Stereo Tool

Ok Hanz,

Probably the Natural Dynamics cause artfacts and the sound is less powerfull.

The Pmux is nearly around 7.4 db vs v 6.10 around 8db.
Mesured with a Pira75

Do you update the presets in final version 6.20 ?
Like extreme sound with declipper activated ?

We search a powerfull sound like omnia or orban for a new fm station , opening at the end of october.

Very good soft stereotool !
Congratulation

Thanks
Luc

This is a very good idea !
Good luck

What is Pmux? I tried Googling it but I couldn't find anything useful...

Multiplex Power
The Power of sound

Like this : http://www.radiotechnique.com/la-puissa ... ex.php#mpx

Ah, ok. I can imagine 2 reasons why the volume is different:
1. BIG changes in the AGC. The new one is far more constant.
2. "Advanced Highs Protection" in 6.20. I must say that I'm not too happy about it - it works better than what I had before but I really want something much better to allow louder and cleaner highs even if lots of other sounds are present.

mmm ok this is an explainaition.
the presets is the same at 6.10 probably is not adapted to 6.20 ?

What genre?

Wow!

My pira75 spectrum analyzer shows 7 dbr of sound " power "
( at 75 khz of course! )

most radiostations have 2 or 3 dbr of power only!

stereotool can make 7 for sure !!

You kinda lose most of the benefits of Natural Dynamics by having the Loudness doing things a normal limiter wouldn't be sufficient at too.

Personally I would go for the Natural Dynamics, leave it unslammed, and make the listeners happy.

My "New York" preset for Omnia.9 was hitting 165% with the OLD clipper. With the new clipper, even the reference preset is hitting 175%. =) But yes, keep in mind that it's true this can't happen constantly (but constantly enough to make a MAJOR audible difference). And also keep in mind that this is a momentary peak and is heavily biased toward the treble, where it's needed most. This doesn't mean it's 75+ percent louder, not even. What it does translate to is much cleaner sounding highs, and crisper sounding transients.

All done on an Intel system, with a very high likelihood that your version of IPP penalizes AMD processors when you link it.

I've been sick all day today, since I posted the previous response, but I did look through some VTune documentation and noticed that Intel even mentions using Windows Perfmon. I'm also seeing references to Counter Monitor having higher overhead than Event Based Sampling, but Event Based Sampling having a Caution that it may not provide 100% reliable information depending on certain circumstances (http://software.intel.com/sites/product ... ction.html)

Further, there appears to be a difference between "Lightweight Hotspots" and "Hotspots", with the latter looking only at your specific application and not system-wide performance. Task Manager, and what I always break out when this subject is brought up, Process Explorer, would be looking at system-wide.

http://software.intel.com/sites/product ... me_running

If I ever manage to get a job, I am going to buy a license for your product, even though I'm only a home user, so with that in mind, can you spare any money to get an AMD system and AMD's CodeAnalyst and look at the non-Intel-biased metrics, or do you think that wouldn't be beneficial due to staying with the known AMD-penalizing IPP?