New Synth

[tulamide]

Enjoy your trip!

[Spogg]

What a lovely and thoughtful gift!

Enjoy!

Spogg

[rocknrollkat]

Not to derail the topic ...

but with all the DC-OFFSET conversation going on ...

1st .... Thanks to MartinV for the two code versions posted ...

but what I wonder:

What if we would want to measure DC-OFFSET in an audio file ? Then it would be know if it needs to be removed.

[sneaky way of asking for code to analysis for dc-offset]

Hi RJ,
All decent DAWs have a module that will detect and remove D.C. offset from a track or entire file.
Some waveforms have D.C. offest "built in" (There is more energy in the upper half of the waveform, or vice versa), so the idea that "D.C. offset is the sum of the halves and should be "0" is only partially correct.
True D.C. offest, caused by a leaky capacitor in a soundcard A/D converter is what typically causes unwanted D.C. offset. That is what you see at "0" volume on the o'scope, the trace is slightly above or below '0' volts.
That is what needs to be removed, since amplifiers and speakers are not designed to deal with D.C. voltages as a signal.
http://supermastering.com/understanding-dc-offset/

ROXY

[RJHollins]

For my Mastering work, I typically use iZotope Rx Pro to handle things like DC-Offset, Phase corrections, etc.
Since my work comes in through Clients, I have to pre-analyze files for any possible technical issues.

My point on the forum was more to having a more complete FlowStone tool that first determined what/if any DC-Offset. Usually it is expressed as in dB/percentage% [similar to RX or WaveLAB].

Was just something of interest ... but I don't want to de-rail this thread.

[tulamide]

For my Mastering work, I typically use iZotope Rx Pro to handle things like DC-Offset, Phase corrections, etc.
Since my work comes in through Clients, I have to pre-analyze files for any possible technical issues.

My point on the forum was more to having a more complete FlowStone tool that first determined what/if any DC-Offset. Usually it is expressed as in dB/percentage% [similar to RX or WaveLAB].

Was just something of interest ... but I don't want to de-rail this thread.

RJ,
You are working in the digital realm, so simply take the average of a file, everything non-zero is an offset. The sign tells you, if it is positive or negative (top, bottom in a visual display). Percentage is simple: Since the maximum offset you can detect would theoretically be +- 1, the absolute value you get IS the percentage. dB doesn't exist in the digital realm, only dBFS. The latter is a fixed scale between with 0 = -inf dBFS and 1 = 0 dBFS. So just calculate dBFS from the value you got. (There's a prim for it, if I remember correctly)

<Edited by moderator>

[Phil Thalasso]

Hello anyone,

I am more than a little confused about this discussion that has been going on for a couple of posts.
The last thing I want to do is fuel a disagreement between two people who are already irritated by
each other. I just want to understand. So please don't take what I write down in this post as anything
well informed, but rather a question of someone who tries to learn flowstone and has zero background
in DSP or anything related to it. I'm just lost.

I do understand that working with computers involves working in a world in which only 0s and 1s matter.
I guess this is a fact which noone would question.
I also understand that while Flowstone can be connected to the analog world, anything that happens
inside Flowstone will ultimately be transferred into 0s and 1s.
If I were wrong on this, anything that follows would be wrong as well.

From what I am being sold as a consumer of vst-instruments by professional companies, I understand that
yes indeed, folks do model electronic circuits in a software environment. One example would be a plug-in
by a small German company called Synapse, "The Legend". If you are interested, here is a link in English
language which explains what they claim to be doing:
http://www.synapse-audio.com/thelegend.html
Among other things, they assess their work as follows:
"Every component, ranging from the voltage-controlled oscillators (VCOs), voltage-controlled filter (VCF)
and voltage-controlled amplifier (VCA), have been modeled to an accuracy never seen before in software.
...
The back panel of The Legend allows to switch between two revisions modeled, Early and Late. Moreover,
extra options allow to fine-tune the analog simulation and account for part tolerances typically found
in hardware."
Now, that makes me wonder whether they are selling snake-oil or whether the software modelling of
electronics is actually something that is a useful thing to do."

Apart from Synapse's Legend there are many more companies who claim the same attributes for their software
and from looking at what those good people charge for their products, it seems to me that customers are
indeed willing to spend large amounts of money for something that is 0s and 1s but at the same time
emulates hardware.

Now again, I just don't know. Obviously this a topic that raises emotions and I have seen plenty of
discussions on the net whether or not this hardware emulation makes sense.
Here is a link which provides some clues on what people are thinking:
https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=173325

As I wrote, I'm lost. So thank you for taking your time reading this post and maybe there could be some
sort of informed discussion be people into that field, a group of folks I obviously don't belong to.

Have a good day, you all.

Regards
Phil

[tulamide]

Hello anyone,

I am more than a little confused about this discussion that has been going on for a couple of posts.
The last thing I want to do is fuel a disagreement between two people who are already irritated by
each other. I just want to understand. So please don't take what I write down in this post as anything
well informed, but rather a question of someone who tries to learn flowstone and has zero background
in DSP or anything related to it. I'm just lost.

I do understand that working with computers involves working in a world in which only 0s and 1s matter.
I guess this is a fact which noone would question.
I also understand that while Flowstone can be connected to the analog world, anything that happens
inside Flowstone will ultimately be transferred into 0s and 1s.
If I were wrong on this, anything that follows would be wrong as well.

From what I am being sold as a consumer of vst-instruments by professional companies, I understand that
yes indeed, folks do model electronic circuits in a software environment. One example would be a plug-in
by a small German company called Synapse, "The Legend". If you are interested, here is a link in English
language which explains what they claim to be doing:
http://www.synapse-audio.com/thelegend.html
Among other things, they assess their work as follows:
"Every component, ranging from the voltage-controlled oscillators (VCOs), voltage-controlled filter (VCF)
and voltage-controlled amplifier (VCA), have been modeled to an accuracy never seen before in software.
...
The back panel of The Legend allows to switch between two revisions modeled, Early and Late. Moreover,
extra options allow to fine-tune the analog simulation and account for part tolerances typically found
in hardware."
Now, that makes me wonder whether they are selling snake-oil or whether the software modelling of
electronics is actually something that is a useful thing to do."

Apart from Synapse's Legend there are many more companies who claim the same attributes for their software
and from looking at what those good people charge for their products, it seems to me that customers are
indeed willing to spend large amounts of money for something that is 0s and 1s but at the same time
emulates hardware.

Now again, I just don't know. Obviously this a topic that raises emotions and I have seen plenty of
discussions on the net whether or not this hardware emulation makes sense.
Here is a link which provides some clues on what people are thinking:
https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=173325

As I wrote, I'm lost. So thank you for taking your time reading this post and maybe there could be some
sort of informed discussion be people into that field, a group of folks I obviously don't belong to.

Have a good day, you all.

Regards
Phil

Hi Phil,

I understand your confusion. Some people here certainly have added to it. Regarding your example, I'm pretty sure you'll find any or all of the following 3 words, if you read carefully: "virtual", "emulation", "simulation". And that's important. You can't build an analogue synth in a digital environment. You can't build a transistor, a diode, a capacitor, a resistor, etc. But you can create dsp code that imitates the result of a transistor, a diode, a capacitor, a resistor, etc. This imitation can get close to the original behaviour, but they are created in totally different ways. And so there are always little things left that distinguishes the original from its emulation. For example the little fabrication inaccuracies of the components.
A good example for it is Adam's Viper. It is emulating the behaviour of a Virus Ti, but Adam would never claim to have recreated the components of the Virus Ti. Instead he listened carefully and programmed his synth, until it sounded very similar to the Virus.

The best image I can give is the following: You sit in a car. You push the gas pedal and the motor roars. You hear the big block working hard. But, why do you hear it? You know, you're sitting in an electric car! There is no motor with thousands of little explosions that finally make up the typical motor sound. With your electric engine, you should barely hear anything! Well, car designers are working hard on a surround sound system that reacts to the pedal, imitating the sound of a big block. The illusion works very good. The resulting sound is almost the same on the traditional car and this electric car. Yet, the electric car lacks the big block.

As to the discussion wether it makes sense to emulate analog hardware digitally, that is more of a decision for artists, less for developers.

[djbrynte]

good explenation tulamide. Couldent do it better my self. Can you make me a VST that sound like an V8 Lamborgini

haha.

Fact this explenation is very good to understand.

Tulamide ftw!

[rocknrollkat]

...I posted a reference link that backs up what I said...

In my view a dc offset in the analogue world correlates with a fixed value offset in the digital world; if you get one, you get the other.

Cheers

Spogg

Hi Spogg,
To clear things up, D.C. offset is any "no signal bitsream" other than two's compliment 1000000000000000, or the 16 bit digital representation of what will become converted to "0" volts analogue in the real world.
D.C. offset has been a problem long before digital electronics and as you point out, if you get one, you get the other.
Today's generation of people who are brought up in the digital audio domain have a newer definition of D.C. offset, saying that the sum of all points of a waveform should equal "0" .
Where the situation gets dicey is when you have a nonsymmetrical A.C. signal, (and most music is comprised of nonsymmetrical waveforms), there is a constant and fluctuating D.C. offset, if you go by the newer definition.
Fortunately, as long as a speaker cone is in motion, D.C. offset by that definition is not a big issue.
When there is no signal, the speaker cone should be at rest.
If "no signal" D.C. offset is present, and If you have a direct coupled amplifier, pure D.C. will be fed into the speakers, creating a cone NOT in the resting position, damaging the magnets and possible overheating damage to the amp.
Other amp designs are not as affected, but program headroom is lost upstream, etc.
From the link provided....

"Technical Explanation

DC offset is an offsetting of a signal from zero. The term originated in electronics, where it refers to a direct current voltage, but the concept has been extended to any representation of a waveform. DC offset is the mean amplitude of the waveform; if the mean amplitude is zero, there is no DC offset."

Here's the link....
http://supermastering.com/understanding-dc-offset/

Hopefully this will shed some light on a frequently misunderstood topic.

ROXY

[Spogg]

Very good explanation tulamide

I think what can add to the difficulty is a confusion between function and method too. Add to that the names we use!

For example, take the names “Low pass filter” and “Oscillator”. These come from the analogue world and we still use them, because we kinda know what to expect when we see them. But in the digital world the method of implementing these functions is entirely different from the analogue approach.

I’ve seen older stuff from Synthmaker days enclosing a stream multiply prim in a module and calling it a “VCA” and this typifies the situation. You could say that many of the more fundamental modules and prims are emulations of analogue functions, but they will of course always be that; emulations.

Cheers

Spogg