|
|
|
05-27-2021, 10:11 AM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South, UK
Posts: 14,218
|
v6.29+dev0527 - May 27 2021
v6.29+dev0527 - May 27 2021
- * Includes feature branch: render normalization
- * Includes feature branch: MIDI editor note reordering
- * Includes feature branch: EEL2 x86_64/SSE
- * Includes feature branch: VST3 bridging
- * Includes feature branch: media item lanes
- + JSFX: add peak/RMS/LUFS loudness meter
- # Render: fix LUFS calculation
- # Render: fix embedding bwf position when normalizing
- # Render: fix peaks drawing with multichannel renders
- # Render: fix up peaks drawing
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
__________________
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.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 11:06 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Joisey
Posts: 6,026
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Stevie_
I just installed and started it:
around 500 plugins needed to be rescanned and SWS couldn't get loaded.
Now with a second start, everything seems to work again.
But this didn't make me confident. Anything known that could have caused this?
|
That didn't happen here on either my Standard or Portable installs. Both started up as per usual. Windows 10.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 11:06 AM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 187
|
No issues here (Win 10).
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 11:10 AM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,883
|
Quote:
+ JSFX: add peak/RMS/LUFS loudness meter
|
Very nice. Thank you
__________________
Win11, R 64bit
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 12:04 PM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,295
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers
v6.29+dev0527 - May 27 2021
[*]+ JSFX: add peak/RMS/LUFS loudness meter
|
Lovely!
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 12:10 PM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Moscow / Tbilisi
Posts: 912
|
+ JSFX: add peak/RMS/LUFS loudness meter
Cool!! I see sweet use with gmem and parameter modulation!
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 12:14 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: On my arse in Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 2,053
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janne83
Very nice. Thank you
|
OOh yes, LUFS meter in the TCP. No SWS or plugin issues here (Winprehistoric)
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 12:28 PM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Black Forest
Posts: 5,067
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Funkybot
That didn't happen here on either my Standard or Portable installs. Both started up as per usual. Windows 10.
|
Disregard (deleted post), after all these years I clicked on the 32bit installer...
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 01:13 PM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,875
|
Thanks once again for the amazing work devs
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers
[*]# Render: fix LUFS calculation
|
Much better but with normalizing there still is something wonky going on...
When normalizing to a certain LUFS level the normalized audio is always at least 0.1 LUFS too loud. For example if I specify a target of -23 LUFS I get a file at -22.9 LUFS. The LUFS stat in the render dialog does state -22.9 as result and so do other LUFS meters, but why does it not render to exactly -23 if that is what I specify?
Most renders behaved as described above but in a small number of renders things were even stranger. The LUFS stat at the render showed the value that I wanted to reach (-23LUFS) but when analyzing the resulting file through various meters it was even more off. I got one case of 0.6LUFS too loud and one even of 0.8LUFS too loud. Could it depend on the duration of the audio? Or dynamic range? Or frequency spectrum?
It is generally funny that when rendering to LUFS the file tends to be +0.1LUFS too loud and when rendering to peak it always is -0.1dB too quiet. It would be nice to have both reach exactly the specified target but it is even more important for LUFS, given that these go higher than expected which can lead too unexpected issues and overs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers
[*]# Render: fix peaks drawing with multichannel renders[*]# Render: fix up peaks drawing
|
Great! Not only the regression from v6.29 version got fixed but the peaks look even more precise than ever. Has some issue from way back in time been found and fixed?
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 01:50 PM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: France
Posts: 9,900
|
Nice updates!
Quote:
+ JSFX: add peak/RMS/LUFS loudness meter
|
RMS in JSFX seems very static, how wide is the window ?
To allow modulation based on that maybe it could be interesting to have automation output of the value (if it is not one different value per sample of course, else it would be a bit crowded).
Also, where is short term loudness ? :P
EDIT:
Maybe some kind of min size preview or disappearing text to prevent overlapping at small size:
Anyway, this is JSFX, you can be sure it will end up being moded and enhanced, with graphs for eg, or other fancy things, now that the core calculation are available in concize script.
