• 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

Processing clips

fugazi said:
is this an airrecord? or direct?

Regards,

Evert
Click to expand...

Direct record. I don't use it onair or for a stream. Just for the fun at home. I have to get a set of monitor speakers to set the dspx up a bit beter perhaps. To address your comment on the clipping. That is exactly what I'm after. I like a packed dense and clipped sound. Even some amount of distortion. I know it sounds crazy to most people. :)
 
Direct record. I don't use it onair or for a stream. Just for the fun at home. I have to get a set of monitor speakers to set the dspx up a bit beter perhaps. To address your comment on the clipping. That is exactly what I'm after. I like a packed dense and clipped sound. Even some amount of distortion. I know it sounds crazy to most people.
Click to expand...

To me it doesn't sound crazy. Sound processing, ie. flavor is a personal thing. I bet the sound will sound better over the air.
Setting up sound processing boxes for selected masses of people is a total different thing.

Regards,

Evert
 
Exactly, I wouldn't dare to use this setting on-air although I never tried it. For on-air I would keep the colouring of the sound but ease on the clipping. I think I will try the dspx at a local station were we now use a Omnia FM jr. Nice to compare I guess.
 
We all know the loudness war on the FM radio but what about the web? How loud can you go on the web? No regulations only technical limitations (0db). So what about this aac stream? Is it relevant to be loud on the web?
 
jammerdave said:
Here is my FM's 48K stream. Uses the same "super secret" processing stack whose composite output feeds the STL to air. The line outs weren't being used for anything else.
http://1039thefish.com/listen.aspx

jd
Click to expand...

And it shall remain a secret to all of us using Macintoshes until you add a stream with a Mac-compatible codec.
;)

David Reaves
 
Let's dust off this fun topic. :)

I've uploaded a clip DSPX-FM-with-Aphex-Big-Bottom-StereoImager-LOUD-F-Mister.mp3 to the well known http://fserver.redirectme.net.

I now have put an Aphex Aural Exciter 204 in front of my DSPX-FM. Mainly for it's BIG bottom. I found the (ultra)low in de dspx a bit to thin for my flavor. So I took a gamble and purchased a 2nd hand aphex for 150 euro's (about 195 us dollar). I never heard one before so didn't know what to expect and if it would go well in combination with the dspx. It's really worth the money if you ask me. It brings just that bit extra (Orban & Omnia low) what you miss at certain moments with a bare dspx. And the best thing about the aphex is that it doesn’t over do it, it's there but not overwhelming. I don't know if many use this combo but they go together like cream and pie if you ask me. ;)

You can download the unprocessed clip from my blog if you wish to compare before and after processing.
 
I've just uploaded a couple of clips, one of the Unity I'm working with currently on an Easy listening format. And the other and air record from a local TV station. Not sure what processing they're using but comments on both would be nice.

Stace
 
Oops. Here it is again

Not sure what processing the TV station is using?? But the breeze is processed with a Unity 2000i
 
David Reaves said:
jammerdave said:
Here is my FM's 48K stream. Uses the same "super secret" processing stack whose composite output feeds the STL to air. The line outs weren't being used for anything else.
http://1039thefish.com/listen.aspx

jd
Click to expand...

And it shall remain a secret to all of us using Macintoshes until you add a stream with a Mac-compatible codec.
;)

David Reaves
Click to expand...

David,

As a long time Mac diehard it's easy to listen to those streams that are encoded in Windows Media, no matter if you're on a PPC or Intel Mac running MacoS X (more than likely best if 10.4.x and will probably work with 10.3.x:

1) Goto VersionTracker.com and do a search for Flip4Mac WMV (here's the search string ready to rock) http://www.versiontracker.com/php/qs.php?PHPSESSID=350378822fde78a2c0b1b9119f26dbaf&mode=basic&action=search&str=flip4mac+wmv&srchArea=macosx%7Cmacosx-all&submit=Go - just click on the link under "Size" to download the software.

2) After you install the Flip4Mac codec, use this URL to listen to JamminDave's Stream: http://swn.edgeboss.net/wmedia-live/swn/22776/48_swn-48_kkfs_0807_070723.asx

Personally, I think it's a bit overly processed considering the bandwidth, but it could just be the Window Media Encoder. I would limit the bandwidth going into the encoder and I think that would cure a majority of the "swishes", which in turn would make it sound pretty damn good. I've personally have never had decent luck with WM but I have heard it sound real good when a lot of time is spent on the signal chain - usually dedicated processing is best from what fellow engineers have shared with me.
 
Hello all,

I've been reading these boards for a while and I came across this topic while searching for some info on Aphex products. Processing has fascinated me for some time now and I'm impressed the range of quality in some of the clips.

I have a clip I'd like to upload if it's okay with the owner of the server space. In the mean time, here's what I'm using, strictly for hobby use.

