Jump to content

3ll3d00d

Members
  • Content count

    519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by 3ll3d00d

  1. FWIW there was an error in the convert to dB function which put a lower limit of ~ -92dB on the resulting value, the actual response is https://imgur.com/a/EiDaMN0
  2. No I am not, and have not been, missing your point. I agree that a per channel solution's should be better and is better in theory. I question whether it is practically that much better in practice on certain tracks (and whether the effort involved in creating the pre channel beq is worth it). I agree it would take a per channel comparison to get a more informed view. I commented in the first place because of an idle observation (possibly in the avs thread) that the resulting mono tracks don't look that different (presumably because it is dominated by the louder channels). I haven't done any detailed comparison myself though hence why continued discussion in general is a bit pointless I will dig out the relevant graph to illustrate later and see if it matches my initial idle observation.
  3. that is strange, I haven't noticed that on any other tracks. It looks like the analysis of the source signal has basically dropped down into the abyss. I'll have to look into that one. https://imgur.com/a/UoNlJuS re the rest of the discussion, it seems a bit pointless to discuss further in abstract terms as it hinges on one's definition of subtle vs marked and whether an effect at -x dB is one or the other.
  4. perhaps this is clearer before https://imgur.com/a/lyOBXiQ after https://imgur.com/a/n8g8KHe this is the channel levels on the track so in reality LFE would be another 10dB higher this is average but the delta between the channels is similar on the peak chart (just much harder to read) The post beq surround channel looks odd to me (i.e. it is just the filter shape) and it's at a *much* lower level than the LFE and C. Even if there are distinct effects in the surrounds that aren't in any other channel, IMV it's going to be at most a subtle difference.
  5. The surround specific bass boost requires an extremely large boost in order to bring it up to a pretty low level relative to the lfe hence, in this case, even if you have channel specific beq, I suspect you will struggle to notice it.
  6. I just found it a bit dull compared to TFA or Rogue One, storyline seemed particularly derivative of earlier films as well so that it felt like a remake at times rather than a new film. in principle I agree, in practice I'm not so sure for a track like this where the surrounds are so much lower in level and even LR is another few dB down on the C. I haven't compared but I would not be surprised if there was a pretty small audible difference between the two approaches in this case.
  7. I found TLJ quite underwhelming even with the volume turned up and with BEQ on though perhaps my impression is coloured by my impression of the film (which I also found pretty underwhelming). FWIW I posted the per channel pva for that on avs - https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2995212-bass-eq-filtered-movies.html#post57055584 - as I was curious about the relative merits of the two BEQ approaches (pre and post). It seems to be a really heavily filtered track, almost looks like they baked bass management into the track itself.
  8. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    bit quiet round here recently but in case anyone is watching... latest beta builds have a bunch of features around seeing the impact of filters on the waveform and being able to zoom into the spectrum for slices of the track while also seeing the overall track. The avs thread has some pics and details - https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2995212-bass-eq-filtered-movies.html#post57032634
  9. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    latest builds have a split screen before/after beq spectrogram view as well as a way to check the headroom in the waveform pre/post BEQ which you may find useful (and colourful!)
  10. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    there is a release of that feature available at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/releases/tag/0.4.1 & described in https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2995212-bass-eq-filtered-movies.html#post56940944
  11. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    ok problem solved, adding an aformat step (to convert to dbl and then back to s32) around the biquads fixes the issue.
  12. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    Looking at it some more (and checking the code at https://www.ffmpeg.org/doxygen/2.8/af__biquads_8c_source.html) suggests it really should be possible to avoid this problem unless something else in the chain clips it. Will dig a bit further.
  13. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    I like the quick test https://imgur.com/a/8HopqIx which shows there is zero headroom available. I suppose this is not that surprising as ffmpeg filters are treated as completely independent blocks. not ideal though perhaps not a blocker as it would be simple enough to attenuate before filtering, good enough for analysis purposes perhaps (though not for the "create remuxed file" case) sample command for reference - https://gist.github.com/3ll3d00d/40be3ec6e1a5c0466ae324350be65cb0#file-gistfile1-txt
  14. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    I think I've worked out the incantation required to get ffmpeg to apply filters to individual channels so was thinking about how to test whether it does this correctly (re the concerns mentioned earlier about clipping). Any suggestions on what a simple, easily repeatable, test would be for this? i.e. generate a specific signal, apply some filter, output should be x.
  15. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    this is built with pyinstaller so it should just mean download it and run it, nothing else required at all (except for the only known external dependency, i.e. libsndfile) all my linux boxes are configured the same way though so hard for me to tell if it works in other situations, could spin up a VM I guess...
  16. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    @Kvalsvoll I built the latest build on my (debian testing) box, I don't have any other distros here to try it on but it works on this machine so give it a try and see if it works. https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/releases/download/0.0.3/beqdesigner
  17. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    I haven't tried it myself but https://github.com/bmc0/dsp/wiki/System-Wide-DSP-Guide gives an example of how to use LADSPA for system wide dsp. It looks like there is a script for converting REW filters into a format LADSPA can use too so that might make it quite easy. Another (not free) option would be jriver as their linux build now has video support.
  18. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    That is correct, it will get added at some point though.
  19. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    There seems to be some confusion about what the app actually is at this point in time so let me clarify. It's an interactive *per channel* minimum phase filter designer with the tools required to quickly and easily work with either mono bass managed tracks or multichannel tracks, i.e. designing pre or post BM BEQ filters. Interactive means it must be quick hence the filter view is based on the transfer functions. Obviously this wouldn't work if we were trying to combine channels but we're not (except when extracting the source track which is pre filter) so this is fine. A post filter clipping check is something I am aware of and had logged it at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/issues/19 a while ago. This isn't hard to implement (both sox and ffmpeg can apply biquads) so it's just a question of time and desire to implement the feature. One could also implement this in python using scipy or there are other python libs (with an underlying C impl, e.g. http://ajaxsoundstudio.com/pyodoc/) that could also be used if scipy is too slow. Having said that I would have thought that would be something that happens relatively infrequently as a final check so working with existing cli tools seems fine to me and would be quick and easy to implement. @Kvalsvoll the bit I don't get is why you want to remux that back into the original track. If you're playing an mkv then you're already on a computer that can do the filtering in real time so why would you want to alter the source itself?
  20. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    I don't know what this could be, you can go to Help > Show Logs (or press Ctrl+L), put it in debug and then repeat the activity to see if that tells you anything else https://imgur.com/a/oTqQ0VF I'm not sure what to do about the colour scheme, I've used the speclab style so far simply because it is what people are familiar with but this doesn't work for many signals (not enough shades and they're too close together). Note the controls in the bottom right of the main window let you turn the legend off if you prefer and choose which signals and/or filters are actually displayed. https://imgur.com/a/4iSEnZZ Interesting idea, noted in https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/issues/38
  21. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    if you uncheck the "mix to mono" checkbox and click extract then once it finishes, the button should change to "Create Signals" and the field at the bottom will be enabled. Put something in here and click "create signals". https://imgur.com/a/uoOh3Hr It should then automatically close the dialog and add each channel as a separate signal using the channel names (taken from https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/AudioChannelManipulation#Layouts) https://imgur.com/a/y7GGUU2 If this doesn't happen then feel free to log something with appropriate steps to reproduce/pics/supporting files over at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/issues similarly if you think of any interesting features then do also feel free to suggest them, I'll probably work on this for a little while longer at least.
  22. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    Can you be more specific about steps to reproduce? as it seems fine here and for some other users (not to say there can't be bugs of course ? )
  23. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    There's a new release up at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/releases/tag/0.0.2-beta.3 which should be sufficient for BEQ pre BM in that it can extract multichannel wavs and link multiple signals together against the same filter. This means you can do something like * extract an 8 channel wav from a 7.1 film * load all 8 signals in BEQ (they will be named xyz_FL xyz_FR and so on after the channel layout) * link FL, FR, FC together under 1 filter, LFE on another and the surrounds on another * tweak each filter independently * save the result to a shareable (gzipped json) format that anyone else can load * save pngs and/or graph the difference between signals This should work on linux without the hack above as I removed the offending library. I haven't had a chance to test this yet though.
  24. 3ll3d00d

    The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    git clone git@github.com:3ll3d00d/beqdesigner.git cd beqdesigner git checkout 0.0.2-beta.2 python3 -m venv beq . beq/bin/activate pip install numpy colorcet scipy qtpy qtawesome pyqt5 matplotlib ffmpeg-python soundfile resampy cd src/main/python # you also need ffmpeg and libsndfile1 installed, e.g. sudo apt install ffmpeg libsndfile1 then open mpl.py in a text editor and change the following change for k, v in cc.cm_n.items(): to for k, v in cc.cm.items(): (this is due to some lib having an older version in pypi vs conda, it is fixed in next release) then python3 app.py and you should find it fires up I'll get round to packaging it properly for linux soon enough next release will properly support pre BM BEQ btw, will publish that tomorrow hopefully I run Debian Testing here and it seems ok, haven't tested it extensively though so let me know if problems, will get round to testing it properly on linux at some point. The same approach has also been used on the mac too btw.
×