Hello, I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess. -- What's the unit of "delay"? Is it milliseconds? Or is it audio samples? -- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of the filter? -- What's the difference between "asupercut" and "lowpass" filter? What's the filter steepness of the asupercut filter? Michael
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
-- What's the unit of "delay"? Is it milliseconds? Or is it audio samples?
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. Delay is set in 1/1000 seconds.
-- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of the filter?
It changes steepness, not cutoff.
-- What's the difference between "asupercut" and "lowpass" filter? What's the filter steepness of the asupercut filter?
Very big, almost under 90 deg. You can find out filter graph response for almost any filter combination in graph. Using this filter graph: mpv av://lavfi:aevalsrc="not(mod(n\,32768)):d=50" -lavfi-complex "[aid1]asupercut,asplit[ao],showfreqs=overlap=0:win_size=32768:win_func=rect:ascale=log,format=rgb0[vo]" In place of asupercut you can put any combinations of FIR and/or IIR filters: lowpass, bandpass, ..., aiir, afir, acrossover and so on.
Michael _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer.
Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
-- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of the filter?
It changes steepness, not cutoff.
What's the unit of the "slope" option? Michael
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer.
Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
-- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of the filter?
It changes steepness, not cutoff.
What's the unit of the "slope" option?
1 / octave, can be set as dB unit, eg. -20dB, 0dB or 1 is max value. Use mentioned mpv command for the reason, as it displays curve. Than you can obviously see what slope changes. slope is just different way to control curve, other ones is Hz, Q-factor and octave, they all changes curve but with different output for different value. See documentation of other filters like lowpass, highpass, lowshelf, equalizer and so on.
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
-- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of the filter?
It changes steepness, not cutoff. What's the unit of the "slope" option?
1 / octave, can be set as dB unit, eg. -20dB, 0dB or 1 is max value.
Use mentioned mpv command for the reason, as it displays curve.
The command does not work on my computer. I did download mpv.exe and run the command line. mpv exits immediately, no output, no error message. When I run mpv without any options, then a mpv window opens. Michael
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:40 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
-- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the
filter?
It changes steepness, not cutoff. What's the unit of the "slope" option?
1 / octave, can be set as dB unit, eg. -20dB, 0dB or 1 is max value.
Use mentioned mpv command for the reason, as it displays curve.
The command does not work on my computer. I did download mpv.exe and run the command line. mpv exits immediately, no output, no error message. When I run mpv without any options, then a mpv window opens.
Make sure you run it inside power shell or cmd.exe and make sure you tried mpv.com too.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 27.11.2020 um 22:47 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:40 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
-- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of
filter?
It changes steepness, not cutoff. What's the unit of the "slope" option?
1 / octave, can be set as dB unit, eg. -20dB, 0dB or 1 is max value.
Use mentioned mpv command for the reason, as it displays curve. The command does not work on my computer. I did download mpv.exe and run
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the the command line. mpv exits immediately, no output, no error message. When I run mpv without any options, then a mpv window opens.
Make sure you run it inside power shell or cmd.exe and make sure you tried mpv.com too.
Now with mpv.com it works. But the version doesn't yet have the asubboost filter. With other filters it works. Michael
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:20 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:40 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
> Hello, > > I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. > > -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter > looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. > What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass > filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass > filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's > only a wild guess. > This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
> -- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the > cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of
> filter? > It changes steepness, not cutoff. What's the unit of the "slope" option?
1 / octave, can be set as dB unit, eg. -20dB, 0dB or 1 is max value.
Use mentioned mpv command for the reason, as it displays curve. The command does not work on my computer. I did download mpv.exe and run
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the the command line. mpv exits immediately, no output, no error message. When I run mpv without any options, then a mpv window opens.
Make sure you run it inside power shell or cmd.exe and make sure you
Am 27.11.2020 um 22:47 schrieb Paul B Mahol: tried
mpv.com too.
Now with mpv.com it works. But the version doesn't yet have the asubboost filter. With other filters it works.
Download the latest release version of mpv. Also note that asubbost is not a simple IIR filter and thus it can not really show its response.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 27.11.2020 um 23:27 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:20 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:40 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >> >> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter >> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. >> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass >> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's >> only a wild guess. >> > This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back > to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how > much > new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. Sorry, I didn't understand it. I think this filter could be explained much better with a block diagram.
>> -- Is it correct that the "slope" parameter effectively changes the >> cutoff frequency, but doesn't change the steepness (dB / octave) of
>> filter? >> > It changes steepness, not cutoff. What's the unit of the "slope" option?
