Processing clips

[CalifZeke]

The other thing with that track is the fact that the vocals are sung through the church PA mic system. The vocals were picked up by the ambisonic microphone...along with the PA system 60 Hz hum & all the upper harmonics.

I agree, It isn't the world's best recording to tweak a processor on!

-C

This says a lot. Let me understand correctly. The people in this group have been lamenting and criticizing audio processors based upon some lo-fi recording. Must be wonderful to be a 28 yr old self-serving know-it-all from Jersey.

 

[oldiesstation]

100 per cent correct califzeke, yeah except for the sibilance,noise all over the track, etc, it's a masterpeice.if this,if that, if my aunt had testicles, she'd be my uncle.if if's and buts were candy and nuts, it would be christmas everyday,too...the song is a stiff joke..Kevin is like my son, hell i can't tell him anything either....

 

[cgould]

From CalifZeke:

This says a lot. Let me understand correctly. The people in this group have been lamenting and criticizing audio processors based upon some lo-fi recording.

Basically, I guess that is true.

The Cowboy Junkies *wanted* this type of sound for artistic reasons....but that doesn't make it any better of a track to use.

Fonorban pretty much nailed it with (his?) explanation.

-C

 

[rorban]

[snip]
(by the way XT2 is a 5 band multiband unit and only original XT is a six band
[snip]
XFon

Good post! I only have one minor coment -- the VCA in band 6 of the XT2 is driven by band 5's compressor/limiter sidechain but bands 5 and 6 have independent multiband clipping. In other words, the XT2 still takes advantage of the band 5/6 crossover for distortion control by preventing intermodulation between the band 5 and band 6 program elements in the multiband distortion-cancelled clipper. So it's not strictly true to say that the XT2 is "five band" -- maybe 5 1/2 band?

Bob Orban

 

[rorban]

In fact, Orban factory presets (while not causing ducking on HF material) totally suck the life out of snare drums, for instance, but I'm not going to pan the box on a user forum because of that. One needs to explore the entire processor before returning a "I give up - this thing sucks -- guess what buddy, your processor has issues" response.
-C

The Orban factory presets are designed for low distortion on as much material as possible. The downside of this is that sometimes snare drums sound better when they are slammed against a clipper instead of being pulled back by our clipping distortion controller.

All of our high end processors have a control called MAX DISTORTION CONTROL. As the manual says, this control limits the maximum amount of final clipper drive reduction (in dB) that the Optimod's clipping distortion controller can apply, preventing over-control of transient material by the distortion controller. Instead, the final clipper is permitted to control some of the transient material (to increase "punch"), even though, technically, such clipping introduces "distortion." A setting of 4 to 5 dB works best in most cases. Factory default is 5 dB for virtually all presets.

If you want more of a "clipped" sound, you can reduce the setting of this control. Sometimes a setting as low as 1 or 2 dB can considerably help reduce audible clipping distortion while allowing snare drums to hit the clipping system harder. I prefer a 4 to 5 dB setting because it controls distortion substantially better with a wide range of program material. But that's just my preference.

Bob Orban

 

[cgould]

Bob Orban wrote:

The Orban factory presets are designed for low distortion on as much material as possible. The downside of this is that sometimes snare drums sound better when they are slammed against a clipper instead of being pulled back by our clipping distortion controller.

All of our high end processors have a control called MAX DISTORTION CONTROL. As the manual says, this control limits the maximum amount of final clipper drive reduction (in dB) that the Optimod's clipping distortion controller can apply, preventing over-control of transient material by the distortion controller. Instead, the final clipper is permitted to control some of the transient material (to increase "punch"), even though, technically, such clipping introduces "distortion." A setting of 4 to 5 dB works best in most cases. Factory default is 5 dB for virtually all presets.

If you want more of a "clipped" sound, you can reduce the setting of this control. Sometimes a setting as low as 1 or 2 dB can considerably help reduce audible clipping distortion while allowing snare drums to hit the clipping system harder. I prefer a 4 to 5 dB setting because it controls distortion substantially better with a wide range of program material. But that's just my preference.

Bob Orban

And there, folks...you see why it is dangerous to slam a processor without learning how to drive it properly for your format first!

