The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

[SME]

16 minutes ago, maxmercy said:

This track should not come close to 128dB WCS, largest peak on the ATMOS BEQ is 121dB.  The BEQ after-gain for dialogue matching is only 4dB, not the usual 7.  

Watching this BEQ at '0' would yield a peak of 124dB (

I did not apply the correction to the DTS track to see how it would do, but I do know the DTS track had a lower Crest Factor.

I chose the ATMOS track to BEQ since it had the more dynamics of the two.  

There must be a substantial difference that PvA and simple wav stats do not show to have had that large an effect to clip your setup.

JSS

Thanks for your comments.  I realize I will need to do the UHD upgrade sooner than later.  It's a top priority when I have the income for it again.  At the same time, Netflix by mail doesn't offer the discs, which is a drag being that the prices to buy the discs tend to be a lot higher too.

This was an unusually quiet track, and so I'm surprised to learn that the Atmos track had an even higher crest factor.  Wow!  Even at "0" (or -2 vs. 85 dBC reference after dialnorm), the level seemed quite moderate on the DTS track.

I assume I didn't exceed 128 dB WCS.  Even if I did, I don't have that specific limitation in my signal chain.  As such, I don't apply the static gains in the corrections and have no need to compensate using my MV.  My headroom is effectively unlimited until the output stage to the amps (i.e., before the DAC), for which I have ~3 dB more than the signal that clips the amps with no load.  On heavy infra content, the amps clip a fair bit lower than that, so in most cases, my headroom is closer to ~6 dB above the clipping point of the amps.  This means that I can easily exceed 128 dB WCS with content above 20 Hz, but below there I run out of headroom a lot earlier.

I've seen a fair few instances of heavy infra content clipping the amps, depending on my level choice and other parameters (HTTYD crash, TIH boxing / body slam?, a couple points in SW:TFA+BEQ), but this is the first time I've seen clipping on the digital output stage.  That suggests to me that there were insane amounts of infrasonic content in those scenes, which doesn't exactly line up with what I see in the PvA.  At the same time, you seem to indicate that the PvAs appeared very similar between the two tracks, apart from different overall levels.

Is it possible that, even though the aggregate PvAs looked similar, the distribution of low frequency energy between the different channels was different between the two tracks?  So maybe in the DTS track, the LFE was filtered a lot less than in the Atmos track, but the LCRS were filtered a lot more?  If so, I can see how this could lead to a track that's much hotter in the infra after applying this BEQ.  I guess I'll have to do my own analysis when I have the capability.

[maxmercy]

"Is it possible that, even though the aggregate PvAs looked similar, the distribution of low frequency energy between the different channels was different between the two tracks?"

This is what I think happened, and constructive interference with bass management took  things to another level.

JSS

[Infrasonic]

Holy cow! That looks like quite the heavy hitter, post BEQ.

Very nice.

[maxmercy]

Pacific Rim 2 is disappointing with BEQ.  While most effects gain a little, it was not as huge a difference as the PvA would lead you to believe.

JSS

[SME]

On 3/25/2018 at 6:42 PM, maxmercy said:

Valerian and the City of 1000 Planets:

Good improvement on this one, esp the Intruder scenes.  Tough correction, lots more infra in C than in LRS.

I watched this one today.  The movie itself was kind of funky, but I appreciated it for what it was and would watch it again.

Spectacular video and audio on this one.  Center channel dialog track sounded a bit full in a lot of places, but otherwise, the sound was excellent.  (At some later date, I might try to re-EQ the dialog to fix it up.)  The Atmos surround effects were some of the best I've experience, despite my sitting outside the MLP  on a 5.1 system.  The sub bass effects sounded more distinctive and somehow imaginative than a lot of movies.  I was often surprised by how laid back the mix was.  It seems to fit the feel of the movie.  I watched at "-4" and probably could have gone higher if my subs weren't already at their limits.  (If only I had the floor space and the money, I could easily make use of 8 x UH-21" in here.)

Anyway, thanks for the BEQ on this one.  The restored ULF seemed to contribute a lot to the sound effects, and not just heft.  In fact, most of the bass in the movie seemed quite tight and transient, except where it was obviously not supposed to be (some scenes with music).  I've noticed before that the restored ULF can actually make the sound seem tighter and more precise.

 

[maxmercy]

Ready Player One tentative BEQ solution:

[maxmercy]

Ready Player One BEQ (Both UHD and BD have ATMOS tracks, this correction was applied to the 7.1 channel bed)

 

All effects that need to gain power/heft do so.  I like this BEQ, and this film.

