- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This applies to Breakaway being docked either on the bottom or the top of the display. It could also apply to the window being docked on the sides of the display.
Using the button that switches between meters, the scope or the simple mode really has very little effect of actually having either the meters predominantly viewed, or the scope. Very little difference is noticed between the three modes of Breakaway’s display function if the application’s window is docked to the top or bottom. Leif, I’m sure you know that.
The request:
I proposing that the display reflect more of what is selected using the toggle and very little if any at all of the other.
Example:
I use the meters display more than I do of the scope. When the window is docked to either the top or the bottom of the display, I cannot see the meters as well as I do with the window undocked because so much room is taken up with the scopes. Right now, I have it undocked and the window sized large enough to see the meters, but small enough to not see the scope (regard not the adjustments as they are needed to be displayed at all times). If the meters is toggled, it should show the meters mostly or totally.
I have tried resizing the docked window, but the only thing is does is take more room on the desktop that I’m willing to give up. It defeats the purpose of having a high resolution display setting.
With the exception of the broadband AGC, the multiband and the limiter, you could perhaps…maybe…display using horizontal meters.
I guess that it depends on what’s really important to all users as it should be developed to majority of all of its users, but I thought that I would throw this out there to see what you thought.
Thanks Leif
Howdy!
You’re right about the mode switch button. When docked at the bottom or top, it will really only enable or disable the meter gradation, and change the width slightly.
The reason is indeed layout — stretching out the vertical meters sideways would only make them unreadable.
Running the meters sideways is an interesting idea though. Still, we’d have to stack 7 bands and the gradation on top of each other (if the multiband meters aren’t side-by-side they’d be useless). It might work to use them in two groups.
Back when I wrote my metering code, I implemented it in a highly flexible manner (or so i thought) — making the meters horizontal literally requires flicking a single switch. Re-layout and everything is handled.. However, there’s no support for having the meters in two groups though, so I’d have to retrofit that in.
I agree completely about docking — layout was a very hard compromise. It’s hard to sensibly fill a tall-and-skinny (or wide-and-short) window with controls and meters.
It’d be quite a project, but it might also be worthwhile. I’ll keep it in the back of my mind, I might just think of a good way to do it 🙂.
///Leif
I was just curious. Perhaps make each individual display (for instance having the input, AGC, multiband, limiter, and the output have independence on resizing. Probably more than you are willing to do right now with the other projects that have higher priority.
Thanks for giving the topic a look.
Philip C Walker
Taylor, TexasHi Leif! I’ve been using Breakaway for some time now and I love it!
I treat myself by comparing the unprocessed audio to Breakaway’s. However, the radical change in volume level when I hit bypass spoils the impression.
This is because the frequencies the program applies gain are lost. So my wish is the program would keep the outputs volume on the same level
at all times. Also this way the listener wouldn’t hurt his ears when he forgets about the volume-boost effect and enables the sound enchaner.For most enjoyable songs I like to create their own specific settings and having to set them manually every time is a pain. So my second wish is that there would be a preset library in a drop-menu with search function. Here’s my idea how it could work.
1. First you set up the settings for the song
2. You press a save button (located next to bypass button or the preset menu or something similar)
3. In a pop-up window you type the key words.
4. Press ok and the information is saved.when you want to load the setting, select the preset from the drop down menu and Breakaway sets every setting except volume.
The search function would filter only the presets that contain typed text.Here’s a crude visualization I made with MSPaint. Enjoy 😀
http://img217.imageshack.us/my.php?image=presetsxx4.jpgHi Molsk!
The change in volume when you hit Bypass, depends completely on the input level you are feeding to Breakaway at the time.
Because Breakaway is so effective at normalizing, it’s also rather treacherous — you have no idea what the input level REALLY is, until you bypass.
If you play a modern, overly loudly mastered CD directly into breakaway without changing the volume, whether it been converted to MP3 or not, chances are bypass will be LOUDER than processed.
