|
|
|
04-02-2011, 12:09 AM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
LUFS Functions
This is the discussion thread for the feature request
LUFS Functions It asks for various LUFS metering and processing functions for Reaper. It is related to the metering request by Dannii and augments it with some broadcast-related necessities.
|
|
|
04-02-2011, 04:27 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
|
I don't do broadcast work, but I fully support the idea - voted +1
|
|
|
04-03-2011, 11:25 AM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South, UK
Posts: 14,218
|
I need this too just looked at nugen one, ouch!
|
|
|
04-07-2011, 11:43 AM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Love bump.
|
|
|
04-07-2011, 12:01 PM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Athens / Greece
Posts: 625
|
+10 for that, always looking for good standardization techniques :-)
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 07:38 AM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
One month, one bump.
|
|
|
05-21-2011, 04:26 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
An interesting feature request has been posted that ties in to some of this requests feature set to a degree.
Normalize After Render
The discussion thread for it is actually in the pre-release forum here: http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=80586
Oh and vote for this request too while you're at it. The link is in my signature at the bottom .
|
|
|
05-23-2011, 12:43 PM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 501
|
This whole LUFS thing seems to just make matters worse. I watched that hour long video which could have been said in less than 10 minutes and still left me wondering exactly where on the meter Im supposed to have the volume at. Is the short term loudness supposed to be at -23? Like this?
If so that is ridiculously quiet for a master recording!
__________________
ethersheets.bandcamp.com
Intel i5-2500K | MSI Mobo | 12 Gigs RAM | Win 10 Pro x64 | Reaper x64 | Studio One v3.5 x64
|
|
|
05-23-2011, 02:36 PM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
This is for broadcasting. You simply mix by ear, and later normalize your entire program or segment to have an integrated loudness value of -23 LUFS.
The meters are a source of information and for checking out what you're doing from time to time. It's a guide, nothing more.
For example, I might look at the meters when I'm mixing music for a show to make sure the material doesn't push up the overall loudness of the program too much, but most of the time I won't be looking, and thus mixing by ear.
The short term loudness metering (400ms) is more for checking loudness range. The momentary metering(3 seconds) is for general range of the material you're currently listening to. The integrated metering is for loudness normalization of the entire program or segment.
The normalize and scan functions proposed in the feature request make the necessity of external tools unnecessary.
For example, with the request functions, I'd make a time selection over the segment I wish to loudness-normalize, activate the function which makes Reaper render that time selection for pure scanning purposes, at the end of which it will present to me a value in LU(and maybe LUFS as well). I then go back and adjust my bus or master volume for that segment so the LU value is zero (which is -23 LUFS). Loudness normalized.
Last edited by airon; 03-26-2014 at 06:41 AM.
|
|
|
05-23-2011, 03:35 PM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 501
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon
This is for broadcasting. You simply mix by ear, and later normalize your entire program or segment to have an integrated loudness value of -23 LUFS.
|
It seemed in the video like he made a couple of mentions of using it for commercial music production as well. Maybe I misunderstood...
Also, -23 integrated? I pulled all my faders down on a mix and could never get the intergrated value to drop below 8 something. What gives?
__________________
ethersheets.bandcamp.com
Intel i5-2500K | MSI Mobo | 12 Gigs RAM | Win 10 Pro x64 | Reaper x64 | Studio One v3.5 x64
|
|
|
05-23-2011, 06:50 PM
|
#11
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
This is meant to be used from the most dynamic material for broadcast, usually films, to the least dynamic material, usually commercials. Thus a loudness level was chosen that can accommodate the most dynamic material.
This also means that if music is played, the most compressed music will probably not sound great. It'll be rather quiet and whimpy. This will hopefully inspire people to use the dynamic range a little better than they have so far.
But like I said, this concerns broadcasting, and if a song is played on TV, it will also concern music. So the most dynamic music will probably produce the best listening experience.
|
|
|
08-21-2011, 08:21 AM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South, UK
Posts: 14,218
|
Bump plus an idea
Tim has just managed to give RMS normalizing to items, could he maybe integrate the shareware code you were proposing?
Tim?
That is unless the RMS was using built in reaper code and it would be difficult to use the external code.
|
|
|
08-21-2011, 11:53 AM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
EBU R128 scanning is available via a free library, so it really shouldn't be too big of a problem to integrate that kind of thing.
That library is available here:
http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y00...ibebur128.html
I'll post this in the extension thread as well.
|
|
|
08-21-2011, 12:33 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
|
Hey Airon, I'm currently searching google for it, but is there a command line version for OSX yet that you know of?
|
|
|
08-21-2011, 05:57 PM
|
#17
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
You might be able to get someone to compile it for you, as the source is available. There are lots of libraries to add though.