Note: I realized TBProAudio already has a EBUR128 Loudness Measurement JSFX which has short term, automation output, true peak (but not has meters, just JSFX sliders), so maybe don't care about these stuffs.
Last edited by X-Raym; 05-27-2021 at 01:59 PM.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 02:12 PM
|
#11
|
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,819
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Raym
RMS in JSFX seems very static, how wide is the window ?
|
In the jsfx at present it's integrated RMS, so it's measuring the total loudness of the material.
The next build will have some display improvements at smaller/embedded sizes.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 02:33 PM
|
#12
|
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,819
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phazma
rendering to LUFS the file tends to be +0.1LUFS too loud and when rendering to peak it always is -0.1dB too quiet.
|
Couple of things likely going on there. First of all, the LUFS spec itself allows for a tolerance of +/- 0.2 LU. There is an EBU calibration test suite that REAPER does pass. The tolerance is mainly because the specification is vague about some things, like how to deal with different sample rates.
Also, because there is a gating step, there is a nonlinear relationship between gain and loudness, which is probably why you are seeing some overshoot. Certain kinds of material might be more nonlinear than other material. Having said that, if you have some specific material that misses by more than say 0.3 LU please share it.
The peak normalization missing is probably because of floating vs fixed point measurement, we may be able to improve that.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 02:34 PM
|
#13
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: home is where the heart is
Posts: 12,109
|
edit; missed schwa's reply
Last edited by nofish; 05-27-2021 at 02:49 PM.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 02:48 PM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 209
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers
v6.29+dev0527 - May 27 2021[*]# Render: fix peaks drawing with multichannel renders[*]# Render: fix up peaks drawing
|
I realize this isn't render-related, but so long as peaks drawing is being looked at, I wonder if it might be possible to fix the slight misalignments that seem to occur with peaks drawing on retina/hdpi Macs when "antialiased peak" drawing is checked? (It's especially noticeable on darker peaks with edges.)
Last edited by BPBaker; 05-27-2021 at 05:11 PM.
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 04:24 PM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 396
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicbynumbers
[*]+ JSFX: add peak/RMS/LUFS loudness meter
|
YES YES YES!!!!!!!!!! Thank you!
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 06:02 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Québec, Canada
Posts: 4,967
|
The render normalization is saved slightly weirdly in reaper-render.ini presets. '<RENDERPRESET_EXT' does not have a matching '>' and each preset gain an additional indentation level:
Code:
<RENDERPRESET Bar 44100 2 0 1 3 0 0
bW11ZA==
>
<RENDERPRESET_EXT Bar 0 0.063096
RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT Bar 1 0 0 0 0 untitled 1
<RENDERPRESET Baz 44100 2 0 1 3 0 0
bW11ZA==
>
<RENDERPRESET_EXT Baz 0 0.063096
RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT Baz 1 0 0 0 0 untitled 1
<RENDERPRESET Foo 44100 2 0 1 3 0 0
bW11ZA==
>
<RENDERPRESET_EXT Foo 0 0.063096
RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT Foo 1 0 0 0 0 untitled 1
Shouldn't it be like this (no '<' before 'RENDERPRESET_EXT' as it's a single line, like 'RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT')?
Code:
<RENDERPRESET Bar 44100 2 0 1 3 0 0
bW11ZA==
>
RENDERPRESET_EXT Bar 0 0.063096
RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT Bar 1 0 0 0 0 untitled 1
<RENDERPRESET Baz 44100 2 0 1 3 0 0
bW11ZA==
>
RENDERPRESET_EXT Baz 0 0.063096
RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT Baz 1 0 0 0 0 untitled 1
<RENDERPRESET Foo 44100 2 0 1 3 0 0
bW11ZA==
>
RENDERPRESET_EXT Foo 0 0.063096
RENDERPRESET_OUTPUT Foo 1 0 0 0 0 untitled 1
(I'm updating a script that needs to parse this, before I adjust it to the new format, I just want to make sure it's not a bug.)