This is the problem I'm starting to have with the way the posts judging these processors by unknown recording techniques, and basing
opinions on boxes without optimizing the adjustments to do the job right for a given format.

For those new to processing, this has always been the fun part behind audio processing. You are faced with a challenge, and the goal is to try to do whatever it takes to solve the issue.

You aren't going to get there by not understanding the processing beast in front of you! This takes time and care.

Yes, in the radio environment of today, time something VERY hard to have, but it's the only way to learn how to drive a broadcast processor!

I think this is one of the real reasons so many fond memories abound for older units. Those analog beasts come from an era where we had time to tinker with modifications to timing networks, mixing and matching boxes, etc.

These days, Broadcast Engineering just a job anymore...not a passion.

-C

 

[CalifZeke]

And there, folks...you see why it is dangerous to slam a processor without learning how to drive it properly for your format first!

This is the problem I'm starting to have with the way the posts judging these processors by unknown recording techniques, and basing opinions on boxes without optimizing the adjustments to do the job right for a given format.

For those new to processing, this has always been the fun part behind audio processing. You are faced with a challenge, and the goal is to try to do whatever it takes to solve the issue.

You aren't going to get there by not understanding the processing beast in front of you! This takes time and care.

But...But...But...Mr. Gould, one time I was over Kevin Tekel's house, and we heard one half-note of this song, from one-fifth of a nanosecond, that was the reciprocal of the tin can response, of this transient that was recorded two weeks before the artist ever thought to conceive it, and we could not believe our ears! Then we recorded this FABULOUS sample to a 78 rpm record, with recycled vinyl, so goran could hear it.

You see, it's guys like our 'buddy' kevin who knows it all. Word has it that mr. orban and mr. foti studied kev's comprehensive research he compiled 40 years ago on his radio shack 50-in-1 electronics bread board box, although wonder boy-toy kevtronics is only 28 years old.

 

[gtomas]

I don't know we came to conclusion that the Sweet Jane was some sort of good test track to adjust processors... I certainly didn't cause it's not. It's an example of extreme track that I just used to blatantly demonstrate certain issue I have with Omnia.6. Like I said that issue is noticeable to me with normal program material, though it's not that obvious as with this extreme example.


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[gtomas]

Well I'm not familiar with the presets provided with the 8500 so I would say the one that suits the format of sweat jane best. Or comparable to the rocknroll preset used with the omnia.6 clip. And if you feel you have a better setting for this song please feel free to take more clips. I'll just download the crap out of the server

I'm not sure I'll be able to make a recording with Sweet Jane track. This is a station that plays mostly pop/80s song so this obscure song doesn't fit particularly well into their playlist I'll see what I can do...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[RadioFixerCLE]

*newbie's turn to speak up*

Wouldn't it be a logical idea to use "difficult" or semi-bad sounding songs (lots of sillibance, excessive bass, etc.) to tune a processor with? Somehow that way you can adjust them to make the "bad" stuff actually sound listenable, yet still manage to keep the good stuff sounding golden. ???

 

[gtomas]

Best whishes for 2008 to all colleagues and manufactures around here
Some introduction first, I am just a music lover passionate with processing units as anybody here, I am NOT on “loudness” side but more on “consistency from source to source & pleased sound” I don’t have the habit to “abuse any processing box”.

Some thoughts about Sweet Jane track and other thoughts.

Xfon, you mention quite a few valid points here. Let me just address some things in your post that I slightly disagree

Don't know why the discussion got so focused on Sweet Jane song. The only relevant thing in that song is that it contains HF transients. The question is not how to process Sweet Jane song good, the question is how to process HF transients good! We could have just as well used a live radio program for this. An announcer, phone caller or a jingle could have even more transients that this song...

I don't have the 8100/XT2 or any other Orban right now with me to check what is going on on the s-es in this song and I have zero experience with 8200. But I don't think it's the AGC causing the ducking... This is too short transient for AGC to react. In the clips made by Broadcast I can hear some, but only slight "wideband" ducking. Most of the ducking is in high-end, due to limiter action...

