Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER Pre-Release Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-22-2022, 01:38 PM   #1
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default v6.61+dev0622 - June 22 2022

v6.61+dev0622 - June 22 2022
  • * Incudes feature branch: render statistics improvements
  • * Incudes feature branch: media explorer loudness calculation
  • * Includes feature branch: fixed lane play markers
  • * Includes feature branch: improve experimental silent-track CPU reduction option to include FX tail length
  • * Includes feature branch: media item fixed lanes
  • * Includes feature branch: internal pin management overhaul for future extension
  • + Actions window: update shortcut list when editing an existing shortcut
  • + Configuration files: fix various issues for FX shortcut/safemode/etc settings on plug-ins/themes with odd filenames
  • + JSFX: improve behavior of text fields on Linux
  • + Linux: fix support for Shift+Space
  • + Normalization: prevent media from going offline during normalization even if user switches focus away from REAPER [t=268059]
  • + Pan: document ReaScript/API setting for pan law flags
  • + Pan: explicitly support constant power, linear taper, or restricted constant power pan functions [p=2571092]
  • + Pan: fix implementation of constaint power pan law restricted to linear above -3dB when applying gain compensation
  • + Pan: simplify pan law preferences
  • + Render: save/restore tail length with render presets [t=264018]
  • + Text fields: improve handling of spacebar on Windows/Linux (do not use for play start/stop unless configured as a global hotkey)
  • # VST: remove previous allow spaces in reaper-vstplugins.ini filenames function (preserve existing behaviors/bindings/etc)
This thread is for pre-release features discussion. Use the Feature Requests forum for other requests.

Changelog - Pre-Releases

Generated by X-Raym's REAPER ChangeLog to BBCode
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 01:47 PM   #2
Meo-Ada Mespotine
Human being with feelings
 
Meo-Ada Mespotine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Leipzig
Posts: 5,393
Default

Thank you for the tail-length in presets addition
__________________
Use you/she/her.Ultraschall-Api Lua Api4Reaper
Bugreports&Docs notes please do here:https://github.com/Ultraschall/ultra...-reaper/issues - Donate, if you wish
Meo-Ada Mespotine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 01:49 PM   #3
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,640
Default

Maybe if we change all the pan laws, we can get Kenny to fix his video about it finally.
ashcat_lt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 01:55 PM   #4
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

Here are the three pan law types fwiw.



Constant power, linear taper, and the other one, which maybe we will rename something like constant/linear hybrid. Note that the hybrid mode is equivalent to constant power for pan laws of -3dB and below, and equivalent to linear taper for pan laws of +0dB and above.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 01:58 PM   #5
Phazma
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,208
Default

I know this is barely related to pan law but with the focus now being on panning is there a chance we might soon get an item pan knob?
Phazma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 02:05 PM   #6
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
Here are the three pan law types fwiw.



Constant power, linear taper, and the other one, which maybe we will rename something like constant/linear hybrid. Note that the hybrid mode is equivalent to constant power for pan laws of -3dB and below, and equivalent to linear taper for pan laws of +0dB and above.
Thanks very much for all of this! Seems much more civilized now Just one question, would linear taper + gain compensation (boost pans) be the equivalent of constant gain?

And yes, I think renaming option 3 to something like constant/linear hybrid is a very good idea. I think those naming conventions with those graphs really clear it up, at least it does for me.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 02:08 PM   #7
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

"Constant gain" doesn't seem very descriptive to us. What does it mean to you?

From a quick scan it looks like other daws call the first mode "constant power" or "equal power", and the second mode is usually either "linear taper" or just the implied result of what you get if you don't have constant power enabled. I think the third mode is unique to REAPER.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 02:13 PM   #8
paaltio
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 248
Default

Since pan law is being worked on now, could there be some safeties added for multichannel tracks so this doesn't happen by accident?

Not sure what's the solution really given Reaper's track type agnosticism, which is great overall of course.

But what I do know is I won't be the last person turning on the pan law out of habit and then getting a surprise like this with multichannel material!
paaltio is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 03:46 PM   #9
musicbynumbers
Human being with feelings
 
musicbynumbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South, UK
Posts: 13,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paaltio View Post
Since pan law is being worked on now, could there be some safeties added for multichannel tracks so this doesn't happen by accident?

