AB_LM works only as pair: Sender 1 + Receiver 1, Sender 2 + Receiver 2, ..., point to point only.
"Officially" the pair has to be placed with a certain track, not across tracks.
In any case you can try if the AB_LM pair works across tracks, some DAWs supports this.
TBProAudio releases AB_LM - Loudness Match and Gain Staging Plugin for Windows and Mac OS X
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Update to 1.2.0:
- Attention: Please remove all instances of AB_LM before installing V1.2.0 (incompatible parameter set)
- Adds Measurement Modes EBUR128 ML (400ms) and EBUR128 SL (3000ms)
- Attention: Please remove all instances of AB_LM before installing V1.2.0 (incompatible parameter set)
- Adds Measurement Modes EBUR128 ML (400ms) and EBUR128 SL (3000ms)
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Update to V1.3.0:
(Attention: Please remove all instances of AB_LM before installing V1.3.0 (incompatible parameter set))
- Added auto channel select
- Link channels extended to 256
- RMS/EBU measurement bug fixed
(Attention: Please remove all instances of AB_LM before installing V1.3.0 (incompatible parameter set))
- Added auto channel select
- Link channels extended to 256
- RMS/EBU measurement bug fixed
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Update to V1.3.1:
- Auto link channel:
works optimal in pairs
new plug in instance: even instance_count => sender, odd instance_count => receiver, next free channel is chosen (does not work for AAX/RTAS)
copy track with linked pairs: sender/receiver pair is re-linked (does not work for AU and AAX/RTAS)
copy plug in: next free channel is chosen
- Auto link channel:
works optimal in pairs
new plug in instance: even instance_count => sender, odd instance_count => receiver, next free channel is chosen (does not work for AAX/RTAS)
copy track with linked pairs: sender/receiver pair is re-linked (does not work for AU and AAX/RTAS)
copy plug in: next free channel is chosen
-
- KVRian
- 1339 posts since 25 Sep, 2011 from New York
Thank You Sir!
Reality is a Condition due to Lack of Weed!
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Update to V1.4:
- New GUI
- Fixed Pre FX max readout
- EBU filter denormal fix
- New GUI
- Fixed Pre FX max readout
- EBU filter denormal fix
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
Hi i am noticing with the loudness matching (i am using it at present to match effects to the original audio gain to test that i am not liking the effect simply because of "loudness placebo". I am very impressed with how accurately your plugin measures the levels),
that there is quite a delay as a disable and enable the third party effect in the middle between the two instances of AB_LM, in other words it's really slow for the volume matching. It always gets it spot on, but surely there must be a way to do it faster? Is this what the snapshots are for? I haven't delved into this yet.
that there is quite a delay as a disable and enable the third party effect in the middle between the two instances of AB_LM, in other words it's really slow for the volume matching. It always gets it spot on, but surely there must be a way to do it faster? Is this what the snapshots are for? I haven't delved into this yet.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Thank you for your nice feedback.
Delay of volume matching:
1) if your FX chain introduces latency, pls make sure that this is compensated by AB_LM (see PDC)
2) It also depends on the "measurement speed", e.g. EBU R128 SL uses a window of 3secs, so it needs 3 secs to measure the final level
3) Just select RMS measurement and set window to 50ms or even 10ms, this will give a very quick response
I hope this was helpful.
Delay of volume matching:
1) if your FX chain introduces latency, pls make sure that this is compensated by AB_LM (see PDC)
2) It also depends on the "measurement speed", e.g. EBU R128 SL uses a window of 3secs, so it needs 3 secs to measure the final level
3) Just select RMS measurement and set window to 50ms or even 10ms, this will give a very quick response
I hope this was helpful.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
"Snapshots" are used to store/recall drive and matched gain levels for quick comparison.TheoM wrote:Is this what the snapshots are for? I haven't delved into this yet.
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
ok so basically you are saying yes to my question? besides snapshots, is there any improvement that can be made to the real time gain matching algorithm in terms of speed?TB-ProAudio wrote:"Snapshots" are used to store/recall drive and matched gain levels for quick comparison.TheoM wrote:Is this what the snapshots are for? I haven't delved into this yet.
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
Ok I just finally bought it anyway..the new gui pushed me over the edge. So nice.
PLUS.. it' more or les one of the most essential utility plugins on the planet.
There's just nothing else like it, especially automatic recording of exact latency of a plugin, that is SO cool. This allows me to actually for the first time EVER,(for example, just one of many), to use the softube FET plugin in look ahead mode (softube, after more than 5 years, still refuse to code this plugin to report the look ahead latency to the DAW), and then be able to compensate using a nudge tool..
I do have one last question also.. can your plugin be made to report delay to the DAW, so one can use a plugin that doesn't report it's delay properly?
PLUS.. it' more or les one of the most essential utility plugins on the planet.
There's just nothing else like it, especially automatic recording of exact latency of a plugin, that is SO cool. This allows me to actually for the first time EVER,(for example, just one of many), to use the softube FET plugin in look ahead mode (softube, after more than 5 years, still refuse to code this plugin to report the look ahead latency to the DAW), and then be able to compensate using a nudge tool..
I do have one last question also.. can your plugin be made to report delay to the DAW, so one can use a plugin that doesn't report it's delay properly?
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Well, i tried to answer this one post beforeTheoM wrote:ok so basically you are saying yes to my question? besides snapshots, is there any improvement that can be made to the real time gain matching algorithm in terms of speed?
Set measurement mode to RMS and use a window of 100ms or 50 ms.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 711 posts since 16 May, 2014 from Germany
Thank you!TheoM wrote:..the new gui pushed me over the edge. So nice.
PLUS.. it' more or les one of the most essential utility plugins on the planet.
Sorry, not at the moment. But this is more something for a small tool: report latency, but do not delay...TheoM wrote:I do have one last question also.. can your plugin be made to report delay to the DAW, so one can use a plugin that doesn't report it's delay properly?
I will think about it.
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
TB-ProAudio wrote:Thank you!TheoM wrote:..the new gui pushed me over the edge. So nice.
PLUS.. it' more or les one of the most essential utility plugins on the planet.
Sorry, not at the moment. But this is more something for a small tool: report latency, but do not delay...TheoM wrote:I do have one last question also.. can your plugin be made to report delay to the DAW, so one can use a plugin that doesn't report it's delay properly?
I will think about it.
ok just to make sure we are on the same page here, i mean for the second instance of your plugin (ie the receiver) to have option of reporting the latency tested to the daw (which would be the latency of the au plugin for example, in the middle place between the two ab_lm)
http://www.voxengo.com/product/latencydelay/
that's the way to get around it for now, what i would do is add this after ab_lm and report the figure you have given. But it adds also an extra 200ms latency of it's own, so the voxengo is not ideal. You have the infastructure already built in to record the latency, just an option to report it would be amazing.
yes please do consider it, i don't think any customer could disagree that's a bad optional feature
PS i am confused about euphonia. do you want to discuss my questions here or another topic?