Perhaps that project that brings Linux apps to OSX can help you there as well. Mac Port or something ? Not sure what it's called exactly.
Or you could spend $1000 on the NuGen Batchtool for loudness normalization. I tested it, it's great. For facilities that are in constant use. It might be WIndows only though :P .
We should discuss this in the development forum. SWS might be able to help you or someone else that can compile stuff for OSX.
|
|
|
10-07-2011, 11:54 PM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2006
Location: mortsel / antwerp / belgium
Posts: 152
|
hindenburg journalist has a nice loudness meter build in
w.
|
|
|
10-26-2011, 11:30 AM
|
#20
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Little bump for the useful LUFS functions and metering.
Wouldn't you rather meter with the best and most useful method we have right now ?
|
|
|
12-11-2011, 08:33 PM
|
#21
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 109
|
Voted.
I didn't see it mentioned in the FR, but it would be nice if the mcu-master meter could be selected to show "True-Peak" the way the current meter displays "RMS/Peak" side by side. Also, selectable between MLk (momentary LUFS) and SLk (Short LUFS), with the digital readout for Integrated at the top or bottom of the meter, along with a "reset" button.
Also, for my preference, I'd have it read the actual LUFS (ie -23) rather than having -23LU read as 0, and a user who wishes otherwise could calibrate it to his/her wishes by adjusting display gain (in LU increments, of course).
|
|
|
01-18-2012, 02:36 PM
|
#22
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 415
|
bump.........
|
|
|
03-07-2012, 08:32 AM
|
#23
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Bump this. 89 votes.
|
|
|
03-07-2012, 10:44 AM
|
#24
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
|
Went to vote, but found I already Yes'd.
|
|
|
04-06-2012, 02:44 AM
|
#25
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Adelaide, South Australia (originally from Geelong)
Posts: 5,598
|
Bumping with a screen grab of Ozone 5 Adv implementation of R128 metering (as I posted in my meter FR thread)....
|
|
|
04-06-2012, 05:29 AM
|
#26
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Here's a list of the things requested, just in case anyone doesn't want to wade through the whole request :
LUFS metering in the master and any other track designated by the user
Integrated LUFS value of master/selected track(s) over a time selection
Normalize item to 0 LU (-23LUFS)
Not much, is it.
|
|
|
04-06-2012, 09:55 AM
|
#27
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Adelaide, South Australia (originally from Geelong)
Posts: 5,598
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon
....Not much, is it.
|
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
|
|
|
04-15-2012, 04:33 PM
|
#28
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
99 votes. Let's hear it for 100. Give it to me now.
The PLOUD folks are putting on another seminar at the NAB in Las Vegas. Loudness metering, the ins and outs, the why and how far everyone's come with implementing it. I hope they record it again. Can't hurt.
|
|
|
04-26-2012, 06:27 AM
|
#29
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
100 votes.
Let's hope this is something they can spend a day or two on in the near future.
|
|
|
05-22-2012, 03:50 PM
|
#30
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 85
|
I hope so, airon! I've mixed on Pro Tools with the NuGen plugin (limited to realtime metering only, thanks to PT's legacy internals) and for broadcast work going forward, it's a must.
Going to try out the free Audiocation plugin in the meantime:
https://www.audiocation.de/en/plugin
...but I really hope REAPER includes this functionality by default. Truly a professional-level feature that most other DAWs don't have yet.
-Mark
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 02:39 AM
|
#32
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Steinberg just released a free VST3 plugin that performs a small part of the duties requested in this FR.
Read about it here
Download it here
Interesting note. Reaper can't use it(no VST3 support), so I do hope this gives Cockos even more incentive to support this important measurement standard as requested.
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 03:10 AM
|
#33
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Athens / Greece
Posts: 625
|
A nice thing would be to be able to set our own dynamic range and metering option so we that are working on other industries can also work with our own metering standards. For instance after the R128 promotion the game audio industry does its own search to find a suitable way of measuring things.
Why not make the LUFS function like the surround plugin of reaper, to be able to change everything and setup colors and ranges and algorithms that measure the sound and have the EBU-R128 and the other metering options as presets to choose from and also the ability to make your own.
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 03:37 AM
|
#34
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Here's a somewhat new idea for a new view in Reaper that would be of enormous value to anyone mixing for broadcast. I have added it to the request.
Why
Mixing for TV requires you to adhere to specifications of the client, which is often a network like Discovery, CBS or the BBC.