Not sure what's the solution really given Reaper's track type agnosticism, which is great overall of course.

But what I do know is I won't be the last person turning on the pan law out of habit and then getting a surprise like this with multichannel material!
Indeed any solution for this would be appreciated. It's very easy to get caught out on these things which can lead to having a master rejected and costing people a lot of money to redo
__________________
subproject FRs click here
note: don't search for my pseudonym on the web. The "musicbynumbers" you find is not me or the name I use for my own music.
musicbynumbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 05:40 PM   #10
Funkybot
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,021
Default

If the Pan code is being cracked open, would it be possible to check if PanL/PanR automation can be written via a control surface? CSI and the Eucon adapter both are able to control PanL/PanR via the surfaces, but for some whacky reason, you couldn't write PanL/PanR automation. Pan/PanWidth automation write without issue. When last raised, Geoff seemed to indicate the issue was likely in the API itself. Just figured I'd mention it with the recent Pan updates.

If there is an issue with PanL/PanR automation not being written via the API, maybe this would be a good dev cycle to resolve it.
Funkybot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 05:43 PM   #11
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 14,404
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers View Post
Indeed any solution for this would be appreciated. It's very easy to get caught out on these things which can lead to having a master rejected and costing people a lot of money to redo
Not sure what a solution would be. Suggestions?

To be fair, checking your levels and your mix before sending it off would be sort of a no-brainer?
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 07:28 PM   #12
Embass
Human being with feelings
 
Embass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 743
Default

Embass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 07:41 PM   #13
Embass
Human being with feelings
 
Embass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 743
Default

Embass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 09:00 PM   #14
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 993
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
"Constant gain" doesn't seem very descriptive to us. What does it mean to you?

From a quick scan it looks like other daws call the first mode "constant power" or "equal power", and the second mode is usually either "linear taper" or just the implied result of what you get if you don't have constant power enabled. I think the third mode is unique to REAPER.
"Constant gain" doesn't seem very descriptive to me either. Maybe "round taper" describes the difference to "linear taper" better? The third mode maybe "linear and round taper"?
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 09:11 PM   #15
Embass
Human being with feelings
 
Embass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 743
Default


Reaper project: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rBL...ew?usp=sharing
Embass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 09:54 PM   #16
Embass
Human being with feelings
 
Embass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 743
Default

Embass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 10:22 PM   #17
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 993
Default

In this pan test project I noticed that the pan automation points are not accurate. In Track 2, move the edit cursor to 1.1.00, there the automation point has the value "center". In the goniometer you will see that the pan value is slightly off to the left. Now move the cursor to the second pan automation point at 1.2.00, the pan value there is 100%L. In the goniometer you can see that the value is not 100%L. Check also the other automation points with the cursor and the goniometer, you will see that the automation values are not correct. It is not possible that the goniometer shows 100%L or 100%R when the pan mode is Stereobalance or Stereopan. The pan mode "REAPER 3.x balance (deprecated)" shows 100%L or 100%R in the goniometer.
If you check and uncheck "Linear scale above -3dB pan law" in the Pan Law settings in Track 2, you will also notice an unwanted volume difference.
REAPER v.6.61 x64 Win10 x64
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 10:25 PM   #18
Embass
Human being with feelings
 
Embass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 743
Default

Embass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 10:34 PM   #19
musicbynumbers
Human being with feelings
 
musicbynumbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South, UK
Posts: 13,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Not sure what a solution would be. Suggestions?

To be fair, checking your levels and your mix before sending it off would be sort of a no-brainer?
It's been a while and I might have had a different situation to others now I think more about it. In my scenario, I did check against several external ebu meters and it was fine when the 7.1 file was a single multichannel wav but when I came to also outputting the same file but as separate channels (something I've not had to do for recent projects), I got caught out. Trying to remember exactly what it was I did but I think it was because I needed to quickly be able to do it again so set up a post master project where I split up the multichannel by each channel (non destructively) and it was the panning part here that I wasn't expecting a level change on.

I think though this was before we had the option to route to the bus channel in mono (and the amazing metering we now have on rendering) and wasn't expecting a pan law drop but can't recall why it was unexpected.

