest parts of a whole song envelope. But when I
zoom down in my daw to individual waves what do I see? FLAT
TOPS on the tallest waves!

Explain THAT, professor.


You might want to go back to the discussion a year or so ago where a dozen
people attempted futilely to explain to you the difference between envelopes
and waveforms.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #89   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
JackA JackA is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,052
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 4:20:19 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 2:34:38 PM UTC-4, wrote:
:


Hmmm.. When I limit(flat top) a pure sine wave, even by
just .5dB, it sounds different to me


if you flat top it, then it is not limiting, it is clipping


-- I just want to know HOW to get a sinewave to clip. No crest, no sound. Flat-topping would create the harmonics.

Thanks.

Jack


that is the essesnce of the difference

Mark


  #90   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
JackA JackA is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,052
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 4:43:29 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 8:19 a.m., JackA wrote:
O
I tend to think, if I could actually clip a sine-wave, I would not hear anything for a brief moment. You couldn't clip with magnetic tape, since it just keeps saturating more. However, you may be able to do it with digital, but maybe not, where it ends up as DC, then I'd think you'd hear harmonics.

Great subject.

Jack


" I tend to think " - yeah right ....

Easy to clip program with the electronics prior to the actual tape.


I know, I know, show me a clipped sinewave on an oscilloscope, smart guy!! :-)

Jack

geoff




  #91   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
JackA JackA is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,052
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 3:42:38 AM UTC-4, Trevor wrote:
On 13/10/2015 7:50 AM, geoff wrote:
On 13/10/2015 3:23 a.m., Trevor wrote:
On 13/10/2015 12:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
geoff wrote:
No CD that I've purchased in the last decade exhibit clipping that I've
noticed, though a few are over-compressed to hell (not many
fortunately). And some I've been prompted to actually check ! Not much
'current' pop though I concede.

The problem is that in the digital world, clipping is whatever you
define
it as. I tend to set metering so three consecutive FS samples light the
over light, and so that is clipping.

No, you first have to normalise the gain back to 0dBFS for that to
work since many CD's are first *severely clipped* then normalised to
about -0.3dBFS, so your clip lights will never come on. BUT the flat
tops remain regardless!


Aggressive limiting that flat-tops the signal isn't necessarily
clipping,
it's just aggressive limiting.

Rubbish, peak limiting that causes flat tops IS clipping. YOU simply
don't understand what they have done, or the difference between
compression and limiting it seems.


I think this is the only thing where we really disagree. The rest of
your debate seems hair-splitting about definitions of terms.


Rubbish, When someone claims clipping is not clipping simply because
it's level has been post reduced, or that clipping is not clipping
simply because it was done by a "limiter" that is FARRRRR from hair
splitting about definitions, that is about that person not understanding
the basic fundamentals of recording!!!!!




I say that 'clipping' is only the result of a digital or analogue
*overload*, where the actual mathematical or electrical constraints of
the process are exceeded and nothing can exist above.


Right, as occurs when a limiter exceeds it's absolute peak level, a
mixer or amplifier exceeds it's maximum rail voltage, or a digital
device exceeds it's digital full scale level, whether OR NOT, that level
is subsequently reduced AFTER clipping!!


'Limiting' is the *controlled* result of a digital or analogue process.
And yes, that can be extreme to the point of resembling clipping, but is
not the same thing.


Bull****!! A limiter by it's very nature will produce CLIPPING when it
exceeds it's knee and reaches it's maximum level. That's the whole point
of the device after all. One may choose to use it so it never exceeds
the knee (and hard limiting may not even have a knee!) but IF it does
exceed absolute maximum, then CLIPPING will occur! That you choose to
believe it is somehow not clipping just because YOU prefer to call it
limiting only shows you ignorance!!!


Achieving, or adding to, limiting by clipping (sadly) is done,
presumably by those who are incompetent, lack understanding of the
implications, or have cynical intent.


Yep, but limiting is NOT necessarily the same as compression. You and
many others still seem to be totally confused about that. And of course
one can drive a compressor into clipping as well!
Clipping is clipping no matter how it is achieved. Arguing that it is
not is simply TOTAL BS!

Trevor.


I guess you could say clipping is when a steady state occurs in audio, nothing is changing. Nothing changes, no sound. Sort of like listening to a battery connected to a speaker - power is used, but no sound.