Today these specs are almost aways a form of loudness metering, and more often now, loudness range and Momentary Loudness(the 400ms measurement window) range. So when you fall out of spec, as indicated by a meter with a loudness history graph, you go back to that spot to fix it.
But what if there's more than one spot to fix and the history graph is not locked to the time ruler(/time code) ? What is the meter never knows where it actually is ? You'll have to manually write down all the offending locations, fix them and rescan for confirmation.
What if this could be done more efficiently ?
How
A loudness history graph view in Reaper
It is built as the user plays back the project.
The history can be updated across a time selection or project wide as needed by manual commands.
For user convenience, Reaper must keep track of the areas of the arrangement that the user has changed or not played yet, and remember that those are the areas it needs to update when the user issues a project or time-selection-based update command.
Why this saves time
There are no meters today that lock their loudness history graph to timecode, meaning you can't fix a spot and update the loudness history for it.
This can, and thus nobody has to remember where all the offending locations are because this history graph, locked to the time ruler/time code will always keep you on top of things.
Fix, play or rescan. Confirmed. Next location.
Details and Additional Functions
This is basically a kind of peak overview that should be kept either in the project file or as a separate companion file.
Some folks may wish to have this per-used-hardware-output. 5.1 channel mixes have to be taken in to account as well, though they result in just one graph as well.
Sample frequency is a tough one. Every 0.4 seconds may be a good starting point since that is the integration time of the Momentary Loudness metering anyway. The NuGen loudness meters graph is a good starting point on how to build it. In particular it contains excellent ideas on how to graphically highlight configured thresholds for momentary and short-term loudness measurements.
For example, a spec for a tv network might say :Integrated Loudness : -23 LUFS / 0 LU
LRA < 15 (loudness range statistically calculated)
Maximum Momentary Loudness: +8 LU
It should be possible to have colourful indicators for when the Momentary Loudness graph crosses that threshold so the mixer can easily locate and fix the parts.
Also, the locations of maximum truepeaks above a configured threshold should be remember as well. This can be important for conforming to specs as well, as some limiters do not perform 4 x oversampled limiting and thus may need to be adjusted. The less time that takes the better, as always.
Last edited by airon; 05-25-2012 at 03:46 AM.
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 05:18 AM
|
#35
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,942
|
This a very good idea Airon. Can I vote twice?
With clients already like the BBC (or whoever does their OB now), it would be good for REAPER to have these kinds of abilities.
I got the ToneBoosters plugin just so I could familiarise myself with R128 metering, a history graph and/or normalising to a LUFS level would be fantastic.
>
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 11:43 AM
|
#36
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 2,113
|
This is a great idea. It would make sense to me that the analysis and display feature be per-track. Not necessarily because it would be enabled or used on each track but because there are a number of ways to route a session and to ie. put it only on folder tracks or only on the Master or only on sends would force us into a particular routing strategy. It would also be very useful for example to be able to enable it on a single VO track that needs to be conformed to a given spec before passing on to the next mix stage.
To my fellow music producers I would say that TV sync, games and independent film are all increasing in popularity as revenue streams for artists. To think that this doesn't apply to our music work because radio and iTunes do not (yet) require it is naive. This type of metering can only help our work to sound better in every possible venue. It will not hurt it...in other words you can always slam a well mixed product through a limiter to drive it into 0dbfs after the fact, it's much harder going the other way.
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 11:44 AM
|
#37
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
|
This has to be the 3rd time now that I've seen, read, agreed, and would cast my vote for this much-needed feature.
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 03:17 PM
|
#38
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,818
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by plush2
This is a great idea. It would make sense to me that the analysis and display feature be per-track. Not necessarily because it would be enabled or used on each track but because there are a number of ways to route a session and to ie. put it only on folder tracks or only on the Master or only on sends would force us into a particular routing strategy. It would also be very useful for example to be able to enable it on a single VO track that needs to be conformed to a given spec before passing on to the next mix stage.
|
This could be achieved with tabs of loudness graphs, with one graph being preconfigured to draw its measurements from the master out (1,2 or 6 channels). More could then be added with the track it draws its data from being selectable, perhaps in a dropdown menu at the top. Perhaps a button to "Add new graph tab", with a dropdown popping up having you select the source track.
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 03:56 PM
|
#39
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Athens / Greece
Posts: 625
|
For non broadcast use it would be great to have it as an option on the parent channels as well.
Great idea!
|
|
|
05-25-2012, 08:32 PM
|
#40
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 331
|
What programs are there that have a loudness normalization function at the moment? (...automated like peak normalization.)
|
|
|
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 08:27 PM.
|