Correction:

LFE:

Gain -7dB

Low Shelf 16Hz, Slope 2, +5dB

Low Shelf 16.5Hz, Slope 2, +5dB

Low Shelf 17Hz, Slope 2, +5dB

Low Shelf 33Hz, Slope 0.5, +2dB

Highpass 6dB/oct 3Hz

 

LCRS:

Gain -7dB

Low Shelf 15Hz, Slope 1, Gain +5.5dB (3 Filters for total of 17.5dB)

Highpass 6dB/oct 3Hz

 

Let me know what you think, and if you need Q values instead of slope values for the shelf filters.

JSS

 

[biga6761]

Thanks Max for all your amazing continued work in this thread sir. All of your corrections have made astonishing differences in all these tracks in this thread, some of course better than others but that is totally mix dependent and has zip to do with your glorious work.

 

The most recent correction for RP1 did wonders. This mix was already solid compared to the recent rash from Disney but the correction makes this a Demo worthy track for sure. This track and AQP are in line for my favorite mixes of the year so far.

Thanks again Max and everyone else who has contributed , I look forward to all the future corrections you have time to put together and check this thread almost daily. 

[Wull]

On 8/4/2018 at 3:35 AM, maxmercy said:

Ready Player One BEQ (Both UHD and BD have ATMOS tracks, this correction was applied to the 7.1 channel bed)

 

All effects that need to gain power/heft do so.  I like this BEQ, and this film.

Correction:

LFE:

Gain -7dB

Low Shelf 16Hz, Slope 2, +5dB

Low Shelf 16.5Hz, Slope 2, +5dB

Low Shelf 17Hz, Slope 2, +5dB

Low Shelf 33Hz, Slope 0.5, +2dB

Highpass 6dB/oct 3Hz

 

LCRS:

Gain -7dB

Low Shelf 15Hz, Slope 1, Gain +5.5dB (3 Filters for total of 17.5dB)

Highpass 6dB/oct 3Hz

 

Let me know what you think, and if you need Q values instead of slope values for the shelf filters.

JSS

 

Hi JSS.

 

I'm using JRiver 21. So please can I have the Q values. 

 

Thanks.

 

Will

[biga6761]

Unless It has changed recently that I don't know about, the Q in JRiver is actually slope on shelf filters, this was one of the reasons for Max posting it as slope as far as I know. I could be mistaken though if there has been a change but in all of my reading I have not read about one. I also use JRiver for BEQ and plug the Q values in as the slope values posted by Max.

[Wull]

21 hours ago, biga6761 said:

Unless It has changed recently that I don't know about, the Q in JRiver is actually slope on shelf filters, this was one of the reasons for Max posting it as slope as far as I know. I could be mistaken though if there has been a change but in all of my reading I have not read about one. I also use JRiver for BEQ and plug the Q values in as the slope values posted by Max.

 

Oh I see, that's great news. Cheers for explaining that to me biga6761. 

[maxmercy]

Can anyone contact the JRiver developers to ensure that the Q=Slope?  Using slope values for Q would result in a VERY different correction.  If there is a difference, I'll edit the BEQ post above to include both Q and Slope values.

JSS

[3ll3d00d]

4 hours ago, maxmercy said:

Can anyone contact the JRiver developers to ensure that the Q=Slope?  Using slope values for Q would result in a VERY different correction.  If there is a difference, I'll edit the BEQ post above to include both Q and Slope values.

JSS

I have raised this on a few occasions. There was some interest shown at the start of the current release cycle in doing some work on their DSP studio but no sign of action so far (and they usually add features tbh rather than fix things like this)

[Kvalsvoll]

On 5/22/2018 at 7:19 PM, Kvalsvoll said:

Huge improvement (Star Wars - The Last Jedi).

It already sounds quite good as-is, due to nice dynamics and the fact that levels are not pushed beyond clipping. But Bass-EQ improves this in a dramatic way. And you can increase mv a bit, I tried +3dB now, and that still works very well. Effects now have full frequency range, and anyone who experiences this difference will not need any abx-blind-testing to hear and FEEL this improvement. This is not about shaking the house more, it is about lifting the experience with improved sound quality.

Mid-bass level is quite moderate, so a little lift from 50hz and up may give more impact on transients.

This is exactly what sound quality is about - excitement without fatigue.

Now I have watched half of it, and the impression of the sound is even better than the first brief screenings. ULF is well done, and it sounds much cleaner and less distorted than other movies with clipping and heavy limiter use.

I used to believe that a spacecraft that runs out of fuel will just continue at same, constant speed in same direction, but you always learn something new, from watching this movie it is obvious they loose speed and eventually go to a halt.

[dgage]

6 hours ago, Kvalsvoll said:

I used to believe that a spacecraft that runs out of fuel will just continue at same, constant speed in same direction, but you always learn something new, from watching this movie it is obvious they loose speed and eventually go to a halt.

Space physics!  Duh!

[bluescale]

On 8/13/2018 at 8:57 AM, Wull said:

 

Oh I see, that's great news. Cheers for explaining that to me biga6761. 

Just keep in mind, if you want to use any of the BEQs that don't list S, you'll need to convert Q to S.  I recommend Excel to do the grunt work.  There's a bit of discussion about that earlier in this thread:

 

 

[MemX]

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 9:37 PM, Kvalsvoll said:

Now I have watched half of it, and the impression of the sound is even better than the first brief screenings. ULF is well done, and it sounds much cleaner and less distorted than other movies with clipping and heavy limiter use.

I used to believe that a spacecraft that runs out of fuel will just continue at same, constant speed in same direction, but you always learn something new, from watching this movie it is obvious they loose speed and eventually go to a halt.

 

Wait...  what?

 

I thought that any object travelling on a specific course in space would continue unabated unless an external force acts on it?  (Isn't that one of Newton's laws?  Or Einstein's?  I kind of missed a few Physics lessons at school due to discovering the local club / a girlfriend / alcohol...  lol)

[Kvalsvoll]

Here on earth, and elsewhere in real life, physics do actually follow those generally accepted rules. Big objects no longer supported fall down, and in the process makes a lot of sound, and the bigger the object, the more low frequency energy it creates. Because there is gravity, and there is air.

Like when this glacier brakes loose a quite significant piece of ice (see below for appropriate BEQ):

 

This clip has decent sound, only 2 channels obviously, and it rolls of around 30hz, most likely due to the mic+recorder. A BEQ something like this restores enough to get an idea of what this was:

sfm 22hz q=1.4 gain=+12dB

sfm 14hz q=1.4 gain=+8dB

If you expand to 5.1 you get more headroom and can retrieve even more below 10hz, by moving the low frequencies to LFE.

[SME]

All ya physicsy people talking about space ships and stuff are totally forgetting about The Force!

 

Edit: Hey, it worked for Leia.

[MemX]

Hang on...  I just realised that my sarcasm detector might be broken today lol

 

Was the original post about spaceships slowing down a sarcastic comment about how they don't do that in real life, but do do that in the film?

 

In the same way that there is no sound in space yet all spaceships must rumble by and explode loudly in films?

[dgage]

54 minutes ago, MemX said:

In the same way that there is no sound in space yet all spaceships must rumble by and explode loudly in films?

Now you hold on.  Don’t mess with my fake sounds in space because I love said rumbles.  And can you imagine how boring a space movie would be without sounds in space.  Duh!

[Kvalsvoll]

1 hour ago, MemX said:

Hang on...  I just realised that my sarcasm detector might be broken today lol

 

Was the original post about spaceships slowing down a sarcastic comment about how they don't do that in real life, but do do that in the film?

 

In the same way that there is no sound in space yet all spaceships must rumble by and explode loudly in films?

It is the same. Most sci-fi films use some kind of alternative set of laws for physics. Allows for sound in space, fast travel - without all this, it would not be entertaining. We accept that, and enjoy the adventure in a fiction world.

[minnjd]

I'm gonna break my geek out and say that they were orbiting a planet and even at that distance there is still minuscule amounts of atmospheric drag, so technically a ship without any propulsion could slow down.

 

[3ll3d00d]

FWIW I decided to knock up an little ui to make experimenting with BEQ easier (so it can extract audio using ffmpeg & show the results of adding assorted filters, comparing tracks) hence it removes the need to faff around with speclab). An early release (windows only atm as I'm away from my linux boxes) is available at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/releases/tag/0.0.1-alpha.2

Here's a pick to illustrate https://imgur.com/a/KgfaxOJ

This is still a fairly early build (and the exe is a bit massive) but it seems to be usable so thought I'd share it. The readme at github has some of the things left to do and some bugs. One thing not mentioned there is being able to apply different filter sets to different signals. 

EDIT: I replaced the exe with something that should display errors if you start it from a console (as someone on avs reported it didn't work for them)

EDIT2: possible workaround in https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2995212-bass-eq-fil-turd-movies.html#post56692822

[3ll3d00d]

latest build allows you to stack shelf filters and define them in S or Q so should make it easy to report filters in jriver compatible format or for other software