Jack
  #92   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 782
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

whineybitch @ gmail.com wrote in message
...
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't know me at all.


You've been making a huge stinking public display of what you don't
understand, for some years now. What makes you think nobody would
notice?

  #93   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 782
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

thekma @ shortbus.edu wrote in message
...
wrote: "Limiting can and will flat top an envelope
but not the waveform. "

Ok, flatten the loudest parts of a whole song envelope. But when I
zoom down in my daw to individual waves what do I see? FLAT
TOPS on the tallest waves!

Explain THAT, professor.


It's been explained to you, probably hundreds of times now. Explaining
it is a waste of time. You're not capable of understanding.

  #94   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
JackA JackA is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,052
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 5:09:12 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 9:43 a.m., wrote:
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't
know me at all.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating
clipping:
http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result
zoomed in looks exactly like the red lines in that
diagramSo does anyone know what the F- limiting
looks like in a DAW?!


Depends on the DAW and what it is doing when you implement it's 'hard
limiting'.

If it clips (actually clips) and that's not what you want, tweak the
controls, use a different plugin, or buy a different DAW (or editor).


And may I say, most people who hang-out in usenet have pirated copies of Pro Tools; same with Photoshop. That's why, after several years, I decided to purchase Goldwave.

Goldwave can even remove varying DC Offset, even though Scott said there is no such thing, but since he now ignores me, he must have found out there is such a thing!!

Welcome to usenet.

Jack
Jack

geoff


  #95   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 782
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

thkema @ gurgle.dum****sRus.com wrote in message
...
A SIDE NOTE:
Via google groups, this thread, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah


Usenet does not give a **** about gurgle groups. Get a real newsreader
or stop your whining.



  #96   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 782
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

ignorant-ignoramus @ shortbus.edu wrote in message
...
So I DO understand what's going on Mike, Scott, geoff, and


Still utterly failing to ignore me, I see. You understand how to
ignore me about as much as you understand audio. Dumb****.

who shall remain nameless,


Heh. You just posted about me, again. You're as sharp as a bowling
ball!

it's putting things into words where I stumble.


  #97   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,481
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 12:15 p.m., JackA wrote:
And may I say, most people who hang-out in usenet have pirated copies
of Pro Tools; same with Photoshop. That's why, after several years, I
decided to purchase Goldwave.


Maybe the other odd places that you hang out, with amateurs dabbling.

Here most people are professionals who pay for their software

geoff
  #98   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
JackA JackA is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,052
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 7:27:24 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 12:15 p.m., JackA wrote:
And may I say, most people who hang-out in usenet have pirated copies
of Pro Tools; same with Photoshop. That's why, after several years, I
decided to purchase Goldwave.


Maybe the other odd places that you hang out, with amateurs dabbling.

Here most people are professionals who pay for their software


I hope you don't mind me, an amateur, hanging out with the professionals!! I feel so honored!

Jack


geoff


  #99   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 1:58 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote:

a good way to differentiate clipping from limiting from compression is by
considering the attack and decay times relative to the features of the waveform


That's half of it... and the other half is the shape of the knee. But how
fast is fast? When does soft clipping become limiting and vice-versa?


There is NO such thing as "soft clipping". It's either clipped or it's
not. There is soft limiting however which you probably mean, and it's
very simple, when the knee ends and the signal flat tops for a few
samples (usually accepted as at least 3 or more) then it has gone into
clipping.
I'm surprised you still don't grasp this?

Trevor.


  #100   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] thekmanrocks@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,742
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

"You've been making a huge stinking public display of what you don't
understand, for some years now. What makes you think nobody would notice"


YOU HAVEN'T CONTRIBUTED ANYTHING TO
THIS CONVERSATION - SO BUTT OUT, YOU
OVERFLOWING BED PAN!

I DON'T KNOW WHAT I DID TO OFFEND YOU,
AND YOU NEVER TOLD ME. EASY TO BERATE
SOMEONE ANONYMOUSLY, OVER THE INTERNET.

Dorsey, geoff, Mark, & Rivers, do not let this
used sanitary napkin deter you from mature
adult conversation. And do not offer it ANY help
when it is having trouble or asks a question.
Too many threads have died because of it.
Even if I am the only one it attacks, that
doesn't mean anyone should be strengthening
alliances with it.


