Anti-Loudnesswar: I just discovered how to de-brickwall music
- Thread starter ahjteam
- Start date
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
if you were to use a linear phase eq for this, am i right in saying that all you're doing is cutting some deep bass and then turning the volume up?
i don't really understand the phase stuff with eqs, any one care to explain what changes it would cause
i don't really understand the phase stuff with eqs, any one care to explain what changes it would cause
Jevil
Pro Evolution Fucker
The damage is done in the mastering, dynamics were killed and peaks were flattened. Nobody can turn it back.
Yeah I'm not sure if those new peaks created from phase shifts are actually adding more impact into the music. But hey, if these guys say they hear a difference, perhaps there is.
Soundlurker
Member
- Nov 19, 2005
- 3,730
- 0
- 36
Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
Yeah. Don't mean to be a party-pooper, but this is kinda like smashing a car to a tree at 100mph, straightening the metal with a pair of pliers and claiming it's got more features than it did before.
Erkan
mr-walker.bandcamp
Hahaha funny shit, it's almost as stupid as TV-Shop commercials
Same level of stupidity as in their claims.I recall a recent one (which has been going on forEVER here in Sweden) where they demonstrate the H2O Vac, a vacuum cleaner with water filtration. Anyway, they take a straw and blow into a glass filled with dust, the dust scatters all over the place. Then they pour water into it and do the same thing but nothing happens since the dust is mixed in with the water, so only bubbles come out of the glass, and then they go "BECAUSE WET DUST CAN'T FLY!" with a very stupid tone, almost childish, acting like it's a big fucking surprise... hahaha, god it's so stupid.
WET DUST CAN'T FLYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! Oh fuck, you don't say?
LeSedna
Mat or Mateo
He never claimed to get close to the original recording, and maybe technically dynamics doesnt come back, but it "sounds" less walled anyway.
Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
Hahaha funny shit, it's almost as stupid as TV-Shop commercials
I recall a recent one (which has been going on forEVER here in Sweden) where they demonstrate the H2O Vac, a vacuum cleaner with water filtration. Anyway, they take a straw and blow into a glass filled with dust, the dust scatters all over the place. Then they pour water into it and do the same thing but nothing happens since the dust is mixed in with the water, so only bubbles come out of the glass, and then they go "BECAUSE WET DUST CAN'T FLY!" with a very stupid tone, almost childish, acting like it's a big fucking surprise... hahaha, god it's so stupid.
WET DUST CAN'T FLYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! Oh fuck, you don't say?
Hahahaha
My favourite TV Shop commercial was the one where they stated "This is the last pair of windshield wipers you will ever buy!" Woohoo, Cursed wipers of inevitable death -2!
Cyanide_Anima
yooveesevenbeekay
im gunna have to agree with splatt and the others, i think it makes a small audible difference, only because of the possible phase shift (unless you used a linear phase eq) and the added headroom from dropping 6dbs makes your converters not wanna exploderate.
Erkan
mr-walker.bandcamp
Hahahaha
My favourite TV Shop commercial was the one where they stated "This is the last pair of windshield wipers you will ever buy!" Woohoo, Cursed wipers of inevitable death -2!
Haaahaha yea that doesn't sound good at all... claiming something is the last thing you'll ever buy, sounds a bit like a discrete threat haha
Aaaaah women... they still fall for those TV commercials, since they still seem to be going strong.
Uladyne
Greg
I don't know much of the science behind audio, so forgive me if I sound like an idiot. I think the goal with this technique is to gain the perception of increased dynamics, no?
The lower frequencies are always going to sound less dynamic, due to their "slowness" and more constant, rolling nature. If you take as much of that out as possible, it seems to me that you very well could achieve the feel of increased dynamics, even if nothing is really changed in the upper frequencies.
If you reverse the filter and make it a low pass and just listen to what is actually being cut (assuming your monitoring system will allow it, and obviously depending on the source material), I'm sure it would sound almost like a rumble with very little dynamics compared to the other end of the spectrum. Even though it doesn't make up a huge part of the sound, on an analyzer it makes up a fairly sized part of the waveform, so by cutting it out, you're unmasking the peaks already present in the original file. There should naturally be a much bigger change in the visual than the aural. We can see everything below 30hz on an analyzer better than we can hear it from our speakers.
I could be totally wrong on this, I don't know.
The lower frequencies are always going to sound less dynamic, due to their "slowness" and more constant, rolling nature. If you take as much of that out as possible, it seems to me that you very well could achieve the feel of increased dynamics, even if nothing is really changed in the upper frequencies.
If you reverse the filter and make it a low pass and just listen to what is actually being cut (assuming your monitoring system will allow it, and obviously depending on the source material), I'm sure it would sound almost like a rumble with very little dynamics compared to the other end of the spectrum. Even though it doesn't make up a huge part of the sound, on an analyzer it makes up a fairly sized part of the waveform, so by cutting it out, you're unmasking the peaks already present in the original file. There should naturally be a much bigger change in the visual than the aural. We can see everything below 30hz on an analyzer better than we can hear it from our speakers.
I could be totally wrong on this, I don't know.
