Klanghelm VUMT 2 and VUMT deluxe released
-
- KVRAF
- 1645 posts since 12 Dec, 2012 from Switzerland
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
I think, and as Tony mentioned a couple of times at this point, the next "plugin" will be a code port to the new engine. Which one of the plugins it will be, we just have to wait and see.zenvoxpop wrote:So Tony, any hints in which direction your coding will go for your next plugin?
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 225 posts since 14 Dec, 2008
Hi all,
I've just updated VUMT & VUMT deluxe to version 2.1.1.
These maintenance updates include the following:
VUMT & VUMT deluxe:
- FIX: issue in Wavelab, where the preset name only got updated when clicking in the preset field again after loading a preset from disk
- FIX: the hold-needle is now being reset when switching the DISPLAY mode (M, LR, MS)
- FIX: code signing of the Mac Standalone App
- when saving a default state, it gets updated immediately, so you don't have to reload your session or load a new instance before the new default becomes active.
VUMT deluxe only:
- FIX: the WEIGHTING parameter is being recalled properly now in the user default state
- FIX: IN-PLACE button state is initialized correctly now
- NEW: the side(difference) signal can now be monitored centered/mono when IN-PLACE is not active
As always, the updates can be found in the Klanghelm user area.
A huge thanks to Roland Löhlbach (Compyfox), who has provided some additional metering presets with in-depth documentation for VUMT & VUMT deluxe. These presets can be downloaded from here
Tony
I've just updated VUMT & VUMT deluxe to version 2.1.1.
These maintenance updates include the following:
VUMT & VUMT deluxe:
- FIX: issue in Wavelab, where the preset name only got updated when clicking in the preset field again after loading a preset from disk
- FIX: the hold-needle is now being reset when switching the DISPLAY mode (M, LR, MS)
- FIX: code signing of the Mac Standalone App
- when saving a default state, it gets updated immediately, so you don't have to reload your session or load a new instance before the new default becomes active.
VUMT deluxe only:
- FIX: the WEIGHTING parameter is being recalled properly now in the user default state
- FIX: IN-PLACE button state is initialized correctly now
- NEW: the side(difference) signal can now be monitored centered/mono when IN-PLACE is not active
As always, the updates can be found in the Klanghelm user area.
A huge thanks to Roland Löhlbach (Compyfox), who has provided some additional metering presets with in-depth documentation for VUMT & VUMT deluxe. These presets can be downloaded from here
Tony
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
Also a huge thank you for this excellent metering tool!tonhelm wrote:A huge thanks to Roland Löhlbach (Compyfox), who has provided some additional metering presets with in-depth documentation for VUMT & VUMT deluxe. These presets can be downloaded from here
I hope my presets are of help for some people.
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
In all honesty, when does CM NOT give a 10/10?
Though it's rare for Independent Developers for sure. Congratulations.
Which issue was that?
Though it's rare for Independent Developers for sure. Congratulations.
Which issue was that?
-
MusicProgrammer MusicProgrammer https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=458450
- Banned
- 24 posts since 4 Mar, 2020
v2.3.1, I'm confused as to the differences among the three different "VU-modes", and still confused after reading the manual, p. 10.
I don't know VU math and specs, I just want a VU meter that works like a normal VU meter. The manual says all three modes are "within VU specs". How is mode VUMT1 different from ideal mode? Doesn't that mean VUMT1 isn't ideal, and if so, why would it be useful?
VUMT2 mode I might understand. It will give me ideal results if I leave it at default, but it includes options to change rise and fall times away from ideal settings?
I don't know VU math and specs, I just want a VU meter that works like a normal VU meter. The manual says all three modes are "within VU specs". How is mode VUMT1 different from ideal mode? Doesn't that mean VUMT1 isn't ideal, and if so, why would it be useful?
VUMT2 mode I might understand. It will give me ideal results if I leave it at default, but it includes options to change rise and fall times away from ideal settings?
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
I can explain that (hopefully).
It has something to do with the behavior (inertia) of the meter and also overshots.
