• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Dsp-x Presets wanted

crap, i missed the edit timeout. (annoying btw :-X )

i wanted to add... that imo, the radio-processing companies have nobody to blame for the "loudness wars" but themselfs, and it's not because it's impossable to have "my" sound with traditional methods. it's in my opinion because (reguardless of price) they are under engineered machines. there is balance between having to drive a Datsun Pickup at 180MPH, and coasting 30MPH in a Greyhound. But today's processors, even for the analog-emulations they are, just do not have enough power at the analog architecture level, which forces them to be driven much harder to get the texture that is desired. In fact that in and of itself is the reason some things in processors still today were made to work around, instead of solving the problem.

a unity-gain multi-band compansion "circuit" would improve if not fix all volume issues with [whatever_processor] and it would allow the texture to be controlled seperatly from the dynamics. Also, there are many ways to psyco/neuro-acoustically compensate for the things a radio processor does, which allows for even more seperation of texture design from dynamics. When you start using compansion to alter the way other processes in the chain work (like putting bass enhance between a compressor & expander) you can really push the analog-emulation to new heights of consistency while not touching the volume.

after you have a unity-gain compander setup, there's a bunch of "fixes" that can go right out the window, like window-gating (or compression gating at all for that matter). a few db of multiband unity-gain compansion and a few psycoacoustic tricks will get you more texture than 12db into a multi-window gated multiband comp/limiter (especially a clean-sounding one). so it's just retarded that "they" are doing what they are, especially now that changing the architecture in thier "bricks" is a free lunch, no parts to buy, no signal/noise considerations (which btw compansion is actually less noisey), etc.

</rant>

btw, on average the human auditory system can only relate how loud something is to something else for 7 seconds. after 7 seconds volume is just perception.
 
Just like everything else in broadcasting, the actual "sound texture" for radio has become what it is today. Most of these boxes are engineered and supplied with presets that meet that goal and if you go down the feature set of each box, its easy to see how similar the setups are.

Alot of the presets are severely lacking and lots do have patches and band-aids to allow things to be pushed harder and try to keep the appearance of being more "open". I can understand open for CHR, where the mastering of music is just horrible over the last 5-10 years and most material is already squarewave, but for oldies, classic rock etc (material that NEEDS and CRAVES depth from audio processors), many of these new boxes need alot of work AWAY from factory presets and against manufacturer recomendations to yield a really good sound. They can do it, but most don't know HOW or are held back by others who want a certain sound. Keeping it safe like the same 300 records you listen to OVER & OVER.

As for loudness, it's supply and demand. Everyone has lowered the clipping... they've just been turning up the output to make up the loudness difference
 
Most audioproductions seems to be processed by multiband devices initialy used for broadcast.
Some audioproductions on cd are really really bad, but mega loud.
Loudness sells, that's the problem.

And what about loudness on webstreams?
To be honest, i am also a guilty contributor to the loudness war on the web, but i do it mainly for fun.
We have no SNR issues on webradio ;-)
Since we are non-profit radio, the amount of listeners is not important, but nice.

Evert
 
fugazi,

About the loudness war on the web one other stream is interesting,
http://lemixx.mine.nu:8004

the music selection is almost the same as yours
the audio processing is loud on both of them and it's interesting and easy to compare on the same song

Modulomaxx ;)
 
Hehe,

I seem to bump into a lot of people today.
I have been a very very frequent listener of lemixx france ;-)
Simply because your content rocks. Good format and fresh content.
The roots of dancelimit 2cooks were based on lemixx, not original, i know, but it's fun among those funk freaks ;-)
Lemixx set a trend, which lead to multiple followers ( including 2cooks ) but your listeners count says something. It's higher then every other funk station.

About sound, this is my honest opinion.

It's kinda harsh ( heard in the vocals ), it's very loud and sounds analog ( GOOD ).
If i can be of any help, please let me know. I have no problems putting effort in lemixx ;-)

Lemixx rocked and still rocks and respect for that.

Regards,

Evert.
 
Hi Evert

The problem is, i'm playing a lot of very poor maxi vinyls badly encoded long time ago and good CD in same time.
i agree that sometime the audio quality is very bad

Modulomaxx
Be and stay Lemixx !! LOL
 
Lemixx sounds very good. It's analog. I think they use the old soundprocessor from Skyrock in France. I don't know which type it is. And they also use an stereomaxx stereo enhancer I believe. A couple of years ago I had contact with the owner of that station. I don't know if they using the same equipment actualy. Maybe someone who knows more?
 
Can i ask what kind of processing is used, because it's really loud. It must bump into the codec's limit somehow.

The record of the track from roger sounds great, no harshness. So it's really only in the source.

regards

Evert
 
Yeh what's the processing ModulomaXX? I agree, it's painful.

Why? I think it's partly cos the top treble band's output is too loud, and partly there seems to be a filter at 12kHz, maybe an aural exciter? Both things combine to drive more density into the codec's 15kHz filter causing more comb-filtering in the auditory system. The lack of louder/denser spectrum right below that area also decreases the chance of spectral masking above that, magnifying the "problem" (or more like failing to reduce it).

Btw, i'm listening with an Apogee MiniDAC & Sony MDR7506 cans, with Genelec 1032A/7070A as backup (unfortunately my current room isn't worthy of them). Spectrum analisys by my ears, and SpectraFoo.