The 8100/XT2 is not a miracle box, I agree. If you're looking for a cleaner and/or softer sound, cleaner high-end and much better control of input levels, 8400/8500 is a better choice. But 8100/XT2 has that distinctive character and texture, it's got that charm (probably due to it's imperfections) that is for some reason likable. If I had to choose between 8500 and 8100/XT2, I'd go with 8500. But I would keep 8100/XT2! Indeed, the mods that Broadcast made to his unit change the sound noticeably in terms of quality and cleanliness. But when it comes to the dynamics itself, it's still 8100/XT2, it's still got that potted modules (and Broadcast kept most of the clipping in the same place) and you can hear that in the clips. In handling HF transients, I think his clip is pretty relevant. I can make a recording of ours 8100/XT2 which is pretty much stock, but I doubt there will be significant difference in terms of ducking...

Speaking of 8100/XT2, would I would like to see form Orban is a "vintage" 8100/XT2 emulation algorithm for 8500! It would have to be a different algorithm because you can't get that sound with 8500's current algorithm. It's too smooth and I'd say too "civilized" for that. But people are buying 8100/XT2s on E-bay for nearly $6000 - I'd say there's a market and demand for something like that


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[gtomas]

All of our high end processors have a control called MAX DISTORTION CONTROL. As the manual says, this control limits the maximum amount of final clipper drive reduction (in dB) that the Optimod's clipping distortion controller can apply, preventing over-control of transient material by the distortion controller. Instead, the final clipper is permitted to control some of the transient material (to increase "punch"), even though, technically, such clipping introduces "distortion." A setting of 4 to 5 dB works best in most cases. Factory default is 5 dB for virtually all presets.

If you want more of a "clipped" sound, you can reduce the setting of this control. Sometimes a setting as low as 1 or 2 dB can considerably help reduce audible clipping distortion while allowing snare drums to hit the clipping system harder. I prefer a 4 to 5 dB setting because it controls distortion substantially better with a wide range of program material. But that's just my preference.

Indeed, the Max Dist Ctrl changes the sound from softer too more harder, "edgier" sound due to more clipping. It's a nice control to have. I have a little bit of trouble with Max Limit Threshold though... This is an interesting control that can open up a sound little bit (with the cost of increased distortion), but I find the step size (0.25 dB) a little too big. I would have like to put it somewhere in-between 0.0 and 0.25


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[kevtronics]

Another test song I'd like to hear people give a try is Kelly Clarkson's "Because Of You," which was already been uploaded to the server a while ago. You don't need to do the whole song, just the beginning and first chorus.

The upper harmonics on Kelly's voice in the beginning tears up the HF clipping and causes very audible "splatter" on every FM station I've ever heard this song on -- even the few around here which aren't so heavily processed (by NYC standards). The bass drum beat also tends to sound rather grungy, since it is heavily pre-clipped on the CD.

 

[CalifZeke]

Another test song I'd like to hear people give a try is Kelly Clarkson's "Because Of You," which was already been uploaded to the server a while ago. You don't need to do the whole song, just the beginning and first chorus.

The upper harmonics on Kelly's voice in the beginning tears up the HF clipping and causes very audible "splatter" on every FM station I've ever heard this song on -- even the few around here which aren't so heavily processed (by NYC standards). The bass drum beat also tends to sound rather grungy, since it is heavily pre-clipped on the CD.

What do intend to prove? If this song sounds bad on every station you hear it, what is the point of twiddling around with some closed-circuit files on a list-serve? [EDIT]


[EDIT-inflammatory]

 

[kevtronics]

What do intend to prove? If this song sounds bad on every station you hear it, what is the point of twiddling around with some closed-circuit files on a list-serve? Boy-Toy, you need to get a life...

Well, maybe some station engineers would appreciate some suggestions on how to make that particular song sound better, since it is widely played as a recurrent on AC, Hot AC, and CHR formats, and is also indicative of the current state of CD mastering, which radio stations will continue to have to deal with for the forseeable future.

[EDIT]

[EDIT-inflammatory]

 

[cgould]

Stephanie asked:

*newbie's turn to speak up*

Wouldn't it be a logical idea to use "difficult" or semi-bad sounding songs (lots of sillibance, excessive bass, etc.) to tune a processor with? Somehow that way you can adjust them to make the "bad" stuff actually sound listenable, yet still manage to keep the good stuff sounding golden. Huh

Well...the song(s) that caused the most discussion, first off, are "fringe" songs for most formats. Having said that, to truly make the song(s) play 100% well typically means compromising the overall sound of the stations either in terms of loudness, or other aesthetic reasons.