  #101   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 2:02 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
Many samples?


At least 3 or more. (genuine square waves excluded) And as I have said,
some CD's have HUNDREDS of consecutive samples at maximum level, and
often many similar groups in one song. IF there are only 3 in fact I'm
not worried in the slightest, when there are hundreds I am. That is far
more common with pop CD's these days than many people seem to think,
simply because they never look.


Well, that's the degenerate case. Those CDs are clearly clipped. But I'm
talking about the borderline cases, because that's where it gets interesting.


Few borderline cases in the pop world any more.

At what point does limiting end and clipping begin?


As soon as the knee ends and maximum level is reached for at least 3 or
more samples. I'm surprised you don't understand this already It's not
rocket science!


That's a good definition. Although... I might decide it is 2 samples or
8 samples and be able to make a good argument for those too.


Go ahead. As I said 3 doesn't bother me, it's just a minimum. 8 would
mean I've done something wrong, but 1000 doesn't bother some mastering
engineers! :-(


I'm totally amazed that someone with your experience still doesn't have
a vague notion of what clipping actually is. It can occur anywhere in
the chain, and is independent of final level. Just like you can clip a
Mackie mixers mix bus, even if the output fader is well below maximum.
In fact you can clip a single channel on ANY mixer, without clipping the
mixer output, or amplifier input. THAT channel is STILL clipped!!!


Oh, I have a vague notion of what clipping actually is.... and a vague notion
of what limiting actually is.... but I can think of a LOT of examples that
are sitting directly on the border. I don't want a vague notion, I want a
precise mathematical description.


I gave you one above, and it's widely accepted by lots of recording
people, other than yourself.


My line might be "if you can hear it, it's clipping, if you can't, it's
limiting." That's no less vague, though.


Right, that is simply subjective, the accepted (by everyone else)
definition I gave is NOT.

Trevor.


  #102   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Randy Yates[_2_] Randy Yates[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 221
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

writes:


At what point does limiting end and clipping begin?


there __is__ a definitive answer to that question

with clipping , the gain changes fast enough to follow the cycle by cycle waveform ____and therefore creates harmonic and intermodulation distortion___.
If you clip a sine wave, you can hear the harmonics.
Mathematically, this is a non-linar process.

Anything slower than that, is limiting, compression or AGC.
These are mmathematically linear process


They are? I don't think so, Mark.

Let's go back to basics. A transformation T is linear iff

T(a*x1 + b*x2) = a*T(x1) + b*T(x2)

So let's consider a very simple limiter that does this:

L(x) = x, |x| 1
L(x) = sgn(x) * 1, |x| = 1.

Is this linear by the definition above? Nope. Here's
a simple counterexample.

Let x1 = 0.75, x2 = 0.75, a = 1, and b = 1. Then


a*T(x1) + b*T(x2) = 1 * 0.75 + 1 * 0.75
= 1.5

but

T(a*x1 + b*x2) = T(1.5) = 1.

Not linear.

I think you knew this. I'm not sure why you think it's linear.

--Randy


and do not create harmonics or intermod.
If you limit or compress or AGC a sine wave, you will not hear
harmonics.


(I'm not saying these are good, they can still ruin the aesthtics by squashing the dynamic range, but they do not cause harmonics or intermod.

Clipping casues harmonics and intermod.

Matematically, clipping alone creates new frequencies, The others do
not.






Mark


--
Randy Yates
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
  #106   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 7:43 AM, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 8:19 a.m., JackA wrote:
I tend to think, if I could actually clip a sine-wave, I would not
hear anything for a brief moment. You couldn't clip with magnetic
tape, since it just keeps saturating more. However, you may be able to
do it with digital, but maybe not, where it ends up as DC, then I'd
think you'd hear harmonics.

Great subject.


" I tend to think " - yeah right ....


:-)

Easy to clip program with the electronics prior to the actual tape.


And the tape itself does not have infinite flux capability so it MUST
clip eventually. The only difference is it soft limits before that point.

Trevor.