1 / octave, can be set as dB unit, eg. -20dB, 0dB or 1 is max value.
Use mentioned mpv command for the reason, as it displays curve. The command does not work on my computer. I did download mpv.exe and run
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the the command line. mpv exits immediately, no output, no error message. When I run mpv without any options, then a mpv window opens.
Make sure you run it inside power shell or cmd.exe and make sure you
Am 27.11.2020 um 22:47 schrieb Paul B Mahol: tried
mpv.com too. Now with mpv.com it works. But the version doesn't yet have the asubboost filter. With other filters it works.
Download the latest release version of mpv. Also note that asubbost is not a simple IIR filter and thus it can not really show its response.
That's clear. If the filter has a delay line, then a simple frequency response makes no sense. It would really help if you could draw a block diagram for asubboost. That would be much easier to understand than a description with words. Michael -- ********************************************** ASTRO ELECTRONIC Dipl.-Ing. Michael Koch Raabestr. 43 37412 Herzberg www.astro-electronic.de Tel. +49 5521 854265 Fax +49 5521 854266 **********************************************
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer.
I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly the same thing as "wet". Michael
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer.
I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly the same thing as "wet".
No, your reasoning is invalid. I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Hello,
I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters.
-- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's only a wild guess.
This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the same thing as "wet".
No, your reasoning is invalid.
I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free.
When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite. Michael
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
> Hello, > > I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. > > -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter > looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. > What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass > filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass > filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's > only a wild guess. > This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how much new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the same thing as "wet".
No, your reasoning is invalid.
I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free.
When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite.
Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used. I do not want to lost more time in such pointless discussions. As better time is spent developing code more then teaching someone to properly read and understand source code.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >> >> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter >> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. >> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass >> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's >> only a wild guess. >> > This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency back > to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets how > much > new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the same thing as "wet".
No, your reasoning is invalid.
I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite.
Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used.
When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example: set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7" ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1 -frames 1 -y out1.png ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1 -frames 1 -y out2.png ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the asubboost filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped. Michael
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:24 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
> Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < > astroelectronic@t-online.de> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >>> >>> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter >>> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. >>> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol: pass
>>> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >>> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's >>> only a wild guess. >>> >> This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency > back >> to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets > how >> much >> new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly the same thing as "wet".
No, your reasoning is invalid.
I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite.
Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used.
When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out1.png
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out2.png
ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png
Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the asubboost filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped.
What we said previously about delay buffers and that above command? It was literally less than 24h. That command can not show you the action of delayed input as it is not designed for it.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:46 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:24 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> > wrote: > >> Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < >> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >>>> >>>> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter >>>> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. >>>> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol: pass
>>>> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >>>> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's >>>> only a wild guess. >>>> >>> This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency >> back >>> to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets >> how >>> much >>> new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output signal. Is the attached sketch correct? It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly the same thing as "wet".
No, your reasoning is invalid.
I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite.
Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used.
When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out1.png
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out2.png
ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png
Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the asubboost filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped.
What we said previously about delay buffers and that above command? It was literally less than 24h. That command can not show you the action of delayed input as it is not designed for it.
More precisely input which is single impulse and rest is 0 can not give you different output ever. Try it on real bassy music.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 28.11.2020 um 14:48 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:46 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:24 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
> Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < > astroelectronic@t-online.de> >> wrote: >> >>> Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < >>> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >>>>> >>>>> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter >>>>> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. >>>>> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol: pass
>>>>> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >>>>> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's >>>>> only a wild guess. >>>>> >>>> This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency >>> back >>>> to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets >>> how >>>> much >>>> new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. > I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output > signal. Is the attached sketch correct? > It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly > the same thing as "wet". > No, your reasoning is invalid.
I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite. Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out1.png
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out2.png
ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png
Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the asubboost filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped.
What we said previously about delay buffers and that above command? It was literally less than 24h.
The previous example was "showfreqs" which has a frequency domain output. Not suitable for analyzing filters which contain delays. Now I'm using "showwaves" which has time domain output. That's a different thing. Of course delay lines can be analyzed in time domain.
That command can not show you the action of delayed input as it is not designed for it.
