Lots of activity since I last visited.
My burst on time was much shorter than a second. Attack effects will settle pretty quickly. I needed to make mine completely adjustable so I could better coax out artifacts in ancient circuitry. Modern parts are quite a bit better behaved than what I was working with.
Brad: yes, my mix control bypasses the burst with a dry signal. This has two uses. Yes, the baseline level is useful to gauge release time, but also establishes initial conditions at some level. The gain cell/VCA and side chain ramping to final conditions from 6 dB away will be quite different than from 26 dB away.
My preference for sine wave burst testing for design listening tests is because the simplicity (purity) of sine waves makes artifacts stand out more. Admittedly this is more focussed on functional integrity of dynamics chain and not aesthetic which must be established with music and ears only.
FWIW my hardware burst generator could also accept music as source material so I could hype the dynamics present using normal music, and gauge how well music masks artifacts that couldn't be completely eliminated, or when forced onto a tradeoff between how the artifact will express. Of course since the burst timing was uncorrelated to music the utility was limited with musical sources.
IMO overall time constants should be set entirely be ear, and maybe measured after the fact with tones. The nitty gritty of design benefits from being able to zero in on sonic consequences of different tradeoffs. Judgement is involved in how much the music will mask things audible with simple tones. I don't recall ever encountering an artifact that was more audible with complex music, but it is entirely possible to not check in all the useful frequency ranges, so pretty much like so many audio tests the simpler stimuli increases sensitivity for a narrowed type of behavior. So listening tests with music can help point you toward the proper specialized test conditions to isolate whatever you are suspicious of.
JR
My burst on time was much shorter than a second. Attack effects will settle pretty quickly. I needed to make mine completely adjustable so I could better coax out artifacts in ancient circuitry. Modern parts are quite a bit better behaved than what I was working with.
Brad: yes, my mix control bypasses the burst with a dry signal. This has two uses. Yes, the baseline level is useful to gauge release time, but also establishes initial conditions at some level. The gain cell/VCA and side chain ramping to final conditions from 6 dB away will be quite different than from 26 dB away.
My preference for sine wave burst testing for design listening tests is because the simplicity (purity) of sine waves makes artifacts stand out more. Admittedly this is more focussed on functional integrity of dynamics chain and not aesthetic which must be established with music and ears only.
FWIW my hardware burst generator could also accept music as source material so I could hype the dynamics present using normal music, and gauge how well music masks artifacts that couldn't be completely eliminated, or when forced onto a tradeoff between how the artifact will express. Of course since the burst timing was uncorrelated to music the utility was limited with musical sources.
IMO overall time constants should be set entirely be ear, and maybe measured after the fact with tones. The nitty gritty of design benefits from being able to zero in on sonic consequences of different tradeoffs. Judgement is involved in how much the music will mask things audible with simple tones. I don't recall ever encountering an artifact that was more audible with complex music, but it is entirely possible to not check in all the useful frequency ranges, so pretty much like so many audio tests the simpler stimuli increases sensitivity for a narrowed type of behavior. So listening tests with music can help point you toward the proper specialized test conditions to isolate whatever you are suspicious of.
JR