Unfortunately, the feature you’re asking for — a bypass which keeps the level constant — is conceptually impossible. A bypass mode which alters the audio is akin to dehydrated water, or fat-free bacon. If it did any processing, it simply wouldn’t be bypass anymore – period. 😉
I wonder, why is it that it’s quieter in Bypass? Basically all music released the last 10 years is full volume (or beyond) on the CD. It should match the Bypass volume pretty well. Check the input oscilloscope in Breakaway, and turn up the volume in your player higher.. As long as it’s not hitting the edges (=clipping), you’re good.
I do see what you mean though — you want to be able to separate the "enhancement" from the "normalization".. The simple truth is that the "enhancement" is actually a side-effect of the way we do the normalization. That’s why the enhancement sounds so natural — we’re not trying to enhance anything, it just happens by itself, in a natural way, without us having to add anything. For this reason, it’s also impossible to separate them.
Regarding saving settings for every song, the thing is, Breakaway isn’t a mastering audio processor — conceptually it’s more like a broadcast audio processor, in that it’s "set-and-forget". Changing the settings is indeed fun (I know!), but the real goal is to provide consistency no matter what you throw at it, without having to worry about the audio processor at all. Set, forget, and enjoy! 🙂
I’m extremely careful about what features to put in, as more features makes it harder to use, and Breakaway is supposed to be as mainstream / mass appeal / easy to use, as an audio processor of this caliber can possibly get.
Sorry about the post full of nays.. I’ll try to be more cooperative next time 😉. Thanks for your comments.
Best regards,
///LeifI guess presets would be another cup of coffee (another price for Breakaway too).
[quote author=”Leif”]
Unfortunately, the feature you’re asking for — a bypass which keeps the level constant — is conceptually impossible.[/quote]I think this is a misunderstanding.
The answer is correct.
A bypass which keeps the level (for different input sources with different volumes !)
constant — is conceptually impossible.But, I think molsk wants a subjective (not technical) equal volume level when he compares a single track enhanced with Breakaway and the untouched (bypassed) version.
This is a well-known wish of many people (not only Breakaway users).
Leif – maybe you know – it was not long time ago when Steinberg`s Wavelab 6 introduced it "SmartBypass system" (with automatic loudness compensation):
http://www.steinberg.net/en/products/au … elab6.htmlI worked with Wavelab 5 (without this SmartBypass system) and had to add a temporary "tools one" instance to the FX chain and adjust the volume manually, when I compared the untouched (bypassed) version with my FX remastering chain.
@ Leif
A simple solution for Breakaway:
The "Volume db" slider works (conceptually) post the processing.
Right ?
Let the "Volume db" slider be a part of the bypass system !
Why not ?
This way you could adjust the loudness differences with this slider to have a subjective (not technical) equal volume level for the listeners (with semi-professional remastering ambitions)
when they want to do a fast A-B comparison for a single track by pressing the bypass button.Or is there any severe technical, conceptual reason against the integration of the "Volume db" slider to the bypass process ? 🙄 ❓
Until now you have to adjust your Hi-Fi receiver, your PC speakers or this "Volume db" slider every time, when you hit Breakaway`s bypass button, if you want a subjective equal level for the untouched and the processed version of a special track.
How do you mean to let it be a part of the bypass process?
Do you mean Bypass should bypass the volume attenuation as well?
(If so, a user could get blasted out of his/her chair just by clicking Bypass).
The comparison with Steinberg is an interesting one though — they make pro products. Breakaway Audio Enhancer is not a pro product, even if the internal algorithms are pro quality. I have no clue where this misconception could possibly come from — the $29.95 price tag should make it pretty clear that Breakaway Audio Enhancer is targeted for consumers. 😉
It’s not a matter of a level-matching bypass feature being a difficult feature to make.. Explaining it, making it understandable for people who aren’t audio professionals, now there’s a different story altogether.
Best,
///Leifpersonally i just use the volume knob on my monitor controllers to do equal-loudness comparisons. it works for EVERYTHING that i need to compare. 😉
but yeah, Leif is right about it being conceptually impossible, because the input being unknown, and Breakaway being a realtime dynamics processor… you can’t know what the input or output will be, because it’s in the future.
And to "undo" any loudness changes from input to output would also be a worthless endeavor because you wouldn’t be hearing the actual would-be output of Breakaway.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.