Are you talking about the version for LiquidSoap? The normal versions are those with ALSA or Jack in the name; the LiquidSoap versions aren't posted in this thread until now. The latest released versions can be found here: https://download.thimeo.com/Stereo_Tool ... plugin.zip

Damn, is there a word for something that's nonstandard but official? I'll keep an eye out.

Yes and no, the one that works with Liquid Soap but the older stable liquidsoap.
In other words, the cmd version.

Hello. Last night I took a look at the ability to select presets with the NVDA screen reader. I don't see that there is a web/hd presets category now. What do I use for internet radio now?

Hello. Last night I took a look at the ability to select presets with the NVDA screen reader. I don't see that there is a web/hd presets category now. What do I use for internet radio now?

KevGP- Do you mean that literally? Are you saying the numerical value on the slider should correspond to gain reduction time or speed? Attack and release time of nearly zero is effectively a clipper. Attack speed of zero means no gain reduction is created, and if no gain reduction is created release speed is moot, don't you agree?

Note to Stereo Tool developers- I know this is an international product, but a clear and consistent syntax and definitions of terminology is important.

KevGP- The fundamental function of audio processing is manipulation and control of peak and average level across the audio spectrum, to achieve a subjective and objective goal. If you truly want an uncompressed sound, don't use processing.

KevGP, If you want a basic uncompressed sound with a rudimentary single band gain reduction stage, I suggest attack time 10 to 50 milliseconds, recovery time 200 to 900 milliseconds and compression ratio between 3 to 1 and 5 to 1. Adjust to taste. Have fun, and sleep on it. Be aware that peaks with be flying through, uncontrolled. Note those time values are based on the traditional R/C time constant and slope, and modern processors work with multiple detectors, interactive layers and variable slopes, even in a single band. This basic example has been known for over 50 years.

Another approach is attack and release time per dB of gain change, or attack and release time from or to a given audio input level, which may be different from the threshold level where gain change commenced. And as mentioned, there can be adjustments of the slope (over time) of the gain change.

Developers- consider attack and release user adjustment with a GUI graphic similar to the programmable EQ, with gain change on the vertical axis and time on horizontal axis. This way users can see the gain, time and slope components. This could reduce language, terminology and syntax misunderstandings.

Because of the fascinating complexity of audio processing, I think clear and consistent labeling of controls to their underlying action is important. GUI "front panel" control labeling and internal circuit action (DSP engine) are two different things. They must remain in alignment. That is, a new GUI (front panel) should not change the underlying circuit function, or sound of a pre-existing user preset. If it does, there should be full disclosure to customers. Otherwise, the manufacturer has disrespected and destroyed the end result the user created with the product they purchased.

This user is dismayed with the apparent obsession with cosmetic aspects of the GUI (apart from the labeling). I see constant work on the underlying processing engine metrics such as CPU load and bugs. That is excellent. I see little indication of work on improving the underlying processing structure and action. It is a very good processor right now, but I assume you are always thinking of new approaches, and not just cosmetic GUI matters such as scaling, color, making it easy, etc.