I'll try later today to recreate it and see if I can offer a solution
__________________
subproject FRs click here
note: don't search for my pseudonym on the web. The "musicbynumbers" you find is not me or the name I use for my own music.
musicbynumbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 10:57 PM   #20
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
"Constant gain" doesn't seem very descriptive to me either. Maybe "round taper" describes the difference to "linear taper" better? The third mode maybe "linear and round taper"?
Inventing new terminology for concepts which are already well-described in the field doesn't seem like a good use of users' cognitive capacity. "Linear"/"Constant Gain" and "Constant Power" pan laws are well-defined, why not use those terms?
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 11:23 PM   #21
paaltio
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Not sure what a solution would be. Suggestions?

To be fair, checking your levels and your mix before sending it off would be sort of a no-brainer?
In my case how I found out I just did a quick edit for a film score of mine, wasn't really mixing anything. We only noticed it at the dub stage because we did a double-check by flicking back and forth between the old and new file... Would not expect any levels to change in any program when I do a render of a file at 0dB, no FX and panning at center.

At least personally I would typically only be interested in a pan law in mono sources. So this makes me think it should not be a global setting, but at least optionally be limited to specific media items. Of course given that pan is a track-wide operation, not sure how this makes technical sense.

In any case the global one should probably come with a warning label on multichannel material!
paaltio is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 11:34 PM   #22
Tale
Human being with feelings
 
Tale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
From a quick scan it looks like other daws call the first mode "constant power" or "equal power", and the second mode is usually either "linear taper" or just the implied result of what you get if you don't have constant power enabled. I think the third mode is unique to REAPER.
FWIW, "equal power" and "linear taper" would make the most sense to me.
Tale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2022, 11:56 PM   #23
AZpercussion
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Not sure what a solution would be. Suggestions?

To be fair, checking your levels and your mix before sending it off would be sort of a no-brainer?
I have a suggestion not for safety but for useability.
There are many cases when ReaSurroundPan is excess tool. Moreover ReaSurroundPan makes the pre-fader send a post-pan send in fact.

I suggest a checkbox in pan-law window which switches a track to LCR pan mode, where 1 and 2 channels are L&R and 3ch is center.

So if a track has more than 2 channels it became LCR panned track.
It needs most often for foley and dialogues.

And there is no contradictorary if I want more functionality from ReaSurroundPan. I just need to move automation from the track pan envelope to plugin's envelope and switch the checkbox off.

You may ask what will be used as source in this LCR mode. I think it could be downmix from 1&2 track channels, as currently pan knob is just for these channels.

And a cherry on the cake: width knob can be used as a divergence knob.
__________________
My smart contextual split script: https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=259751

Last edited by AZpercussion; 06-23-2022 at 12:10 AM.
AZpercussion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 12:16 AM   #24
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default

re: pan, not to beat a dead horse, and I don't want to see that terrifying GIF, but I have a question about the behavior of the constant power 0.0dB pan law.

Feeding a -12dB signal in, panned center, I get -12dB out. Perfect.

At full left or full right, I get -12dB on each channel. Not necessarily what I would expect in a 0dB panning mode -- shouldn't I get a +3dB increase on each side, with unity in the center?

But the weirdest thing is that at 50% left or 50% right (45°), I get -10.2dB on each channel. I see this in both balancer and pan mode, also if I don't override the defaults.

This 1.8dB bump is not present in linear taper mode (as I would expect). It's kind of like the pan mode wants to go to +3dB on the sides, but changes its mind halfway.

Anyway, I don't know how to interpret what I'm seeing. As far as I can tell, the other pan laws (-3dB with/without gain compensation, for instance) are all working properly. It's just the 0dB mode/constant power which is confusing me. Thanks for setting me straight...
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 03:41 AM   #25
Soli Deo Gloria
Human being with feelings
 
Soli Deo Gloria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sockmonkey72 View Post
v6.61+dev0622 - June 22 2022
  • + JSFX: improve behavior of text fields on Linux
  • + Linux: fix support for Shift+Space
  • + Text fields: improve handling of spacebar on Windows/Linux (do not use for play start/stop unless configured as a global hotkey)
Hi devs!

Since I'm seeing some love for usability details in Linux, I'd like to point out that, at least with a spanish keyboard, I don ´t seem to be able to write project/preset names with accent and/or other special characters. This doesn ´t happen in the Windows version.

