Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Fwd: [Jamin] Re: soft clip: Achieving Gain, inconsequential overloads
From: tim hall (tech_AT_glastonburymusic.org.uk)
Date: Wed May 05 2004 - 02:45:54 EEST
On Tuesday 04 May 2004 19:43, Paul Winkler wrote:
> I have a (completely untested) theory that part of the reason is
> due to the distortions that happen in the ear at high listening
> levels (mentioned earlier in this thread).
This bit interests me. I don't have chapter and verse on it, but I do know
that this is more than just our personal theory. It possibly has been tested
in work with hyperactive kids. If I find the reference, I'll post it. I don't
remember where this idea came from, so don't hold yer breath (or quote me on
it :-).
As for the rest of this thread it seems like we would need to ground our terms
a bit better before we can carry on this debate. If you've had enough of this
thread, you'll be stopping reading about here:-) 'Loudness', 'relative
volume' and saturated bandwidth and increased harmonics seem to me to require
looking at separately with an appreciation of the difference between analog &
digital clipping, brickwall limiting. Again CMIIW - I'm just learning in this
field, so I'm really just mirroring back what I've understood of this
conversation.
The lesson I'm getting out of this is that the more 'classical' approach as
put forward by Mark, Joern & others is that basically when you make
adjustments, you want to cut rather than boost in order to maintain the
integrity of the sound, that's if at all. Ideally you have a good room + mic
sound. If you are recording digitally, then you might use a brickwall limiter
to protect you from digital clipping. (I think you all know what I mean and I
think we'd all agree, it's horrible:-) Basically you're aiming to make the
recording sound like 'Real Life(TM)'.
The 'pop' approach is basically to compress the life out of everything. Again
I'm not expecting too much disagreement if I say that the nicest possible
sound here is achieved using some valve compression / distortion and possibly
saturated analog tape. I recently did a session where the drums and bass got
compressed to fsck, you can hear the compressor breathe so hard it sounds
like it has asthma. It's a great recording. It doesn't have to be 'Loud' to
achieve the desired triggering of the inner ear (see above), say 80dB above
'silence' (whatever THAT is). It doesn't have to be ear blistering. The same
sort of effect can be gained from 'singing bowls', which produce a consistent
and harmonically 'rich' sound. I'm also promted to think of the rather atonal
chanting of male tibetan monks. I think we're looking at beneficient
harmonics rather than 'loudness' or the unpleasant forms of distortion /
noise that are _so_ easy to create, given injudicious boosting of signal
levels.
That much I think I understand, the rest of this discussion has lost me.
How's my driving?
cheers
tim hall
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed May 05 2004 - 02:45:01 EEST