If I remember correctly, VUMT v1 had a different "ramp up/fallback" behavior compared to VUMT2. This is why there are three modes existing. VUMT (old behavior), "Idealized" (which could be considered as linear as possible) and a blend of both being VUMT2.
Due to this, this also has a slight influence on overshots. I think the original overshot was about 5%. With VUMT2 you can set 1%, and then the implementations still have a slight offset. But that's where my understanding of the engine ends (I'm not the programmer after all).
All three options offer custom rise/fall settings. Although for a bog standard VU it is 300ms rise/fall.
It has something to do with the behavior (inertia) of the meter and also overshots.
If I remember correctly, VUMT v1 had a different "ramp up/fallback" behavior compared to VUMT2. This is why there are three modes existing. VUMT (old behavior), "Idealized" (which could be considered as linear as possible) and a blend of both being VUMT2.
Due to this, this also has a slight influence on overshots. I think the original overshot was about 5%. With VUMT2 you can set 1%, and then the implementations still have a slight offset. But that's where my understanding of the engine ends (I'm not the programmer after all).
All three options offer custom rise/fall settings. Although for a bog standard VU it is 300ms rise/fall.
-
MusicProgrammer MusicProgrammer https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=458450
- Banned
- 24 posts since 4 Mar, 2020
I appreciate your input. With your apparently deep knowledge about VU meters, do you agree with the VUMT manual that all three VUMT modes are "within VU specs"? The VU spec that you've studied (I haven't) allows for VUMT1's less linear ramp/fall behavior?Compyfox wrote: Fri Apr 17, 2020 11:59 pm I can explain that (hopefully).
It has something to do with the behavior (inertia) of the meter and also overshots.
If I remember correctly, VUMT v1 had a different "ramp up/fallback" behavior compared to VUMT2. This is why there are three modes existing. VUMT (old behavior), "Idealized" (which could be considered as linear as possible) and a blend of both being VUMT2.
Due to this, this also has a slight influence on overshots. I think the original overshot was about 5%. With VUMT2 you can set 1%, and then the implementations still have a slight offset. But that's where my understanding of the engine ends (I'm not the programmer after all).
All three options offer custom rise/fall settings. Although for a bog standard VU it is 300ms rise/fall.
It struck me that VUMT has a mode named "ideal", but VUMT defaults to a different VU mode. Later I may appreciate the options, but for now, I just want VU meter that emulates my old, real VU meters; and my old VU meters did not require me to select modes. If I want it to work like VU meters from back in the days of mode-less VU meters, should I set the mode to mode 1, mode 2, or mode ideal?
-
- KVRAF
- 8485 posts since 29 Sep, 2010 from Maui
Doh, now you've done it.MusicProgrammer wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:22 am I appreciate your input. With your apparently deep knowledge about VU meters
jk, if it anyone could know more about that subject than is humanly possible...
-
Hermetech Mastering Hermetech Mastering https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7418 - KVRAF
- 1619 posts since 30 May, 2003 from Milan, Italy
The original spec for VU meters from 1940 is here:
http://www.aes.org/aeshc/pdf/chinn_a-new-svi.pdf
It allows for certain tolerances, so yes, all the modes are within spec, (much like there are tolerances for measuring ISPs, and therefore different ways of implementing them, and therefore certain meters give slightly different results).
Every real VU is gonna be slightly different too. I've been using large calibrated Sifam VUs fore about a decade now, and no plugin version comes close, they all look jerky compared to the real thing, but I do think VUMT is the best attempt so far.
http://www.aes.org/aeshc/pdf/chinn_a-new-svi.pdf
It allows for certain tolerances, so yes, all the modes are within spec, (much like there are tolerances for measuring ISPs, and therefore different ways of implementing them, and therefore certain meters give slightly different results).
Every real VU is gonna be slightly different too. I've been using large calibrated Sifam VUs fore about a decade now, and no plugin version comes close, they all look jerky compared to the real thing, but I do think VUMT is the best attempt so far.