Here is how, i.e., the word "demostración" is shown while trying to save a test project :



Needless to say, this only happens with Reaper in my system (Manjaro).


As usual, thanks and thanks for all...
Soli Deo Gloria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 03:57 AM   #26
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

"+3dB increase on each side, with unity in the center" is what I would expect with -3dB pan law and gain compensation enabled.

I think maybe you are over-reading (or we are over-using) the words "constant power" to mean something equivalent to "-3dB pan law". -3dB is the only pan law where the pan function always satisfies sqrt(R*R+L*L)=1. With a +0dB pan law, the "power" at center will be sqrt(2) times higher than at full L or R. Maybe instead of constant power vs linear taper we should describe these as sin/cos taper vs linear taper?
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 04:25 AM   #27
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
"+3dB increase on each side, with unity in the center" is what I would expect with -3dB pan law and gain compensation enabled.

I think maybe you are over-reading (or we are over-using) the words "constant power" to mean something equivalent to "-3dB pan law". -3dB is the only pan law where the pan function always satisfies sqrt(R*R+L*L)=1. With a +0dB pan law, the "power" at center will be sqrt(2) times higher than at full L or R. Maybe instead of constant power vs linear taper we should describe these as sin/cos taper vs linear taper?
I'm really just going by "prior art", for instance as described here: https://www.harmonycentral.com/artic...ing-laws-r501/ ; or here: https://www.cinemasound.com/debunking-long-arm-pan-law/.

As far as I can tell, the (gain-compensated) -3dB (-12dB C, -9dB L/R), -4.5db (-12dB C, -7.5dB L/R) and -6dB (-12dB C, -6dB L/R) are all absolutely correct. It's only the 0dB law which doesn't make sense -- or are you saying that there's a sin/cos "line" from -12dB (C) to -12dB (L/R) which is causing the 45° bump?

In any case, I haven't found any DAW with a 0dB law which has the same output level on the sides as in the middle.

In any case, I think I misunderstood what I was reading; in fact the 0dB pan law (if those sources are correct) should be 3dB quieter on the sides than in the center, not louder. I'm not trying to harass you guys, I really just want to understand how these modes actually work, so that I can use them deliberately.

And for the case that there is a bug, well, I wanted to bring it up. Thank you for taking the time.
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 04:28 AM   #28
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Embass View Post
gifs
Fixing these, thanks (appreciate the repro project for the one with partial measures, too).
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 05:14 AM   #29
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sockmonkey72 View Post
(pan stuff)
Without gain compensation, all pan laws in REAPER affect the output at dead center by the amount of the pan law, and do not affect the output at hard left/right.

With gain compensation, all pan laws in REAPER do not affect the output at dead center, and affect the output at hard left/right by the (inverse) amount of the pan law.

Therefore the +0dB pan law does not affect the output at dead center or at hard left/right, regardless of the gain compensation setting.

The taper affects what happens between hard left/right and dead center.

Playing with the attached project is probably the best way to get a handle on what the different settings do.
Attached Files
File Type: rpp pan.rpp (4.1 KB, 22 views)
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 05:30 AM   #30
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
Without gain compensation, all pan laws in REAPER affect the output at dead center by the amount of the pan law, and do not affect the output at hard left/right.

With gain compensation, all pan laws in REAPER do not affect the output at dead center, and affect the output at hard left/right by the (inverse) amount of the pan law.

Therefore the +0dB pan law does not affect the output at dead center or at hard left/right, regardless of the gain compensation setting.

The taper affects what happens between hard left/right and dead center.

Playing with the attached project is probably the best way to get a handle on what the different settings do.
Thanks, I have a project which does approximately what yours does in order to check the behavior I wrote about in my previous messages of "pan stuff". That's how I determined that there's something fishy about 0dB.

The problem with the 0dB pan law as implemented is that a 0dB signal will clip as you pan it from dead center to L or R, reaching its maximum at 45° of +1.8dB. That shouldn't happen, but it does in your project the moment I turn it on.

Obviously, there is a workaround: don't use "constant power" 0dB because it's (IMO) doing something weird and unexpected (getting louder and then getting softer as you move from the center to the side).