  #107   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 7:49 AM, geoff wrote:
On 13/10/2015 8:42 p.m., Trevor wrote:

Bull****!! A limiter by it's very nature will produce CLIPPING when it
exceeds it's knee and reaches it's maximum level. That's the whole
point of the device after all. One may choose to use it so it never
exceeds the knee (and hard limiting may not even have a knee!) but IF
it does exceed absolute maximum, then CLIPPING will occur! That you
choose to believe it is somehow not clipping just because YOU prefer
to call it limiting only shows you ignorance!!!


Bull**** you ! A crude limiter might - a sophisticated limiter will
produce a 'knee' region that should not resemble clipping if you look
closer.


As I have been saying ALL along, BUT will still clip past the knee.
Do you NOT get this? Or didn't bother to read what you are replying to?


Glad my ignorance keeps such good company.


Yes, you are in fine company here. Judging by others posts many have a
problem with both the technicalities AND reading comprehension! :-(


Yep, but limiting is NOT necessarily the same as compression. You and
many others still seem to be totally confused about that. And of
course one can drive a compressor into clipping as well!
Clipping is clipping no matter how it is achieved. Arguing that it is
not is simply TOTAL BS!


Limiting should be a process closer to extreme compression that clipping.


And it IS, until the maximum level is reached, at which point it clips,
How many times do I have to say the same thing?

Trevor.


  #108   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 7:50 AM, geoff wrote:
On 13/10/2015 8:24 p.m., Trevor wrote:
Yep, and yet MANY Cd's have HUNDREDS of consecutive samples at maximum
level :-(
No-one can argue THAT is *NOT* clipping simply because the CD is
normalised to -0.3dBFS, CAN THEY? Or are some people who claim to be
"pro's" really that stupid?



Was I ever suggesting that some (even many) CDs or other digital media
does not exhibit clipping ?


Where did I suggest you did?

Certainly not many of the sort that I purchase.


Good for you.

Trevor.


  #110   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 7:59 AM, wrote:
.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating clipping:
http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result zoomed in looks
exactly like the red lines in that diagramSo does anyone know what
the F- limiting looks like in a DAW?!


Yes, you must Zoom in to see the WAVEFORM rather than the ENVELOPE.


Nope it is all waveform (the envelope is simply imaginary) but yes you
must zoom in to see the waveform clearly, or in any detail.

And if the WAVEFORM appears as in the .jpg, then i would call that
clipping (as the link does) even if the box that did it is called a
limiter.


Dead right!
However what is labelled "soft clipping" is technically incorrect, that
is compressed, but not yet clipped.

Trevor.



  #111   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 7:59 AM, geoff wrote:
On 13/10/2015 8:42 p.m., Trevor wrote:

Rubbish, When someone claims clipping is not clipping simply
because it's level has been post reduced, or that clipping is not
clipping simply because it was done by a "limiter" that is FARRRRR
from hair splitting about definitions, that is about that person
not understanding the basic fundamentals of recording!!!!!


Dunno where how you managed to extrapolate that out of anything I've
said.


Easy, just put back the bit I responded to and you deliberately snipped,
and it will all become clear. Of course I think it might have been
someone else I replied to anyway and you are being even more silly with
that reply.


But you do appear to be claiming that all limiting is 'clipping',
which is crap.


Dunno where how you managed to extrapolate that out of anything I've
said! In fact I have been VERY clear to spell it out even if you can't
read or understand. Let me try once more for the slow learners, Limiting
CAN become clipping when the knee (if there is one) is past.
Not all limiting causes clipping, but it certainly CAN!

Trevor.





  #114   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 8:09 AM, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 9:43 a.m., wrote:
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't
know me at all.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating
clipping:
http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result
zoomed in looks exactly like the red lines in that
diagramSo does anyone know what the F- limiting
looks like in a DAW?!


Depends on the DAW and what it is doing when you implement it's 'hard
limiting'.

If it clips (actually clips) and that's not what you want, tweak the
controls, use a different plugin, or buy a different DAW (or editor).



Love to hear YOUR definition of HARD limiting? And the difference
between HARD limiting and clipping? :-)

Trevor.


  #115   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,481
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 4:05 p.m., Trevor wrote:
On 14/10/2015 8:09 AM, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 9:43 a.m., wrote:
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't
know me at all.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating
clipping:
http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result
zoomed in looks exactly like the red lines in that
diagramSo does anyone know what the F- limiting
looks like in a DAW?!