All audio is played out using iTunes or from Cool Edit (now Adobe Audition)

M-Audio 96/24 sound card

Behringer Eurorack mixer

Aphex Compellor 320A, stereo enhance off

Broadcast Warehouse TX4 (no longer made) set to 20mW output with it's built in limiter barely being activated

Yeah, next to pirates who just don't care, it's probably the most minimally processed audio on the air
 
Added my clip

I used the guitar bridge from Styx Come Sail Away. The limiter in the TX4 isn't bad in that it will prevent the final clippers from grossly distorting the audio, however, being that it's wideband, it tends to sound pretty funky sometimes if driven for more density due to the pre-emphasis.

Despite that, the limiter is the least disappointing thing about the TX4

The clip is labeled Styx_Compellor 320A_BW TX4.wav
 
All right, I'm a child of the 1980's. You may remember a movie from that decade called "The Never Ending Story." I just found a copy of the soundtrack, and while listening to the title song, I thought, 'something's not right.' Then I remembered that the only time I've ever heard this song was either on the radio or in the movie when it was on HBO.

So just for grins, I ran the song through my processing set up. Yep, sounds closer to what I remember.

I've uploaded a short A/B snippit. The first part is the audio straight off the CD, the second is recorded off my FM tuner.

Clip labeled N_E_Story Compellor 320A TX4.mp3

I've heard the clips with the Aphex Aural Exciter/Big Bottom; now, granted it was in front of a much more powerful processing set up, does anyone think putting one after the Compellor would give me just a bit tighter bass response even with the simple limiter I have? Right now, things sound good through my headphones, but even on the stereo, unless I have the sub woffer on, the bass doesn't have the presence I would like. I'm not looking for a thump fest, just a bit more consistency.
 
Is it possible your copy of the NES soundtrack was digitally remastered? I have a copy of the same soundtrack and it sounds great.

If you got a 24 bit digital remaster, those things are generally trash.

R
 
Info-warrior said:
I've heard the clips with the Aphex Aural Exciter/Big Bottom; now, granted it was in front of a much more powerful processing set up, does anyone think putting one after the Compellor would give me just a bit tighter bass response even with the simple limiter I have? Right now, things sound good through my headphones, but even on the stereo, unless I have the sub woffer on, the bass doesn't have the presence I would like. I'm not looking for a thump fest, just a bit more consistency.
Click to expand...

Big Bottom would give you more bass, but I never liked it on-air because it sounds too artificial to me... With music. It's great on voice, though so it's best use is in production. Perhaps if the aural effect was wrapped around with dynamic gain processor, so that it's effect would be controllable and in real-time response to the actual bass energy, it would work better. But as a stand alone effect, it didn't work for me.

For more consistent bass, I'm afraid you'd have to go multi-band. At least 2-band like Orban 8100. Just for fun and for you to hear how it sounds in multiband, I've uploaded the same clip processed with two different processors - Omnia-6 and DSPX.


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
Thanks for the replies.

I like the sound of the Omnia 6. The DSPX seemed too agressive in it's currant configuration, however, even with all that density, it still sounded quite good.

As for having to go multi-band, that's what I figured would be the best solution. Someday, I'll have the discretionary income to spend on a used Orban or similiar unit. Perhaps an Aphex 722 Dominator might do. I realize it's a peak limiter, but being that it's a three band device that handles the pre-emphasis it might offer a bit more consistancy.

To Robert Bass,

I looked over the CD and couldn't find any mention of it being a re-master. I didn't intend to imply that the recording was bad as it sounds fine and in Cool Edit, the recorded wave form looks similiar in density to many other recordings of that era.

I guess it's just a case of I liked the way it sounded on the radio. ;D
 
Goran Tomas said:
To Robert Bass,

I looked over the CD and couldn't find any mention of it being a re-master. I didn't intend to imply that the recording was bad as it sounds fine and in Cool Edit, the recorded wave form looks similiar in density to many other recordings of that era.

I guess it's just a case of I liked the way it sounded on the radio. ;D
Click to expand...

I can relate to that! ;D

One thing you should look for is rip NES into Adobe, straight from the disc, and study the waveform image (I am guessing you already did this?). If you see most of the waveform smashing into the -1 dBfs to 0 dBfs range, chances are it is shoddy “let’s make this thing loud” remaster. When I did the same thing using my copy, there were maybe three peaks that shot up to around -2 dBfs, while the remainders of the peaks were well below that. This is the way CD's should be, IMHO! Smashing everything at 0 dBfs is ridiculous! :(

By the way, if you haven’t already, try the software program MBL4. It is essentially a Multiband limiter, and you might find a use for it until you can invest into something better, at a later time. MBL4 is free, and it does have pre-emph if you need it.

When my Behringer Ultradyne failed on me, MBL4 made for an inexpensive replacement that gets the job done. I ran NES through it and it sounded nice! 8)

R
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom