Klanghelm VUMT 2 and VUMT deluxe released

[Compyfox]

JUCE framework for quite a while now IIRC

[Boone777]

Insert 1 - VUMT (Instance 1): Average Signal is a bass at -13dBFS, so he pulls it down by 5dB to get to -18dBFS = 0VU

Ther is something I'm not getting here. I have a kick drum that shows -18 dbfs RMS on VUMT 2. Now the VU meter shows -5db. The meter is calibrated to -18. if -18dBFS=0 VU is'nt the VU meter supposed to show 0 ?


Also what confuses me, when people say dBFS it's never quite clear if it's Peak or RMS .

[Burillo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VU_meter

VU meter isn't a dBFS meter, nor it is an RMS meter (although it's somewhat similar).

[MFXxx]

$10 upgrade was an easy buy. Thanks for a great reliable product at a quality price.

[Compyfox]

Ther is something I'm not getting here. I have a kick drum that shows -18 dbfs RMS on VUMT 2. Now the VU meter shows -5db. The meter is calibrated to -18. if -18dBFS=0 VU is'nt the VU meter supposed to show 0 ?

Plenty of things can happen here:

1) the VU Meter is at 300ms rise/fall, the RMS meter uses a 600ms time window
2) the RMS meter doesn't use the AES-17 compensation (you obviously didn't use a weighting filter)
3) a possible bug.

Can you maybe forward me a WAV file of the channels in question, I can take a look at it then.

Also what confuses me, when people say dBFS it's never quite clear if it's Peak or RMS .

This is why proper tagging of the meter is important.

dBFS = Decibel Full Scale Digital, meaning Digital Peak - this is an absolute value
VU = Volume Unit, or "voltage" unit actually
RMS = RMS, it's in dB RMS, you can even fine tune this by saying dB RMS avg A, meaning xyz dB average with the RMS "realtime" ballistics and A-weighting for example
PPM = Obviously the dB PPM value, like with RMS you can declare it even more by writing dB PPM/DIN, which means you have xyz dB with a Peak Programme Meter and the scale/ballistics were from the DIN meter

Want to go even more detail - how about this:
xyz dB PPM/DIN @-18... which also declares the reference level...
You can basically continue this until infinity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VU_meter

VU meter isn't a dBFS meter, nor it is an RMS meter (although it's somewhat similar).

Not wrong, but also not 100% correct either...
http://www.dorrough.com/vision.html

Dorrough's "vision" was to combine the VU and the PPM into one meter, change the circuit and make things a tad more accurate. Effectively Dorrough was doubling the rise/fall time of the VU meter from 300ms to 600ms, and due to the electronic parts, he could lower the integration time from the Peak Meter to nearly instant. He then called this "RMS meter" - although in reality it is a "RMS realtime" meter.

RMS offline/mathematical is indeed something completely different.

[niektb]

JUCE framework for quite a while now IIRC

Klanghelm's plugins motivated me to try to write a DSP Plugin earlier this year (must be somewhere around March iirc) (some ugly digital distortion effect ) and I used WDL-OL because I read that Tony used it too... (so it can't be thát long ago)

[Aloysius]

Is there an uninstaller for VUMT (v1) on Windows, or just delete the dlls? Thanks ...

[Compyfox]

Klanghelm's plugins motivated me to try to write a DSP Plugin earlier this year (must be somewhere around March iirc) (some ugly digital distortion effect ) and I used WDL-OL because I read that Tony used it too... (so it can't be thát long ago)

Only Tony can answer that I'm afraid.



@Boone777:
I did some further tests, and I just forwarded this to Tony. No need to send me anything.

My guess is that there is something happening with the "smoothing" of the RMS realtime meter (which is sadly - not super standardized.. and offsets depending on the incoming program material). I just tested 7 meters against each other, and each showing the most different values even at similar settings. VU an PPM on the other hand is absolutely fine and all show the exact same values.

Even RMS offline with various gives the most different readouts.
So "RMS meter != RMS meter" I'm afraid. (!= equals "is not")

Is there an uninstaller for VUMT (v1) on Windows, or just delete the dlls? Thanks ...

If the uninstaller is gone (because of the v2 installer bug with the release-day version), just delete the DLL's. Also check the Program Files/Common Files/VST3 folder.

[Aloysius]

Thank you Compyfox. I'm in the middle of moving hundreds of GB around my Hard Drives and Batch resaving some of my new BF purchases, so I haven't been paying attention to this Thread about 'the bug'. I'll just delete the dlls.

[Boone777]

1) the VU Meter is at 300ms rise/fall, the RMS meter uses a 600ms time window
2) the RMS meter doesn't use the AES-17 compensation (you obviously didn't use a weighting filter)
3) a possible bug.

Can you maybe forward me a WAV file of the channels in question, I can take a look at it then.

Puting the A filter on I can see how peaky this kick is :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7EoWU ... sp=sharing

So between all the options how do you use the meter ? I'm used to Brainworx Meter I thought this was an upgrade now I'm confused. I read the dorough meter link you posted that is pretty much the brainworx meter I think. I normally keep heavy peaky material in check but without that filter on, I guess I was just squashing the master a bit too much to tame peaks.

[Compyfox]

Thank you Compyfox. I'm in the middle of moving hundreds of GB around my Hard Drives and Batch resaving some of my new BF purchases, so I haven't been paying attention to this Thread about 'the bug'. I'll just delete the dlls.

The question is:
Do you want to uninstall VUMT v1, or keep it?

If you want to keep it for backwards compatibility of your projects, simply over-install v1.

If you want to uninstall it, but you used the v2.0 installer - chances are that the VST2 versions of VUMTv1 mono/stereo were deleted, also the installer, but the VST3 version remained.


As mentioned, this is a bug and should be fixed with a maintenance update by now.

Puting the A filter on I can see how peaky this kick is :

Oh, I don't need the filter, I hear it clearly and see it on various meters. :I

So between all the options how do you use the meter ? I'm used to Brainworx Meter I thought this was an upgrade now I'm confused. I read the dorough meter link you posted that is pretty much the brainworx meter I think. I normally keep heavy peaky material in check but without that filter on, I guess I was just squashing the master a bit too much to tame peaks.

First and foremost, let's get something out of the door which is really, really important for further discussing "RMS realtime meters": no RMS realtime meter works the same!

With that said, the first person that used the terms "RMS meter" for realtime meters, was Dorrough. Others adapted it later. Basically, Dorrough did mean "average signal strength meter" yet called it "RMS" (root mean square). The mathematical "mean" (RMS) value is something completely different, and an offline process.

And I'll leave it at that, as this topic is (sadly) still a very vague thing - even after 30+ years.




Now on to your questions - how to use your metering tools.

Personally I'd say, only use RMS meters for full spectrum stereo signals, or in other words "full mixes" not individual tracks. The readout can shift drastically from meter to meter if used on individual signals. Not to mention that we talk "needle overshot" for needle meters.

If you want to use VUMT for setting up your signals for recording, prior to mixing, or during mixing even - use a VU/PPM combo. I've written this over an over in my KVR marks. But once more:

It's either/or.

Transient heavy material (Snare, Percussion, etc):
Use a digital meter and not exceed -6dBFS, or a PPM and not exceed -9dB to -6dB (on the DIN scale, that would be 0dB to +3dB)

Bass intensive material (bass, deep kick, voice, strings, etc):
Use the VU meter and hover around 0VU




The RMS meter can then be used for final mixdown and mastering purposes.

[Boone777]

Thanks for clarification.

[Aloysius]

+1

[Shalotta]

Maybe some have this question as well:
I am going to upgrade to deluxe in a few days and had the question
if deluxe and standard can be used side by side as both versions can deliver different tasks.

Saw it replied by users over at GS,
deluxe does not replace standard and both can be used which is what I was hoping for.

[Compyfox]

That is correct

Theoretically you can have v1, v2 Standard and v2 Deluxe side by side