[Takeda`1537]

Thanks, I use the same on my metal library and with proper, sensible dosing, it sounds fine.
To each his/her audio preference, thank you for your feedback any way.

 

[bigshot]

Well, when I tried the links you provided, my audio started peaking and distorting the upper mids, especially on my metal library, so nah. I'm after precision and fidelity to the recording. Thanks for the suggestion though.

That is probably clipping caused by the DSP pushing the volume up slightly. If you lower the volume level on your track, it might fix it.

When you talk about sound processing, you aren't talking about fidelity or accuracy. By definition you are altering the signal. Whether or not that is a good or bad thing is entirely dependent on your own taste. If you like it, do it. If you don't, don't. It's all up to you. No one can make that decision for you.

 

[gregorio]

Given that there is no holy sound type, sound editing (or its avoidance) is still a personal preference.

There is no avoidance of sound editing. It is personal preference if you want to add even more sound editing. However, there is a concept of “holy sound type”, fidelity for example (but others too).

I like it with, you prefer it without

Hang on, you’re just making that up! I bought my first aural exciter almost exactly 30 years ago and have owned various ones ever since. And, I’ve never been to a commercial studio that didn’t have one. I quite often use an aural exciter, depending on the type of music I’m mixing. What I’m against is adding it where it’s already been added or where it was decided by the musicians/engineers not to add it.

and both positions are valid and stand for for one and are wrong for the other.

No, they’re not both as valid, particularly if fidelity is a consideration.

on what type of basis are you saying that I may not share my experience with others?

I’m not saying you can’t share your experience with others, although this is the sound science forum rather than the “share experiences forum”. However, you didn’t just share your experience, you gave advice to others. On that basis I’m perfectly within my rights to state that it’s poor advice, as it is indeed poor advice.

Your listening preference is worth as much as mines and each of us is keeping his/her own...

Technically mine is worth more but that’s irrelevant because you’re perfectly entitled to your listening preference, you’re not so entitled to post poor advice though.

Well, when I tried the links you provided, my audio started peaking and distorting the upper mids, especially on my metal library, so nah. I'm after precision and fidelity to the recording.

It will distort and it will clip many/most recordings. An aural exciter synthesises harmonics and adds them to the signal, so it will by definition distort and as it’s adding something (harmonics) to the signal, it will slightly increase the level, thereby causing clipping in most cases. You could lower the input level to compensate for the clipping. However, the mids/upper-mids is where the important guitar sound/distortion lives in Metal music and therefore gets considerable time and effort lavished on it by the engineers and the guitarists themselves. It’s one of the defining features of Metal music production/mastering and not something I would advise consumers to mess with.

Thanks, I use the same on my metal library and with proper, sensible dosing, it sounds fine.

It’s already been given it’s “proper, sensible dosing”, what you’re doing is adding more than it’s “proper, sensible dosing”, which is therefore obviously not proper or sensible! Of course it’s your choice if you want to do that, but it’s not good advice for others.

G

 

[Ghoostknight]

When you're searching for your own personal target curve, start from a fixed point, like Harman or measured flat with speakers. Then make small incremental changes and live with them and hear how they affect lots of music before making another change. If it doesn't work, go back to your fixed point and start again. The slower you do it, the less likely you'll randomly EQ yourself into a weird corner.

yes i also think this is the best way to get conistent results, specially for the future on other systems

i also think the best way to get a universal EQ right is to use a linear slope (which are suggested often if you search for "house curves"), everything else than a slope will sound good with some material and bad with others most of the time, i use these two high shelf filters to get a somewhat linear slope (1.8khz, Q0.4 and 15khz, Q0.7), this way you can reduce stuff above 10khz independently which is kinda nice
and with a linear slope you actually keep what was intended in the first place for the most part beside some preference, boosting certain frequencys will "mess around" with the music too much imo, tho bass boost is ok (but i also suggest here to use a high/lowshelf filter instead of peak filters)

 

[bigshot]

A spike filter can be useful with super funky equipment or recordings and certain acoustic situations with speakers. But the slope for overall is the way to go.

 

[KinGensai]

That is probably clipping caused by the filter pushing the volume up slightly. If you lower the volume level on your track, it might fix it.

When you talk about sound processing, you aren't talking about fidelity or accuracy. By definition you are altering the signal. Whether or not that is a good or bad thing is entirely dependent on your own taste. If you like it, do it. If you don't, don't. It's all up to you. No one can make that decision for you.

Are you talking about exciters or EQ in general? I think it's exciters, but I'm not sure.

I just want to get as close to what the master sounds like without mucking up anything on my end. I guess EQ can run counter to that, but I posted this here because I know sound science will bias toward fidelity and reproducible knowledge pertaining to the topic.

 

[bigshot]

Any kind of DSP/filter might push a hot mastered track over the edge. It depends on how the processor is designed.

The solution would be to normalize the track down 2 dB and then apply the filter and see if it works.

 

[KinGensai]

Any kind of filter might push a hot mastered track over the edge. It depends on how the filter is designed.

The solution would be to normalize the track down 2 dB and then apply the filter and see if it works.

Ok, I get what you're saying. Yes, reducing the replay gain to comp would fix the clipping, but it(exciter) throws the tonality of the track off to add this extra metallic sheen to the track.

I'll keep my mind open on other filters.

 

[Ghoostknight]

The solution would be to normalize the track down 2 dB and then apply the filter and see if it works.

yep, if you dont wanna "try" to find a solution do it this way: if you boost a frequency by 5.5db then set a "preamp" before the eq to -5.6db, always consider 0db volume going in, then you wont have a problem with clipping

another solution i used before is also this: instead of using a lowshelffilter to boost bass you can actually use a highshelf filter to reduce everything but the bass, then you dont need to preamp

I just want to get as close to what the master sounds like without mucking up anything on my end. I guess EQ can run counter to that, but I posted this here because I know sound science will bias toward fidelity and reproducible knowledge pertaining to the topic.

yes for reproduction this should be always the goal and flat speakers (+ some house curve) dont need an exciter, the only things i found useful so far for reproduction are:
1. EQ - whatever EQ, Graphic, Parametric, Convolver etc tho i like Parametric for the ease of use and being precise and having options like high/low shelf/pass
2. Compressor - if you dont want high dynamic range (at night for example)
3. Crossfeed - for headphones sounding more like speakers
4. Limiter - not "really needed" but nice to have and easyeffects on linux allows with the Limiter Plugin to apply Dither
5. (maybe) Deesser - tho its not really needed with the right EQ
6. (maybe) Pitchshifter - 99,9% will not use this but i do, to retune 440hz music to 432hz

but it(exciter) throws the tonality of the track off to add this extra metallic sheen to the track.

this is kinda the point of the exciter plugins, to add more high frequencys to make it "excite" you, but its far from good (neutral) reproduction
tho if you want you can play with it, maybe you just overdone it and actually like a mild exciter,
i also found out that im quite sensitive to effects/eq, i can kinda tell if a EQ for bass/high frequencys is off by 0,2db to 0,5db (A/B i also hear a difference on 0,1db but in the longrun this doesnt matter much)
also pitchshifter plugins are not perfect they seem to tend to mess with the phase/volume a bit
i also hear differences between different EQ software, the best i found so far is EasyEffects on linux with inside the eq plugin "mode: SPM" set and for every filter "Mode: APO (DR)" (well i didnt heared a difference before but with trying the different modes (and A/B them) in easyeffects there is certainly room for good or bad implemenation)

 

[bigshot]

I may have misunderstood what you said. I was under the impression that you liked what the exciter does, but you were getting distortion in the mids. That's what my suggestion was intended to fix. The exciter is what it is.

 

[Ghoostknight]

I may have misunderstood what you said. I was under the impression that you liked what the exciter does, but you were getting distortion in the mids. That's what my suggestion was intended to fix. The exciter is what it is.

maybe it wasnt even clipping distortion "in the mids" but rather the harmonics added by the exciter which were most audible in the mids,
basicly (and i had to look on wikipedia myself to be sure, a exciter is build from a highpass and distorter) a exciter adds just harmonics, which basicly is the exact thing as increasing distortion/THD

while added distortion/harmonics can sound quite good, specially with rock/metal/electro imo we should stay away from it if we wanna listen to the music like it was intended

 

[LisaShayBrown]

No, generally music would sound worse.

I am still far from convinced.. Understand your logic but evidence, to my hears sounds better. Given that there is no holy sound type, sound editing (or its avoidance) is still a personal preference. I like it with, you prefer it without and both positions are valid and stand for for one and are wrong for the other.
If it sounds good to me, if I have empirical evidence of friends getting one too once they hear it how music sounds on my kit (not the full sample but a good majority) on what type of basis are you saying that I may not share my experience with others?
Your listening preference is worth as much as mines and each of us is keeping his/her own...
F

agreed.

of course music wouldn't sound worse if it sounded better to you. that's literally the whole point of audio processing, to make things sound better.

and of course sound science rule#1: gregorio is usually wrong.

 

[bigshot]

maybe it wasnt even clipping distortion "in the mids" but rather the harmonics added by the exciter which were most audible in the mids,

Your description matches clipping.

 

[Ghoostknight]

Your description matches clipping.

how so? the exciter effects might be just more obvious in the mids

clipping would mostly occur in bass anyway (unless you use some heavy eq)

 

[sander99]

and of course sound science rule#1: gregorio is usually wrong.

If you truly believe that you must be misinformed to the extreme.