A step signal contains all frequencies and is the best possible source for analyzing unknown black boxes that may contain delays. You can replace the input by any other source, but you will never find any difference in the two outputs. It's a fact, "wet" and "feedback" are interchangeable. Michael
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 5:18 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 14:48 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:46 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:24 PM Michael Koch <
astroelectronic@t-online.de>
wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> > wrote: > >> Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < >> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < >>>> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the filter >>>>>> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are unclear. >>>>>> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol: pass
>>>>>> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >>>>>> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but it's >>>>>> only a wild guess. >>>>>> >>>>> This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off frequency >>>> back >>>>> to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback sets >>>> how >>>>> much >>>>> new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. >> I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output >> signal. Is the attached sketch correct? >> It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly >> the same thing as "wet". >> > No, your reasoning is invalid. > > I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same. If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite. Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi
asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out1.png
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi
asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out2.png
ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png
Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the
asubboost
filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped.
What we said previously about delay buffers and that above command? It was literally less than 24h.
The previous example was "showfreqs" which has a frequency domain output. Not suitable for analyzing filters which contain delays. Now I'm using "showwaves" which has time domain output. That's a different thing. Of course delay lines can be analyzed in time domain.
That command can not show you the action of delayed input as it is not designed for it.
A step signal contains all frequencies and is the best possible source for analyzing unknown black boxes that may contain delays. You can replace the input by any other source, but you will never find any difference in the two outputs. It's a fact, "wet" and "feedback" are interchangeable.
Nope, you are very mistaken. Try with real audio.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 28.11.2020 um 19:18 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 5:18 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 14:48 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:46 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
> Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < > astroelectronic@t-online.de> >> wrote: >> >>> Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < >>> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < >>>>> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >>>>>>> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of the > filter >>>>>>> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are > unclear. >>>>>>> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol: pass
>>>>>>> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >>>>>>> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but > it's >>>>>>> only a wild guess. >>>>>>> >>>>>> This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off > frequency >>>>> back >>>>>> to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback > sets >>>>> how >>>>>> much >>>>>> new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. >>> I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output >>> signal. Is the attached sketch correct? >>> It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly >>> the same thing as "wet". >>> >> No, your reasoning is invalid. >> >> I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. > When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always > remain the same. > If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite. Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still used. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi
asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out1.png
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi
asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out2.png
ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png
Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the asubboost filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped.
What we said previously about delay buffers and that above command? It was literally less than 24h. The previous example was "showfreqs" which has a frequency domain output. Not suitable for analyzing filters which contain delays. Now I'm using "showwaves" which has time domain output. That's a different thing. Of course delay lines can be analyzed in time domain.
That command can not show you the action of delayed input as it is not designed for it. A step signal contains all frequencies and is the best possible source for analyzing unknown black boxes that may contain delays. You can replace the input by any other source, but you will never find any difference in the two outputs. It's a fact, "wet" and "feedback" are interchangeable.
Nope, you are very mistaken. Try with real audio.
You can use this example with any real audio input you want: set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7" ffmpeg -i dog.mp3 -lavfi asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50 -y out1.wav ffmpeg -i dog.mp3 -lavfi asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50 -y out2.wav ffmpeg -i out1.wav -i out2.wav -lavfi [0][1]amerge,aeval=val(0)-val(1) -y out.wav out.wav is the difference between out1.wav and out2.wav, and it's perfect silence. Which means the two inputs are equal. Michael
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 8:55 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 5:18 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 14:48 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:46 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 2:24 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 13:44 schrieb Paul B Mahol: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> > wrote: > >> Am 28.11.2020 um 12:57 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:41 PM Michael Koch < >> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Am 27.11.2020 um 20:50 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:24 PM Michael Koch < >>>> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Am 27.11.2020 um 19:25 schrieb Paul B Mahol: >>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM Michael Koch < >>>>>> astroelectronic@t-online.de> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have a few questions about the asubboost and asupercut filters. >>>>>>>> -- In asubboost it's not yet clear how the block diagram of
Am 28.11.2020 um 19:18 schrieb Paul B Mahol: the
>> filter >>>>>>>> looks like. Especially the "decay" and "feedback" options are >> unclear. >>>>>>>> What's the input of the the delay line? Before or after the low pass >>>>>>>> filter? Where does the feedback go to? Before or after the lowpass >>>>>>>> filter? I have attached a sketch of a possible block diagram, but >> it's >>>>>>>> only a wild guess. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> This filter just adds delayed sub frequencies set by cut off >> frequency >>>>>> back >>>>>>> to output. Decay sets decay of old sub echo in buffer and feedback >> sets >>>>>> how >>>>>>> much >>>>>>> new sub frequencies are added to the delay buffer. >>>> I did try to reverse engineer the asubboost filter from its output >>>> signal. Is the attached sketch correct? >>>> It seems the "feedback" parameter is unnecessary because it does exactly >>>> the same thing as "wet". >>>> >>> No, your reasoning is invalid. >>> >>> I do not have time to draw graphs or do consulting for free. >> When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always >> remain the same. >> If you think that I'm wrong, please show an example to prove the opposite. > Make sure that you take into account decay parameter, delay buffer is still > used. When you swap the values of "wet" and "feedback", the output does always remain the same, regardless which values you use for "dry", "decay" and "delay". As can be shown with this example:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi
asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out1.png
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i aevalsrc='0.5*gt(t,0.1)':d=1 -lavfi
asplit[a][b];[b]asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50[c],[a][c]join,showwaves=draw=full:s=800x300:r=1
-frames 1 -y out2.png
ffmpeg -i out1.png -i out2.png -lavfi vstack -y out.png
Red is input step signal, green is output step response of the asubboost filter. In the lower half of the output image the "wet" and "feedback" values are swapped.
