Stereo Tool
https://forums.stereotool.com/

Low latency secondary input (microphone)
https://forums.stereotool.com/viewtopic.php?t=853		 Page 74 of 75
Author:  Bojcha [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
- Add Pre-Emphasize for Normal Output (10,15,20,25us), useful for web streaming (?)
- Different Normal Output sound when FM + Stereo is enabled.
This two things are related !

I found next:
First i checked "Breakaway Broadcast" same thing: Normal Output and FM output in same time. Happens exactly same as in Stereo Tool. So..
When Normal Output and FM output is used in same time, Normal output uses 50us or 75us Pre-Emphasis (depends what is selected).

I really don't know how this can be solved. Maybe just separate pre-emphasise for Normal output. (15-25us).
If can be solved like this, in same time i expect new sound for normal output (more highs), which must be corrected by EQ internaly.
Author:  hvz [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Hi Bojcha,

I'm a bit confused now.

If you enable FM processing, the Normal output is indeed different - and that's how it's intended (the entire processing chain switches to processing pre-emphasized sound, which affects the audio).

But... You wrote that the sound changed when you turn "Encode stereo" on or off. If anything, I saw in the code that if "Encode stereo" is enabled AND FM Volume Overdrive > 101%, the limiting is relaxed a bit (because Overdrive is used anyway), which might lead to slightly more highs in Normal Output. But that difference should be really small, and in your example file, the highs are actually reduced when you turn Encode Stereo on. Which (assuming that FM processing and more specifically pre-emphasis was already turned on) does not make any sense.

So far I haven't been able to reproduce it though, and I cannot explain it based on the code...
Author:  Bojcha [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Quote:
Hi Bojcha,
You wrote that the sound changed when you turn "Encode stereo" on or off. If anything, I saw in the code that if "Encode stereo" is enabled AND FM Volume Overdrive > 101%, the limiting is relaxed a bit (because Overdrive is used anyway), which might lead to slightly more highs in Normal Output. But that difference should be really small, and in your example file, the highs are actually reduced when you turn Encode Stereo on. Which (assuming that FM processing and more specifically pre-emphasis was already turned on) does not make any sense.
So far I haven't been able to reproduce it though, and I cannot explain it based on the code...
Hi,
FM override and "Stereo encoding" has nothing with this. Only pre-emphasis makes this difference! it's really strange how you can't hear difference (?) you may try with 75us
As i said i never use Normal and FM output in same time. But then i saw post from "Boris" - here viewtopic.php?f=3&t=715 , where he says that he use StereoTool for Streaming and for Transmitter. i start that stream and i heard strange sound caused by pre-emhasise. Then i try myself same, tryed on stream pc and on my pc, and get same result.
Author:  hvz [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Hi Bojcha,

I must have misunderstood something some time ago. Because I had understood that you heard a difference when you turned "Encode stereo" and "FM output" on.

Pre-emphasis does indeed make a big difference in the sound (which gets bigger at higher Loudness values by the way). But it doesn't matter here if FM output or Stereo encoding is enabled, it occurs immediately when FM processing + pre-emphasis is turned on.

But that's intentional, not a bug.


The only way NOT to do this would to perform nearly all the processing twice. If you want that, you could also run 2 instances of Stereo Tool.
Author:  Bojcha [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 5:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Quote:
But that's intentional, not a bug.
The only way NOT to do this would to perform nearly all the processing twice. If you want that, you could also run 2 instances of Stereo Tool.
Then this is clear now. :)
But i am asking myself how then you going to make pre-emphasise for Normal output.
--------
I make some changes for "clubber" preset. So here it is Clubber_v2
Hans, if you have time please listen this preset and tell me if it could be better.

Attachments:
clubber_v2.rar [2.38 KiB]
Downloaded 505 times
Author:  Luke [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 7:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Hans attached is also the graphical bug like Russel mentions.

Running Win7 home premium on this laptop.
Screen resolution is 1680 x 1050.

Attachments:
stereotool.PNG
stereotool.PNG [ 50.12 KiB | Viewed 7404 times ]
Author:  DUB<^>STEP [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
hi Hans downloaded beta 5.00 on with testing.
Author:  hvz [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Quote:
Hans attached is also the graphical bug like Russel mentions.

Running Win7 home premium on this laptop.
Screen resolution is 1680 x 1050.
Hi Luke,

1. Is that with the latest version (that is, AFTER I posted an update where I said that the issue was fixed, in the 5.00 BETA thread?)
2. The font looks completely normal (not 120 DPI but the usual 96), is that correct?
Author:  Luke [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Quote:
Hi Luke,

1. Is that with the latest version (that is, AFTER I posted an update where I said that the issue was fixed, in the 5.00 BETA thread?)
2. The font looks completely normal (not 120 DPI but the usual 96), is that correct?

Hans, apologies, didn't go for the last beta it seems.
Seems fixed now.

Now go and grab that Heineken, I'll stick with a Duvel.
Author:  hvz [ Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Low latency secondary input (microphone)
Quote:
Quote:
Hi Luke,

1. Is that with the latest version (that is, AFTER I posted an update where I said that the issue was fixed, in the 5.00 BETA thread?)
2. The font looks completely normal (not 120 DPI but the usual 96), is that correct?

Hans, apologies, didn't go for the last beta it seems.
Seems fixed now.

Now go and grab that Heineken, I'll stick with a Duvel.
Duvel? Are you from Belgium?

Anyway, I'm now building another update with a few fixes. What remains after that is just the tweaking of some presets.
Page 74 of 75 All times are UTC+02:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/