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 06:08 PM
|
#17
|
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,819
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfillion
The render normalization is saved slightly weirdly in reaper-render.ini presets.
|
Yes, thank you, that's a bug, fixing!
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 06:21 PM
|
#18
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,594
|
the jsfx meter is pretty cool to see.
One weird thing I see on my mac.
reaper629+dev0527_x86_64.dmg
When peak mode is enabled the UI shifts an inchwhen stopped vs play
Also the same embed resize issue that x-raym showed.
The scale for LUFS is not really useful for the things I work on.
If I want background music at -30LUFS momentary and dialog at -14 and no higher then I can't make use of this meter at all.
I was worried about the CPU use for this but its actually 0. This dev build has jsfx improvements for ARM processors?
|
|
|
05-27-2021, 07:12 PM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 209
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by EpicSounds
The scale for LUFS is not really useful for the things I work on.
If I want background music at -30LUFS momentary and dialog at -14 and no higher then I can't make use of this meter at all.
|
For podcast mixing purposes, I 2nd this note. I usually rely more on short-term LUFS readings (~3 second window).
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 12:56 AM
|
#20
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa
Couple of things likely going on there. First of all, the LUFS spec itself allows for a tolerance of +/- 0.2 LU. There is an EBU calibration test suite that REAPER does pass. The tolerance is mainly because the specification is vague about some things, like how to deal with different sample rates.
Also, because there is a gating step, there is a nonlinear relationship between gain and loudness, which is probably why you are seeing some overshoot. Certain kinds of material might be more nonlinear than other material. Having said that, if you have some specific material that misses by more than say 0.3 LU please share it.
The peak normalization missing is probably because of floating vs fixed point measurement, we may be able to improve that.
|
Thanks for the explanation and for taking care of these details.
I just sent a mail to support@cockos.com with the audio that misses the target by 0.62LU after normalization. It is admittedly pretty dynamic audio. I hope this helps getting it more precise and consistent among different materials.
EDIT: If you shorten the audio that I sent you to 5min (by just rendering the first 5min and cutting off everything afterwards) it is even more off! It will end up at -22.17LUFS instead of -23.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 01:08 AM
|
#21
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPBaker
I realize this isn't render-related, but so long as peaks drawing is being looked at, I wonder if it might be possible to fix the slight misalignments that seem to occur with peaks drawing on retina/hdpi Macs when "antialiased peak" drawing is checked? (It's especially noticeable on darker peaks with edges.)
|
Currently the peaks with edges option is not really usable anyway in my opinion because also silent parts of audio items get edges so it is hard to see where audio-tails finish. Should the devs want to look into peaks with edges I hope they will address that issue too, more info (with images) here: https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=234696
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 03:58 AM
|
#22
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa
Couple of things likely going on there. First of all, the LUFS spec itself allows for a tolerance of +/- 0.2 LU. There is an EBU calibration test suite that REAPER does pass.
|
That is all that's required.
Quote:
The tolerance is mainly because the specification is vague about some things, like how to deal with different sample rates.
Also, because there is a gating step, there is a nonlinear relationship between gain and loudness, which is probably why you are seeing some overshoot. Certain kinds of material might be more nonlinear than other material. Having said that, if you have some specific material that misses by more than say 0.3 LU please share it.
The peak normalization missing is probably because of floating vs fixed point measurement, we may be able to improve that.
|
I'll run a bunch of my mixes through it, stereo and 5.1. They all passed QC and were usually normalized with the SWS Loudness actions or Nugen LMCorrect.
It could be helpful to have have an action report the loudness of an item just for testing purposes. Within 0.2 LU there's no problem. The only 'other' specialist loudness measurement standard is the dialog normalization of Netflix. But we have the tools for that.
In the long term I'd recommend giving folks this for master and track meters, together with non-truepeak indicators. Those are only useful at the mastering or finishing stage and require a 4xoversampling limiter at 44.1 and 48k. 2x at 88.2 and 96k.
For normalization, how about picking an FX chain for truepeak limiting ? That way the user can specify what they want and you can reuse stuff from the batch converter .
