TBProAudio releases mvMeter - Multivariable Meter including RMS, EBUR128, VU and PPM measurement for

[Burillo]

Voltage meter as a plugin, only on KVR.

yeah, and synths can't produce sine waves because they're a mathematical concept. if you don't have anything useful to contribute to the discussion, maybe you should refrain from contributing instead of attacking other KVR members and being a pretend idiot.

[murnau]

I see some trolls here but Compyfox isn't among them.

[Compyfox]

I see some trolls here but Compyfox isn't among them.

Funny, isn't it?

But I'll bite regardless - just to show the hypocrisy of certain users in here.

Your aggressive tone and entitled demands aren't "shop talk".

Says the person that threw the second insult in this thread.

And says the person that has been all but hot air so far and not even tried to debunk my findings (among many others in here). In fact, up until this day. Instead, you sat on your rear end, pointed fingers, insulted me and waited for fixes - just to then point fingers even more with "it's working like it should" - yeah right, after somebody pointed out the glaring issues to begin with (to which the developer neither apologized, thanked the users in question, or credited them).

Tells me how knowledgeable you (singular, pointing at the quoted person) actually are on this topic. But please keep it coming.

This is a useful, free plugin that does what it's meant to,

No it doesn't. The "stereo mode" still does some weird summing (which it shouldn't do, and for which a "mono/single needle VU" is not made for!).

Did you even read what I wrote earlier in this thread, or does my bare name just trigger you beyond infinity? (if so, I'm terribly sorry for you)

and if the developer doesn't want to discuss with you, it's understandable due to your immature attitude.

Here is the thing...

The developer has been ignoring questions right from the start, and found one excuse after another to hide his shenanigans. Add to that, that the developer writes on his page(!) that he's interacting on KVR and GearSlutz - yet his most interaction is actually only on GearSlutz. So why even post in here, if you don't have the patience to further invest time with your userbase (existing or interested one as possible future customers)? (reminds me of a couple of other devs, and my earlier comment that "KVR is allegedly not a professional community", but let's not go there)


There is another incident from many months back, where I talked about a huge glaring issue in dpMeter v1, where the measurement was offset by +3dB (especially RMS) due to two main things: a) a weighting filter (not mentioned in the manual), b) due to the summing of the signal, the AES-17 compensation was not necessary.

You can still find the conversation here:
The discussion starts here with the question if the particular advertised tool has the same bug has dpMeter v1) and it pretty much accumulates here, after a crap-load of "fanboy interaction", and finally here with a comment in German to the developer, stating basically "if help is desired - I'm skilled in this area - reach out to me" (actually, it ends a couple of posts later - but read for yourself). Which the developer didn't do. Preceding that, were xyz amount of mails on the topic "AES-17 compensation and wrong implementation in dpMeter" - with a lot of "why" and "I don't get what you mean" as responses.


As you can see, it took several pages of "incomprehension" (from various sides, on top of name calling and pointing fingers), until I gave up talking to the developer. A couple of weeks later, dpMeter II got released - with the issues I addressed being fixed.

No thank you, no apologies. Only mere weeks after VUMT2 was released (which was in development for several years at this point), we get this faulty mess of code - aka mvMeter.

Once more, lack of comprehension and radio silence from both the dev, and as usual very, very aggressive handling by the user base (which I will continue to call "guard dogs", because they're on the defense for the developer for absolutely no reason, and can't even prove that I've been wrong so far!).


This... is what we're dealing with!


A developer that insists on creating accurate measurement tools (and the ITU-R Standard has! to be accurate, as offsets can result in hefty fees for the users! Example: CALM Act), yet he doesn't even understand the concept of these tools, or creates some made up nonsense "standards". Then throw in the fact, that his tools are heavily(!!!, and I do say that loosely) inspired by other already established tools/companies.

What impression should that give me?
To me, this is riding the bandwagon, living off of the success of other developers (on Youtube, this would be called "clickbait" and "reaction videos").


And honestly, I'm sick of such developer shenanigans. Their snake oil, their BS. And once you look closer under the hood, things start fall apart.


Sure - this is a freeware tool. But the main concept behind it is "if you like this, we have more". However even then, you shouldn't give the developer a free pass because "what's a minor issue in this plugin, it's great otherwise". That's exactly the problem with this over-saturated market! And that is also the problem why there are so many articles about "how to do xyz right", if it has been done wrong to begin with.

