Re: AUDITORY Digest - 3 Mar 2005 to 4 Mar 2005 (#2005-41) (Jont Allen )


Subject: Re: AUDITORY Digest - 3 Mar 2005 to 4 Mar 2005 (#2005-41)
From:    Jont Allen  <jontalle(at)UIUC.EDU>
Date:    Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:36:51 -0600

Tom, Eero is right. Compress, vs. limiting, works even better when applied in several bands. Fast attack (1 sample, 0 delay) and exp decay is good, psychophysically speaking. 3 bands may be enough (2 work) and more can be a problem as many tend to flatten the spectrum, which is not a good feature. We need more research on this question, actually. Jont Allen Automatic digest processor wrote: > There is one message totalling 27 lines in this issue. > > Topics of the day: > > 1. Safety Switch > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 19:52:50 +0200 > From: Eero Aro <arox(at)SAUNALAHTI.FI> > Subject: Re: Safety Switch > > Tom Maglione wrote: > >> I just double checked and you can find out much more by searching on >>the web, including some low-cost stereo analog limiters used for some FM >>radio and other audio systems. Limiters are also sometimes used in the >>recording studio. > > > Sometimes? > > Just to comment: all analog limiters add distortion. Digital compressors and > limiters don't do that, as the signal is delayed a bit, so that when an > overload > is detected in the sidechain, the gain control gets to attenuate the signal > before it hits its head the ceiling. > > Check for example TC Electronics "Finalizer". > > Eero Aro > sound designer > > ------------------------------ > > End of AUDITORY Digest - 3 Mar 2005 to 4 Mar 2005 (#2005-41) > ************************************************************ >


This message came from the mail archive
http://www.auditory.org/postings/2005/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University