So, the best you can do is to compromise the offending songs instead -- or if you're stretched for time (as most engineers are these days) let it fly as-is. The good and bad thing about catching the audio processing bug is that you will tend to obsess over songs that make up 1% of the music playlist, but are the biggest problem tracks for many common audio processing settings.



-C

 

[gtomas]

So, the best you can do is to compromise the offending songs instead -- or if you're stretched for time (as most engineers are these days) let it fly as-is. The good and bad thing about catching the audio processing bug is that you will tend to obsess over songs that make up 1% of the music playlist, but are the biggest problem tracks for many common audio processing settings.

Exactly! There are songs that aren't worth (re)adjusting processor for... There are also songs that just sound good on most processors, even badly adjusted ones.


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[BofH]

Songs that fall into the category of "just sound good" would be anything from "The Cars" debut album, Wang Chung, and even a lot of Phil Collins/Genesis tracks. Perhaps any track that is nicely mastered with tasteful compression that reduces the load on the following broadcast processor will sound great. The tracks that are heavily clipped and limited sound awfull unless you back off your processing heavily, and everything else tends to sound pretty thin and boring then..

 

[Fonorban]

Hello again to all, sorry for my precedent long post, my respects to Mr. B Orban, as a newer member here I feel great enthusiasm to share opinions & info with my “friendly teacher” thus my nick name Your comments Bob are welcome by me and as always find it “usefully”, my precedent long post did not allow me to write details on differences XT to XT2 besides I believe that some of colleague here have the impulsive of “know it all” a now days “ill” which affect all who involved with Radio, TV & Music Media at tech or other level

“oldiesstation” & “cgould” I agree there are a list of songs more appropriate for a tweaking a processor more effectively, but the youth’s under the pressure of his juvenescence use the processors as a (toy) medium to “ spotlight his unique ego” just to distinguish from others by their “tech knowledge?” their “anxiety” to distinguish make them “blind” “disrespectful” & “selfish” besides have the “boldness” to want surpass even Bob Orban, such behaviors I see on a “day nursery” of course I don’t attack to anybody. I just express my toughs about now days of Broadcast Engineering

Goran,
A) Sorry but I don’t have so much Free time to come on your “play ground” to response on all of your writings plus that we heave a different point of view

B) Personally I prefer to “repair” “restore to life” rather to “mod” vintage audio units
Especially a reference unit from old era like 8100/xt2. I like to keep alive and “unspoiled” his sound character as is with bad & good, that is his “charming”.

C) “Demand for an 8100 sound? Of course joking me” 8100 now is only for memorabilia purposes as have I store mine, by the way the most demanded market at this time is the Holland Pirate which is the “bug” of eBay Don’t proves nothing to me that some “diddle” sells 8100/xt2 at 6000& on eBay, for that undue “soar” of the price blames all that “chatter” on forums around the web for superiority of 8100 etc plus the trendy of “loud war on CD market”, many people buy an 8100/xt2 remove card # 6 and use it to produce loud CD’s.
My 8100/XT2 with Zero card & ST Chassis plus spare cards (not the empty XT cards) 3, 4 & 5 all together I buy it long time ago before the “WOW for 8100” climb at any forum at 3.500US$ before eBay fill with “cheaters”.

D) I lend that of “cgould” says which I find it most “revealed” “mature” & “true” than of your or my writings.
“Having said that, to truly make the song(s) play 100% well typically means compromising the overall sound of the stations either in terms of loudness, or other aesthetic reasons. So, the best you can do is to compromise the offending songs instead -- or if you're stretched for time (as most engineers are these days) let it fly as-is.
Yes, in the radio environment of today, time is something VERY hard to have, but it's the only way to learn how to drive a broadcast processor! I think this is one of the real reasons so many fond memories abound for older units.

These days, Broadcast Engineering just a job anymore...NOT a passion.

Best regards, show some respect & be more creative.
XFon

 

[gtomas]

Xfon,

I'm sure we'll understand each other better over time...


Regards,
Goran Tomas