I mean, look at DC2016, with Youlean Loudness Meter... I pointed out a couple of issues and bugs for this developer as well - and what did he do? Thank the people that found the issues, and went on to fix them. No jumping around hoops, not telling the blue from the sky, not pulling anybody's leg. He was (and continues to do so) honest towards his userbase (although I don't agree with his v2 concept, but that's a complete different topic).


I don't see that with TBProAudio.
So I'm continuing to call out this developer.



Prove me wrong in my findings - then we'll talk. (that's the shop talk!)
But that is still unlikely to happen since the incarnation of this thread.

You're free to use any other plugin you prefer.

Classic excuse for "guard dogs" - and completely missing the point.





I restate my question once again:

please define "ideal VU meter ballistics"

Are we talking overshot behavior?
What time windows (inertia) are we talking about?
What is the major difference to the "previous" version?

As developer that adheres to metering standards, this question should be easy to answer

In fact, if the "guard dogs" are so knowledgeable about this, they can answer that as well, and the developer might then just back this up or not.



That's the third time I'm asking now, and it's been one week since the update announcement.

[TB-ProAudio]

this is a metering tool, not a black box magic processor. it should be precise and predictable. so i would agree that the developer needs to give a precise definition of exactly what was meant by "ideal", and why it wasn't ideal before this update.

oh, sorry, i was on a business trip, with limited access to "real" world
Before we had an algo which uses HW sampled values.
Now we are using a dipole filter, which consumes much less CPU resources, same ballistics.
I hope this helps

[Burillo]

ah OK so nothing actually changed, just changed the method of calculation for values. thanks!

[TB-ProAudio]

ah OK so nothing actually changed, just changed the method of calculation for values. thanks!

Right

[Compyfox]

this is a metering tool, not a black box magic processor. it should be precise and predictable. so i would agree that the developer needs to give a precise definition of exactly what was meant by "ideal", and why it wasn't ideal before this update.

oh, sorry, i was on a business trip, with limited access to "real" world
Before we had an algo which uses HW sampled values.
Now we are using a dipole filter, which consumes much less CPU resources, same ballistics.
I hope this helps

ah OK so nothing actually changed, just changed the method of calculation for values. thanks!

Right

Sorry, but that doesn't explain ANYTHING... in fact, the tag "Ideal VU Meter Ballistics" is highly misleading in this case - stating something that just isn't there.

A VU has overshots of about 1% to 5% (depending on how old and banged up your meter is at this point, but the tolerance is around 1%). By "ideal VU meter ballistics" I assume that there is an overshot <1% (smaller than) and that the results are reproducible every time.

You however only changed the method of calculation, without/while not changing the VU behavior.

That is not(!) the same thing.

In fact, that would actually be "CPU usage optimizations", not the random nonsense you announced.




Oh and thanks for answering me (aka, not at all), btw!

Yeah, great developer...
[/sarcasm]

[Teksonik]

Look, it's obvious Compyfox knows his sh*t when it comes to metering. I don't pretend to even understand the question let alone a potential answer but I don't see why the developer won't answer a simple question.....or can't.

If this Meter is giving us erroneous results shouldn't we want to know ? Free or not

(Again I don't claim to know enough about metering to say one way or the other if this plugin is accurate or not or if we should be using it).

At any rate I appreciate the generosity of setting mvMeter free....so thank you.

[TB-ProAudio]

... I find it sad that his products are inaccurate ...

Well, this is obviously not true.
Otherwise please provide facts that you can understand. Thank you.

[TB-ProAudio]

deleted

[TB-ProAudio]

deleted

[TB-ProAudio]

deleted

[TB-ProAudio]

deleted

[TB-ProAudio]

deleted

[Burillo]

... I find it sad that his products are inaccurate ...

Well, this is obviously not true.
Otherwise please provide facts that you can understand. Thank you.

but he has done that, way back in the earlier posts in this thread. in fact, he has reiterated precisely what he has found to be inaccurate (stereo mode) in the very post that you're replying to. i mean, i get it, accusations of being a copycat are uncalled for, but don't be like that, don't dismiss everything he said just because you don't like some other thing he said. maybe you two should sort it out in PM?