Depends on the DAW and what it is doing when you implement it's 'hard
limiting'.

If it clips (actually clips) and that's not what you want, tweak the
controls, use a different plugin, or buy a different DAW (or editor).



Love to hear YOUR definition of HARD limiting? And the difference
between HARD limiting and clipping? :-)

Trevor.


Clipping = individual cycles of waveforms clipped level, 3 or more
cycles (yes, even if subsequently reduced in level).

Limiting = reduced variation of waveform envelope, with the threshold
usually higher which differentiates it from compression.

Hard limiting = very small variation in the amplitude of the waveform
envelope. Arguably including a degree of individual cycle waveform
distortion resembling the previously-linked 'soft-clipping' picture (as
long as no more than 3 samples over 0dBFS, even in a prior processing
stage and subsequently reduced).

geoff


  #116   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,481
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 3:55 p.m., Trevor wrote:

Not all limiting causes clipping, but it certainly CAN!

Trevor.


" As I have been saying ALL along, BUT will still clip past the knee. "

So any limiting is clipping, and if it isn't clipping it isn't limiting !

I give up. You win. Bye.

geoff
  #117   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 2:29 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 3:55 p.m., Trevor wrote:

Not all limiting causes clipping, but it certainly CAN!

" As I have been saying ALL along, BUT will still clip past the knee. "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

So any limiting is clipping,


Wow you *DO* have a problem with reading comprehension!


and if it isn't clipping it isn't limiting !


Not totally wrong actually, it's really just compression until it
"limits", ie clips. But then the word "limiter" is used for a reason
after all, it's NOT just another compressor.

Trevor


  #118   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

On 14/10/2015 2:23 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 4:05 p.m., Trevor wrote:
On 14/10/2015 8:09 AM, geoff wrote:
On 14/10/2015 9:43 a.m., wrote:
geoff:

STOP telling me what I don't understand! You don't
know me at all.

That said, here is a good diagram illustrating
clipping:
http://www.gmarts.org/pix/fx/fx_clip1.jpg

When I utilize "hard-limiter" in a DAW, the result
zoomed in looks exactly like the red lines in that
diagramSo does anyone know what the F- limiting
looks like in a DAW?!

Depends on the DAW and what it is doing when you implement it's 'hard
limiting'.

If it clips (actually clips) and that's not what you want, tweak the
controls, use a different plugin, or buy a different DAW (or editor).



Love to hear YOUR definition of HARD limiting? And the difference
between HARD limiting and clipping? :-)



Clipping = individual cycles of waveforms clipped level, 3 or more
cycles (yes, even if subsequently reduced in level).

Limiting = reduced variation of waveform envelope, with the threshold
usually higher which differentiates it from compression.

Hard limiting = very small variation in the amplitude of the waveform
envelope. Arguably including a degree of individual cycle waveform
distortion resembling the previously-linked 'soft-clipping' picture (as
long as no more than 3 samples over 0dBFS, even in a prior processing
stage and subsequently reduced).


OK, if that very subjective definition suits you, but obviously would
only work with post processing, because no real time limiter can know
where the peak level input is ahead of time to make sure it doesn't clip
with a high threshold setting and small knee. So what do you call all
those analog limiters I wonder? Clippers perhaps? Maybe not a bad idea! :-)

Trevor.


  #120   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Luxey Luxey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default 0dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering

I think, ...
Problem with invisible clipping is not in the sound, because presumably, all interested parties have heard it prior to commiting to it.
It is in "silent" overloading of output stages and what comes with it, possibly all the way to blown out tweeters, depending on quality of playback gear and the way digital and analog meters were alligned to each other.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reference Levels for Editing, Broadcasting and Mastering hskiray Pro Audio 3 April 2nd 08 09:24 PM
Digital Levels on CD's Steve[_3_] Pro Audio 16 December 8th 07 03:22 AM
Mastering output levels. Barry Pro Audio 45 May 18th 07 12:15 PM
Mixdown Levels--Mastering? [email protected] Pro Audio 7 April 19th 05 03:55 PM
"0dBFS+ Level in Audio Production." Nick H Pro Audio 13 September 29th 03 04:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:48 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"