But it's the default pan mode, so weird behavior seems important to bring up. I don't feel particularly heard, but I guess I'll stop at this point.
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 05:49 AM   #31
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sockmonkey72 View Post
Obviously, there is a workaround: don't use "constant power" 0dB because it's (IMO) doing something weird and unexpected (getting louder and then getting softer as you move from the center to the side).
This is true of any pan law above -3dB with sin/cos taper. It's a mathematical constraint; the -3dB pan function is essentially a unit circle, so any pan law higher than that won't fit inside the circle. That was the original motivation for the hybrid taper, to have the equal power behavior near the center, while clamping the partially-panned output to the maximum hard panned output for that channel.

I'm aware that's probably a completely unsatisfying mathematical explanation for unexpected behavior. To put it another way, maybe, is the behavior you are describing as what you expect from the +0dB pan law different in any way from the behavior of the -3dB pan law with gain compensation?

Last edited by schwa; 06-23-2022 at 06:13 AM.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 07:00 AM   #32
musicbynumbers
Human being with feelings
 
musicbynumbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South, UK
Posts: 13,868
Default

I've not been able to find the project backups yet for the project I had the pan law issue on.

I didn't have the problem again though as I think I used the mono sends from child to parent and then didn't pan them as well. So for my way of working, I think this might be fine as is but will see if I can think of a solution for what others are having problems with

I guess there could be something that is done when the track has reasurroundpan on it that might help but since there are other pan plugins that people use. Might need to be a project setting?
__________________
subproject FRs click here
note: don't search for my pseudonym on the web. The "musicbynumbers" you find is not me or the name I use for my own music.

Last edited by musicbynumbers; 06-23-2022 at 07:27 AM.
musicbynumbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 07:26 AM   #33
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
This is true of any pan law above -3dB with sin/cos taper. It's a mathematical constraint; the -3dB pan function is essentially a unit circle, so any pan law higher than that won't fit inside the circle. That was the original motivation for the hybrid taper, to have the equal power behavior near the center, while clamping the partially-panned output to the maximum hard panned output for that channel.
That makes sense, and I understand your motivation.

Quote:
To put it another way, maybe, is the behavior you are describing as what you expect from the +0dB pan law different in any way from the behavior of the -3dB pan law with gain compensation?
I suspect that I hitting my head against a wall here because a 0dB pan law doesn't really make sense with stereo audio? The solution I've been describing (-3dB at L/R, 0dB center) is really only appropriate for mono audio.

In the stereo case, I guess the ideal implementation would maintain unity gain on the unattenuated channel as you pan. The current implementation does that at the 3 critical points, but not between them. I don't have Studio One to test, apparently they have a 0dB panning/balance mode which works like this, though -- it works like a balance control with a taper determining how fast the channels are attenuated.

That would be a more predictable implementation, I guess, but I am not a math guy, so I don't know how it works practically. I tend to think that a +1.8dB bump at 45° might be mathematically correct, but it doesn't make much musical sense.
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 07:52 AM   #34
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 993
Default

"Constant power, restricted to linear taper above -3dB" does not work for me. Pan law -6.0 and -6.02 are superfluous, just -6.0 (but in reality -6.02) should be enough.
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 08:16 AM   #35
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sockmonkey72 View Post
I tend to think that a +1.8dB bump at 45° might be mathematically correct, but it doesn't make much musical sense.
FWIW we will probably eventually change the default for new projects to the hybrid taper function.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 08:16 AM   #36
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
"Constant power, restricted to linear taper above -3dB" does not work for me.
Doesn't work in what sense?
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 08:23 AM   #37
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 993
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
Doesn't work in what sense?
It does not look like this 3rd geometry
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 08:37 AM   #38
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 13,526
Default

The 3rd choice in the pan function dropdown, which we will rename "hybrid taper", is equivalent to the curved function at lower pan laws, and equivalent to the linear function at higher pan laws.

schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 08:38 AM   #39
sockmonkey72
Human being with feelings
 
sockmonkey72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Berlin
Posts: 731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
It does not look like this 3rd geometry
It works for me, if you set the pan law to something like -1, you can see the hybrid curve.
__________________
ReaPack Repository: right-click and copy index URL
sockmonkey72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2022, 09:00 AM   #40
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 993
Default

Now I have it. -1.0 dB pan law now clearly shows the difference.
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.