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 04:11 AM
|
#23
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Leipzig
Posts: 6,630
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa
Yes, thank you, that's a bug, fixing!
|
Thnx Schwa and CFillion
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 04:47 AM
|
#24
|
Mobile
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London & São Paulo. Hardcore commercial REAPERite
Posts: 1,669
|
Not tried a pre-release in a while, but I'm having an issue with
"New recording that overlaps existing media items.. Trims existing (tape mode)"
With old & new projects it's creating takes and when I switch to 'layers' mode in then gets stuck in that mode and won't switch back.
Either way I can't get it to do "tape mode".
Just me?
__________________
Proudly using REAPER exclusively for...
* Media and event music composition & production, sound design + auto-processing at Qsonics.com
* Broadcast branding, promos, education & training and narration voice-overs at DrewWhite.com
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 04:52 AM
|
#25
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon
.
It could be helpful to have have an action report the loudness of an item.
|
Yes a native non-realtime action that reports LUFS Int of selected items would be very helpful.
For this purpose I mostly use the script “nofish_Analyze loudness of master output in time selection (via temp render)” because it is lightning fast when there is no FX chain but it depens on render settings. With normalization switched on for example the gain changes before analysis. Also for analyzing single items it has drawbacks because one has to remember to set time selection to items and solo the track and analyzing multiple items separately os not possible.
Another tool that I use too for non-realtime LUFS calculation and probably is more intended for single items is “SWS/BR Analyze loudness...”. However that action takes significantly more time to calculate Loudness than the nofish method via temp render.
If it was possible to include a native action that reports LUFS levels of items in a speedy manner that would be very handy
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 05:44 AM
|
#26
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,242
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon
For normalization, how about picking an FX chain for truepeak limiting ? That way the user can specify what they want and you can reuse stuff from the batch converter .
|
Unlike the batch process, Render just goes through the everything in the mixer anyway, so is there actually a need to specify an additional FX chain? Simply use a TP limiter on the output of the mixer of the project we're rendering, and that should do it, right?
What's the case where that wouldn't work?
EDIT - Ah, wait - probably Stems etc don't go through the mixer chain, do they?
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 06:09 AM
|
#27
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: home is where the heart is
Posts: 12,109
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon
In the long term I'd recommend giving folks this for master and track meters, together with non-truepeak indicators.
|
[FR]
I'd love to have optional RMS/LUFS metering for tracks.
Peak metering for recording (to check for overs), but at mixing stage I'd switch to RMS/LUFS metering anytime as it's more related to perceived loudness we're hearing imo.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 07:16 AM
|
#28
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,127
|
Does any of this lead us towards :
Play a section of the song, automatically set all faders to -xxLUFS
ie, a normalized starting point for mixing?
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 07:32 AM
|
#29
|
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,819
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phazma
audio that misses the target by 0.62LU after normalization
|
With very specific material, I see some disagreement between different meters. Material with rapidly decreasing loudness seems to be the most problematic. With one particular piece of (contrived) material, REAPER calculates LUFS-I of -25.2, the Melda loudness analyzer gets -24.2, and the Youlean meter gets -22.6.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 07:41 AM
|
#30
|
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,686
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa
With very specific material, I see some disagreement between different meters. Material with rapidly decreasing loudness seems to be the most problematic. With one particular piece of (contrived) material, REAPER calculates LUFS-I of -25.2, the Melda loudness analyzer gets -24.2, and the Youlean meter gets -22.6.
|
Flip a coin
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 08:23 AM
|
#31
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Ukraine, Kyiv
Posts: 173
|
* Includes feature branch: media item lanes
This is a very good function, I would like to further develop its capabilities. I described some of my wishes here: https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...3&postcount=43
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 08:38 AM
|
#32
|
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,819
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by drew
Not tried a pre-release in a while, but I'm having an issue with
"New recording that overlaps existing media items.. Trims existing (tape mode)"
With old & new projects it's creating takes and when I switch to 'layers' mode in then gets stuck in that mode and won't switch back.
Either way I can't get it to do "tape mode".
