[[email protected]]

I recently dowloaded some digital
music files from Amazon, and
loaded them into Audacity sheerly
for the sake of futzing around with
them.

As they were recent tunes, they
exhibited the typical maxed out
appearance in the workspace. But
what really shocked me is what
happened when I selected a song
and the amplify tool: The nominal
amount of available amplification
was -1.8dB for one song - MINUS
that is!

How could that be, in digital where
0dBfs is the absolute ceiling? So
sure enough, I applied the -1.8dB
of amplification, and ended up with
a slightly raggedy looking envelope
instead of one that *appeared*
brick-walled. I thought these digital
files were peak-limited in mastering.

Or am I missing something?

[None]

theckhhmaaaah @ tardsRtheckhmaaah.com farted...
Or am I missing something?

Of course you are. Story of your life.

[Rasta Robert]

On 2017-06-01, wrote:
I recently dowloaded some digital
music files from Amazon, and
loaded them into Audacity sheerly
for the sake of futzing around with
them.

As they were recent tunes, they
exhibited the typical maxed out
appearance in the workspace. But
what really shocked me is what
happened when I selected a song
and the amplify tool: The nominal
amount of available amplification
was -1.8dB for one song - MINUS
that is!

How could that be, in digital where
0dBfs is the absolute ceiling? So
sure enough, I applied the -1.8dB
of amplification, and ended up with
a slightly raggedy looking envelope
instead of one that *appeared*
brick-walled. I thought these digital
files were peak-limited in mastering.

Or am I missing something?

Yes. You don't know yet about inter-sample peaks yet.
This page offers an explanation:
http://www.musictech.net/2012/09/10mm-no211-inter-sample-peaks/
or you can search on that term in your favorite search engine.

[[email protected]]

Rasta Robert wrote: "Yes. You don't know yet about inter-sample peaks yet.
This page offers an explanation:
http://www.musictech.net/2012/09/10mm-no211-inter-sample-peaks/
or you can search on that term in your favorite search engine. "

Oooh but I do!

In fact, over the years their existence
has been somewhat swept under the
rug here on Usenet and on pro audio
forums I frequent.

When exporting a lossless project
to a lossy codec, I either peak limit
half to one dB below full scale, or,
amplify project so that highest peaks
are no closer than that amount to
full scale.

Guess the engineers who mastered
those Amazon files didn't think
ISPs exist either!

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 9:13:15 AM UTC-4, wrote:
Rasta Robert wrote: "Yes. You don't know yet about inter-sample peaks yet.
This page offers an explanation:
http://www.musictech.net/2012/09/10mm-no211-inter-sample-peaks/
or you can search on that term in your favorite search engine. "

Oooh but I do!

In fact, over the years their existence
has been somewhat swept under the
rug here on Usenet and on pro audio
forums I frequent.

When exporting a lossless project
to a lossy codec, I either peak limit
half to one dB below full scale, or,
amplify project so that highest peaks
are no closer than that amount to
full scale.

Guess the engineers who mastered
those Amazon files didn't think
ISPs exist either!

So, I have an graphic equalizer on WinAmp, think +/- 12 DB. Can I move it any and destroy peaks? You know, saturation? I'm no advocate of brick-walled sound, but a peak is a peak, it's not like RMS, so you lose a few peaks, no one will ever notice.

Jack

[None]

thick mama @ tardsRthickmama.dik wrote in message
...
Rasta Robert wrote: "Yes. You don't know yet about inter-sample
peaks yet.
This page offers an explanation:
http://www.musictech.net/2012/09/10mm-no211-inter-sample-peaks/
or you can search on that term in your favorite search engine. "

Oooh but I do!

You've spend years proving otherwise, up to and including your recent
posts.

[[email protected]]

You guys are a bunch of WIMPs,
scared of a garbage-spewing BOT.

[None]

thekma @ snailbrain.com cantilevered in message
...
You guys are a bunch of WIMPs, scared of a garbage-spewing BOT.

Nice to know you're thinking of me, li'l buddy! KSJDLS. KOKOLN.
FCKWAFA!

[None]

theckhmah @ omnibus-brevis.com wrote in message
...
You guys are a bunch of WIMPs, scared ...

The only scared wimp around here is the retard with the blank stare
that you see in the mirror. HTH, li'l guy. DSK. WAFA.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 10:50:14 PM UTC-4, wrote:
I recently dowloaded some digital
music files from Amazon, and
loaded them into Audacity sheerly
for the sake of futzing around with
them.

As they were recent tunes, they
exhibited the typical maxed out
appearance in the workspace. But
what really shocked me is what
happened when I selected a song
and the amplify tool: The nominal
amount of available amplification
was -1.8dB for one song - MINUS
that is!

How could that be, in digital where
0dBfs is the absolute ceiling? So
sure enough, I applied the -1.8dB
of amplification, and ended up with
a slightly raggedy looking envelope
instead of one that *appeared*
brick-walled. I thought these digital
files were peak-limited in mastering.

Or am I missing something?

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency spectrum.
I have a Dusty Springfield hit tune that has a distinct DC offset (I thought), I could not correct. Audacity shows a peak about 17kHz!! I can truncate with Goldwave, but it really changes the waveform!! I GUESS I'm the only one who notices these oddities, with my non-fancy audio software!!

Jack

[[email protected]]

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency spectrum.




if you like spectral plots, take a look at N-Track studio

m

[[email protected]]

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 9:53:10 AM UTC-4, wrote:

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency spectrum.




if you like spectral plots, take a look at N-Track studio

m

Maybe I will Mark. I mean, Audacity is nice to show the (spectrum) peak, but it's a best guess somewhere between 15-20kHz!

Jack

[[email protected]]

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 9:53:10 AM UTC-4, wrote:

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency spectrum.




if you like spectral plots, take a look at N-Track studio

m

p.s. I know Scott and I disagree, but this Son Of A Preacher Man song, music intro is fine, but I'm guessing where the vocals were mixed/added, then you see the 16kHz VU bar remain constant/static. Why I preach about varying DC offset, even though this doesn't appear to be the case here. What caused it is beyond me.

Jack

[Trevor]

On 5/06/2017 11:53 PM, wrote:

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency spectrum.

if you like spectral plots, take a look at N-Track studio

Many/most commercial DAW's do frequency and spectral plots. I'm guessing
what he really likes about Audacity is that it is free. :-)

Trevor.

[Phil W]

Trevor:
On 5/06/2017 11:53 PM, wrote:

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency
spectrum.

if you like spectral plots, take a look at N-Track studio

Many/most commercial DAW's do frequency and spectral plots. I'm guessing
what he really likes about Audacity is that it is free. :-)

Trevor

Another free alternative for *looking at* audio files is "Sonic Visualiser"

http://sonicvisualiser.org

[[email protected]]

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 9:59:00 PM UTC-4, Trevor wrote:
On 5/06/2017 11:53 PM, wrote:

One thing I like about Audacity, is its ability to plot a frequency spectrum.

if you like spectral plots, take a look at N-Track studio

Many/most commercial DAW's do frequency and spectral plots. I'm guessing
what he really likes about Audacity is that it is free. :-)

Trevor.

You can find me in Audacity forum asking for added feature, main gain control. Most thought good/great idea, since "mixing" is a pain, especially when you have a perfect (stereo) mix, but find output too high!!

Also, when multi-tracks surfaced, many claimed you need "newer" Audacity version, that was a crock. Shows me how little others know.

Actually, I'm impressed with recent Sgt. Pepper remixes (comments of others), some are finally catching on. Giles Martin needs training before using DAW.

Jack