The impetus to avoid clipping has become more significant since digital audio is less forgiving of saturation. Logically this might suggest using lower nominal 0VU levels. Or not....
JR
JR
What Ics to use on a Neve V series ?
- Thread starter xarolium
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
But meters in digital mixers and DAWs are ppm, not VU.
not to mention being below digital full scale.....
===
I have long advocated for both peak and average metering.
JR
As much as I understand the necessity for broadcast, for recording and SR I have long relegated VU-meters to the role of Xmas decoration.
They were serendipitiously adequate for tape recorders, though.
VU meters are "eye candy"... I put VU meters on some large consoles because the customers wanted them not me...
I added peak LEDs next to the VUs for me.
JR
I added peak LEDs next to the VUs for me.
JR
Fleximan
New member
Just as an aside. Some of my fave op amps are the LME 49710 / 49720 as a pretty much drop in replacement for the TL071/72s. Smoother highs and more open. Faster slew rate. I really love these in the EQ section of my Trident Fleximix.
Other great op amps are:
ADA 4627-1B,
ADA 4898-1/-2 (can be very temperamental).
I don't know about a whole console but in some choice spots they might have a nice impact. Pull the data sheets for current draw etc. But to really do it right, you DO need a good tec that will make sure you aren't generating any high freq oscillations or other nasty issues.
If they have extremely low DC offset, you can eliminate DC blocking caps at the input (that's a Jim Williams nugget I learned).
Other great op amps are:
ADA 4627-1B,
ADA 4898-1/-2 (can be very temperamental).
I don't know about a whole console but in some choice spots they might have a nice impact. Pull the data sheets for current draw etc. But to really do it right, you DO need a good tec that will make sure you aren't generating any high freq oscillations or other nasty issues.
If they have extremely low DC offset, you can eliminate DC blocking caps at the input (that's a Jim Williams nugget I learned).
The TL07x have a gain bandwidth of > 5Mhz and a slew rate around 15V/usec. That suggests a power bandwidth octaves above 20kHz.
The TL07x series has a few known weaknesses, poor drive capability, poor DC characteristics, not lowest ein. But properly applied in line level audio paths pretty transparent (IMO).
JR
living sounds
Well-known member
Many people seem to prefer VU meters to LED meters. I think the latter ones are the only useful variant.
living sounds
Well-known member
This is asking for trouble. LME497X0 are bipolars and much faster. They're great drop-ins if you like the sound of HF oscillation IMO...
I believe there are two categories of needle meter lovers: those who have been trained when they were the only choice, and those who enjoy the show more than the actual precision of control.
I switched a long time ago. No coming back.
radardoug
Well-known member
You are watching audio on a meter. Precision has nothing to do with it.
It depends on what you expect out of a meter. A PPM gives a much more accurate and useful readout for digital recording if your primary concern is to avoid clipping. What it doesn't do is give you any indication of loudness. Many people want a meter to show loudness as well as level. A VU meter is good for that. An LFUS meter tries to reconcile these two different uses for meters.
I never heard of
.I have a couple patents for simultaneous LED display of Peak and VU (average). The slower average is more representative of loudness than peak.
Sorry about the veer, this is a pretty mature topic.
JR
Last edited:
Well it's actually LUFS. Dyslexic. A boatload of money was spent on R&D for it. It is the de facto level standard for broadcast. It has been adopted by everyone. AES, EBU, SMPTE. The development was a hot topic and all over the AES journals. Surprised you haven't run across it.
pucho812
Well-known member
Lufs is basicallyI never heard of LFUS so searched it.... Sounds like some variant on loudness compensation ( a very old concept but made new again for digital crunching)
I have a couple patents for simultaneous LED display of Peak and VU (average). The slower average is more representative of loudness than peak.
Sorry about the veer, this is a pretty mature topic.
JR
Loudness Units relative to Full Scale or Loudness Units Full Scale(i.e., the maximum level a system can handle.) It’s a standardized measurement of audio loudness that factors human perception and electrical signal intensity together. To simplify, it just means that LUFS are the latest and most precise way to measure loudness in audio, designed to help make consistent sound possible.
Basically, we now have loudness meters whose capabilities extend conventional VU (volume unit), or peak, meters and are based on a spec called Loudness Units. (...) In a nutshell, Loudness Units are the unit of measurement used in the process of quantifying a piece of music’s perceived loudness by analyzing the average level over time. In theory, two pieces of music that register identical LUFS readings should sound like they’re at the same level, and in practice, they do indeed sound like they’re at the same level, regardless of whatever the peak or RMS readings say. So we have an immediate, practical benefit — if you’re mastering and want consistent levels among tracks, check their LUFS readings.
I found Dorrough Loudness meters useful until Pro Tools included a Digital VU (VU + Peak) meter. I also regularly use LUFS meters for mastering, but not for recording or mixing.
A key concept of the LUFS meter is, as JR pointed out, the K-weighting that's applied. Bob Katz figured out a metering that effectively represents the loudness of music as we perceive it. Some people still use the original K-Meter that grew into LUFS. It was actually inspired by a quest for consistent theater sound by George Lucas, from what I remember...
The white papers and standard are a fascinating read. A great deal of thought and development was put into it. It's not prefect but it does a remarkably good job.
Honestly not getting the sense of this comment. It's clearly advantageous to monitor levels visually. Regardless of digital/analogue - remember setting Ng levels on R2R or Cassette recordings.
The interesting bit is accurate metering of digital audio to properly measure
inter-sample peaks. Whether to monitor digital levels and calculate or simply measure analogue signal post re-construction filter.
B.S. The K-Weighting is a simple level shift for headroom. The equivalent of deciding whether your reference level is -20dBfs or -14dBfs. It's pretty useless IMO. It knows nothing about crest factor, RMS level over time or how to ignore outlier values. All the things that make LUFS sophisticated and useful.
Similar threads