Just me?
|
I can't reproduce this at all unfortunately. The word "layers" has been removed from this submenu, so I wonder if you have a customized menu that has different actions from the defaults?
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 08:47 AM
|
#33
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 588
|
New meter is cool. If you only want there to be 2/3 of the usually LUFS meters, much rather have Short Term and Integrated, ditching Momentary. Most QC is only looking at those two, so momentary can end up anywhere and isn't as useful to keep an eye on.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 08:58 AM
|
#34
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 2,288
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fakemaxwell
New meter is cool. If you only want there to be 2/3 of the usually LUFS meters, much rather have Short Term and Integrated, ditching Momentary. Most QC is only looking at those two, so momentary can end up anywhere and isn't as useful to keep an eye on.
|
Not quite true. Momentary is the closest to the K-meters (Bob Katz) so I find it very useful indeed to keep an eye on. Classical is so dynamic that hitting a peak momentary is often what is needed and then let the chips fall where they may. Indeed, if you look at most LUFS meters, the prominent displays are true peak, integrated, short and momentary. Extras such as PSR etc are the ones that perhaps should be hidden by default or shown via an extended window...As for the integrated RMS display, it's really not useful in the age of LUFS. That one could certainly go given integrated LUFS replaces it.
I assume the "peak" in the meter is indeed true peak? If not, it really should be.
Last edited by chmaha; 05-28-2021 at 09:05 AM.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 09:52 AM
|
#35
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa
With very specific material, I see some disagreement between different meters. Material with rapidly decreasing loudness seems to be the most problematic. With one particular piece of (contrived) material, REAPER calculates LUFS-I of -25.2, the Melda loudness analyzer gets -24.2, and the Youlean meter gets -22.6.
|
Ok thanks for taking the time to test this and report it.
From my tests it seems that Reaper has the tendency to calculate lower values than most other metering tools.
I want to point out tough that I am very grateful that we are getting LUFS calculation and normalization in Reaper and that I am in no way trying to criticize it or label it as inaccurate (for most materials it is pretty accurate). I just hope that my feedback can help to make it as precise and reliable as possible for most materials, even "unconventional" ones.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 10:29 AM
|
#36
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,924
|
Amazing.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 10:32 AM
|
#37
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Some tests on stereo mixes, all about 25 minutes. Dialogue, fx and music.
A sports anime series, has some hits here and there but the dialogue sits well.
Four episodes, all between -3.4 and -3.9 dB from the loudness measurements of the other tools.
Four episodes of a series having mostly dialogue and little action.
Usually either -3.6 or -3.7 dB off from the scan results of the other tools.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 11:10 AM
|
#38
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 2,288
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phazma
I am in no way trying to criticize it or label it as inaccurate
|
I think it is OK to call a spade a spade. The results are clearly inaccurate based on results from other established loudness meters
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 11:17 AM
|
#39
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Two 5.1 mixes, two hours and 90 minutes long.
2 hour film, off by -2.4 dB
90 minute film off by -1.4 dB
Hope that helps.
|
|
|
05-28-2021, 11:20 AM
|
#40
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
|
Yeah, just wanted to chime in and say I'm seeing very consistent results between dpMeter, Youlean and Nofish's script. And like Phazma and Airon, Reaper is giving me different results so I still think something isn't quite right. I'll try Insight later as well if I have a chance which I used to use pre-Reaper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BethHarmon
Not quite true. Momentary is the closest to the K-meters (Bob Katz) so I find it very useful indeed to keep an eye on. Classical is so dynamic that hitting a peak momentary is often what is needed and then let the chips fall where they may. Indeed, if you look at most LUFS meters, the prominent displays are true peak, integrated, short and momentary. Extras such as PSR etc are the ones that perhaps should be hidden by default or shown via an extended window...As for the integrated RMS display, it's really not useful in the age of LUFS. That one could certainly go given integrated LUFS replaces it.
I assume the "peak" in the meter is indeed true peak? If not, it really should be.
|
Also, big +1 to all of the above.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:57 PM.
|