What we said previously about delay buffers and that above command? It was literally less than 24h. The previous example was "showfreqs" which has a frequency domain output. Not suitable for analyzing filters which contain delays. Now I'm using "showwaves" which has time domain output. That's a different thing. Of course delay lines can be analyzed in time domain.
That command can not show you the action of delayed input as it is not designed for it. A step signal contains all frequencies and is the best possible source for analyzing unknown black boxes that may contain delays. You can replace the input by any other source, but you will never find any difference in the two outputs. It's a fact, "wet" and "feedback" are interchangeable.
Nope, you are very mistaken. Try with real audio.
You can use this example with any real audio input you want:
set "A=0.4" set "B=0.7"
ffmpeg -i dog.mp3 -lavfi asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%A%:decay=0.4:feedback=%B%:delay=50 -y out1.wav ffmpeg -i dog.mp3 -lavfi asubboost=dry=0.3:wet=%B%:decay=0.4:feedback=%A%:delay=50 -y out2.wav ffmpeg -i out1.wav -i out2.wav -lavfi [0][1]amerge,aeval=val(0)-val(1) -y out.wav
out.wav is the difference between out1.wav and out2.wav, and it's perfect silence. Which means the two inputs are equal.
Ok, made the wet option do actually apply gain to final output.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Am 28.11.2020 um 22:09 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
Ok, made the wet option do actually apply gain to final output.
I think the asubboost block diagram does now look like this (view with fixed width font): IN -o------------------------------------> DRY ---> ADD -> WET -> OUT | ^ | | +-> LP -> ADD ---------------------o-> FEEDBACK -+ ^ | | | +- DECAY <- DELAYLINE <-+ The name "feedback" is misleading because this signal isn't going back. It would make sense to rename "feedback" to "wet". What's now "wet" could be renamed "gain", or it could be removed because it's unnecessary. Michael
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 4:55 PM Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
Am 28.11.2020 um 22:09 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
Ok, made the wet option do actually apply gain to final output.
I think the asubboost block diagram does now look like this (view with fixed width font):
IN -o------------------------------------> DRY ---> ADD -> WET -> OUT | ^ | | +-> LP -> ADD ---------------------o-> FEEDBACK -+ ^ | | | +- DECAY <- DELAYLINE <-+
The name "feedback" is misleading because this signal isn't going back. It would make sense to rename "feedback" to "wet". What's now "wet" could be renamed "gain", or it could be removed because it's unnecessary.
It is really necessary, You keep insisting on pointless changes.
Michael
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
On Sunday, 29 November 2020, 15:55:29 GMT, Michael Koch <astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
The name "feedback" is misleading because this signal isn't going back.> It would make sense to rename "feedback" to "wet".> What's now "wet" could be renamed "gain", or it could be removed because > it's unnecessary. I may not be fully comprehending the behaviour of the software in this case, but if your diagram is accurate that would make sense. Certainly it would reflect the meaning of the terms "dry" and "wet" as they're commonly used in audio processing. Using those terms in another way is confusing. P
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 6:07 PM Phil Rhodes via ffmpeg-user < ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
On Sunday, 29 November 2020, 15:55:29 GMT, Michael Koch < astroelectronic@t-online.de> wrote:
The name "feedback" is misleading because this signal isn't going back.> It would make sense to rename "feedback" to "wet".> What's now "wet" could be renamed "gain", or it could be removed because > it's unnecessary. I may not be fully comprehending the behaviour of the software in this case, but if your diagram is accurate that would make sense. Certainly it would reflect the meaning of the terms "dry" and "wet" as they're commonly used in audio processing. Using those terms in another way is confusing.
It is completely misleading and never was relevant, more so when there is new 'boost' option now. P
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
participants (3)
-
Michael Koch -
Paul B Mahol -
Phil Rhodes