[edit] p.p.s. All three of us are clipping the codec during decoding. :-* [/edit]
 
Lemixx audio processing is "secret" (just for the game) !!!!
In the past the chain was a light 4 band analog processing "home made" and a few months ago (last december to March) using only one small leveller because we were moving the studio.

the audio processing is my Hobby since 1984 and you have right, the skyrock audio processing was very good, typically french and of course you can find some similar coloration on lemixx.
today on the French FM market the MPX power are +8dbr (with Audemat analyser), the old skyrock sound should be now very poor if you compare with the digital box.

Modulomaxx
Be Lemixx
 
French processing is very loud and clean. As i can remember NRG kicking the bounds of the FM broadcast band. This is what i heard there during my visit. This was 4 years ago.
It was louder then what i'm used to in the netherlands. was this an IDT kicking @ NRG?

French processing is somehow not comparable with the rest of the europian market. The loudness war started much earlier in france then in other countries like the Netherlands.
Clean loud processing.. It was not due to the availability of those loudness boxes, but it simply started 2 years earlier then in the rest of europe. Why i have no clue.
Perhaps ,modulomaxx can tell me.

Regards,

Evert
 
ModulomaXX said:
Lemixx audio processing is "secret" (just for the game) !!!!
In the past the chain was a light 4 band analog processing "home made" and a few months ago (last december to March) using only one small leveller because we were moving the studio.

the audio processing is my Hobby since 1984 and you have right, the skyrock audio processing was very good, typically french and of course you can find some similar coloration on lemixx.
today on the French FM market the MPX power are +8dbr (with Audemat analyser), the old skyrock sound should be now very poor if you compare with the digital box.

Modulomaxx
Be Lemixx

Why is it 'secret'. Common tell us!
 
Processing is very very personal. It takes ages of time to get the sound you want.
Putting your secrets on the web is helping the competition.
Nobody is willing to give loads of effort away.

Not much presets are made public especially not for the bigger stations.

Regards,

Evert
 
I'd like to argue that internet radio is becoming more niche as time goes on, is becoming more personal in all aspects of operations & programming. More decisions are made by less real people who care & love & work harder in what they do.

While the #1 market #1 stations are becoming more washed out, more impersonal as more decisions are being made by statistics and stockholders who only have a love for money.

Your theory is a paradox.
 
erwin33 said:
[EDIT] where talking internet radio, not a nr. 1 rated station in a major city!
[EDIT-profanity]


I didn't gave you a personal answer!

If you have read my previous postings you would have known that i have said that loudness on webstreams is rediculous ( no loudness is also rediculous ) but mainly i do it for fun.

You asked me a general question and i gave you a general answer.

Good presets are hard to get, you can't fight that, since it's in most cases other peoples work.
Trading presets is in most cases the solution.

Here in Holland, not much is kwown about processing used at commercial broadcast stations. Some of these stations are already started to die slowly. But the loudnesswar is ongoing here, i personally think the loudness war was limited by their budget.

When the commercial stations came in 2004, the loudness war realy started. Loudness above quality content.

Those who deliver quality content are those who are really making money. Those who are just loud on the dail have a hard time already. Some of them are tending already to die slowly.

Even local broadcasters ( small villages, transmit radius 10 km ) are following the loudness concept as shown by the big boys. Since processors become more easilly availlable at lower costs.

Presets or lineups of processing boxes, you won't find, since some people make loads of money making these.

Evert
 
fugazi I agree.

And I'm sure you'll agree with me that it's not always applied to everything, and it's not a blanket generalization. Some things are given away completely free, even by lil old hifi-snob me. :-* Here's something that could help settle your volume war once and for all (especially with an awsome composite clipper for FM use):

Sound Solution 2 & my "BigBaw Killah" preset
http://www.soundsolution.it/index.php?option=com_simpleboard&Itemid=41&func=view&id=339&catid=2
This is usable for broadcast purposes, because there's a "special" version of the latest SS2 beta that does not have the 4-second silence limitation. Feel free to email me at my personal email address:
[email protected]
if you would like to get a copy of it. There's no shame in my game baby. Also, I think you'll find that when SS2 is properly setup, with a great preset (i'll let you judge mine for yourself) that you can not only hold your own against the usd$10,000+ processors, but you can beat 95% of them to a bloody pulp.

Cost: $0

Getting me to explain my own personal theories & techniques: priceless

In fact, Omnia, Orban, IDT, CRL, etc, etc... wouldn't exist if the audio-secret pimps that founded them just gave away all of thier knowledge. You would be left on your own, which in my opinion can be a better thing, but it's taken up the last 10+ years of my life. Do you really want to work that hard? Or would you accept the current audio-processor market and consulting environment as a compromise? I hope so, otherwise you're just denying reality to comply with your worldview. Or even worse, being a lazy leech unto our community.

</rant2>
 
Soundsolution 1 was really really bad. It didn't use oversampling on the compressors and limiters/clippers. So you were left with digital grunch and nothing more.

soundsolution 2 i have never heard of that.

regards,

Evert
 
Yeh I agree, SS1 is a pile.

I'm not sure if SS2 uses oversampling (and how much) in it's final limiter/clipper... but it sounds very smooth to me, and I hate "digital grunge". Leaps & bounds & more leaps ahead of SS1... or I wouldn't have said that I really believe this can beat a flagship commercial processor. But judge for yourself if you feel inclined.

I simply wanted to proove a point that some things are given away. But it's not a good thing for our community to encourage someone to only be a leech. So I hope i'm encouraging people (erwin33) to share by example.

Whatchu got for me erwin33? Show me the love...
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom