released: SlickHDR - Psychoaccoustic Dynamic Processor

[PeterL]

Here's a short example (before/after) with about the same RMS, either you like it or not (of course dynamic range decreases).
http://www.leinilive.at/hdr/example1_before.wav
http://www.leinilive.at/hdr/example1_after.wav
If you want to download and have problems to do this with your browser, click here:
http://www.leinilive.at/slickhdr.html

[MaxC]

Here's a short example (before/after) with about the same RMS, either you like it or not (of course dynamic range decreases).

Question: Do the initials HDR not stand for "High Dynamic Range"? This would seem an odd label for a plugin that decreases the dynamic range...

[bmanic]

Finally had a chance to try this. It's awesome! Very very easy to overdo the processing though.. especially when you have it on many tracks.

I have a mix here which is a bit all over the place and SlickHDR definitely helped a lot with minimal effort. I simply set it up according to the manual.. basically had 3 or 4 green segments going so pretty subtle.. but this was going on at the same time on 9 different tracks (6 of them busses and 3 individual tracks) + the mixbus. It really glued and controlled the whole thing in a very pleasant way.

Now it's time to abuse it and see what happens!

Cheers for this incredible plugin!

[Tp3]

I simply set it up according to the manual.. basically had 3 or 4 green segments going so pretty subtle.

Ummm... if I understand the manual, it suggests a different thing (workflow):

Drive the first one (P1) to fill the entire green area (sweet spot ?), with occasional poking into the yellow zone (but don't let it stay there !), then adjust P2 to react roughly the same (ie. fill the green zone with poking into the yellow zone). it will, effectively, alter P1, so you have to revise P1 and re-adjust it. then, turn to P3, and try to level it against P1 and P2 (in the same fashion). lastly, trim the output to match the unprocessed signal peaks.

I still don't fully understand how to Low/Hi freq knobs alter the sound, I just know they DO (so ATM I start with a preset and adjust it according to the above outline).

I was able to extract 1dB MORE of DR - NOT LESS, as you would expect with everything related to compression (ergo, I guess, the slogan "HDR processing").... AND the sound was bigger, more defined - and detailed. it kinda contradicts everything I knew about dynamic processing thus far. toggling the processor On/Off made it unmistakably clear as to what is going on.

It is a little miracle. or so it seems (FWIW, I plain HATE HDR on video clips. it just feels "wrong").

[Keith99]

The presets don't change anything for me but it is probably something to do with running a 32 bit plugin in 64 bit Cubase, may try it under JBridge

[Keith99]

ah no just discovered it is just the GUI knobs not moving, when you click once on them they jump to the new place, think I had this issue before with these plugins

[PeterL]

ah no just discovered it is just the GUI knobs not moving, when you click once on them they jump to the new place, think I had this issue before with these plugins

It's still a general issue in all Bootsie's plugins.
Just close and reopen the GUI once and you see all changes.
Although this doesn't appear in StudioOne.
I guess you use Wavelab as audio editor like me !?

[PeterL]

Here's a short example (before/after) with about the same RMS, either you like it or not (of course dynamic range decreases).

Question: Do the initials HDR not stand for "High Dynamic Range"? This would seem an odd label for a plugin that decreases the dynamic range...

I think Bootsie named it according the processing technique in photography.
Indeed it's quite paradox, less general dynamic range but more perceived details.
But that's the truth according to logfile of my audio example:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DR: DR13, Peak:-1.40 dB, RMS:-20.78 dB, FIle: example1_before.wav
DR: DR11, Peak:-4.69 dB, RMS:-20.40 dB, File: example1_after.wav
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Keith99]

Now it has hung cubase Its a real shame this happens with all Bootsie plugins, not his fault but 32 bit in Cubase 64 does not work well

[Agreed]

The comparisons between HDR video and HDR as applied in this plugin are very misleading imo. Better to think of it on its own terms as "this is a plugin with a lot of dynamic range that does some processing stuff" and just get to know it like that. Plugins that do a lot of the work for you are like that, not any different in that regard than, say, character compressors or console emus with specifically modeled behaviors or whatever - you get to know what it does and work with it and the end result can be really good.

[Tapehead]

I think the name HDR is spot on! By looking at some HDR images it is clear to me that the blacks become blacker, the shadows deeper, the details in highlights are more prominent and the colors get more vivid etc, etc...

The same happens with the audio that passes though this plugin(even though we work though reduction in dynamics); Things get more forward, more visible, more detailed...

[bootsie]

I think the name HDR is spot on! By looking at some HDR images it is clear to me that the blacks become blacker, the shadows deeper, the details in highlights are more prominent and the colors get more vivid etc, etc...

The same happens with the audio that passes though this plugin(even though we work though reduction in dynamics); Things get more forward, more visible, more detailed...

And that's what this thingy is all about: its about the perceived dynamics and not the measured ones.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

Its a bit special this one Herbert my friend, I have tried 'psychoacoustic' based processors before but never have gotten along with them (They have either done next to nothing or overhyped source signals). Not so with SlickHDR, The multiple release stages are great and something that could of easily been novel in a manner that means junk instead is novel but in a manner that works great/sounds great

Well played yet again and Patrick has made eye candy fat free/fully functional yet again. Class mate, Class IMveryhumbleHO

Thank you and best to yourself and all as always

Dean

[eidenk]

What most people call HDR images aren't actually HDR images, they are standard 8bit per channel images that have been processed using one or another or combinations of the many tone mapping algorithms that are out there.

HDR means high dynamic range and true HDR images are 32bit per channel, have more than 4 billion luminance levels per channel and generally result from the fusion of multiple 16bit per channel images of the same scene taken at different exposures. They are extremely well suited for tone mapping because they contain much more details than 16bit images (65536 luminance levels) and 8bit ones (256 luminance levels).

Most images labelled HDR out there are 8bit tone mapped images that in 99% of cases don't even have an actual HDR image as source.

This plugin, no matter how innovative, interesting and good it is, is no more HDR than the majority of images labeled as such. It does something akin to LDR tone mapping on audio material but is no HDR in the true sense of the term.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[bootsie]

What most people call HDR images aren't actually HDR images, they are standard 8bit per channel images that have been processed using one or another or combinations of the many tone mapping algorithms that are out there.

HDR means high dynamic range and true HDR images are 32bit per channel, have more than 4 billion luminance levels per channel and generally result from the fusion of multiple 16bit per channel images of the same scene taken at different exposures. They are extremely well suited for tone mapping because they contain much more details than 16bit images (65536 luminance levels) and 8bit ones (256 luminance levels).

Most images labelled HDR out there are 8bit tone mapped images that in 99% of cases don't even have an actual HDR image as source.

This plugin, no matter how innovative, interesting and good it is, is no more HDR than the majority of images labeled as such. It does something akin to LDR tone mapping on audio material but is no HDR in the true sense of the term.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Sorry to say, but thats completely nonsense. The HDR imaging is exactly about rendering into a crappy lofi 8-bit per channel Jpeg and nothing else (but with a higher perceived dynamic range). Exactly that tone-mapping is required to do so is the intelligence actually required. You are wrong in every regard.