Reefius wrote:Sigh... Pretends to be a professional, but runs a 'studio' full of cheap Behringer gear and keeps on moaning about the price of a $27 plugin. Pathetic...
Oh, we're going down that
route again, Reefius? You only went the personal insult route like how often prior at this point? Twice? Three times? Getting boring, annoying, and actually nowhere. I'm pretty sure I can beat other engineers any day with my skills and quote-on-quote cheap Behringer gear (which my work environment is not
"full of", and which is far form being cheap in sound and usability in the right hands) in my "so called... 'studio' ".
You're missing the point of my argument though.
The plugin might cost a "mere 27USD" and it's "pathetic" to you for me calling out the developer. But you ignore the pressing issues at hand:
1) time limited intro pricing, including day-1 announcement that prices go even further up
2) Pro features can't be tested beforehand, you need to purchase the plugin in order to do so
3) no refund policy known
4) shop issues (mostly handled at this point)
But sure - throw around with insults and lack of understanding, hiding behind an alias, not showing any work, page or social media yourself. This is always the easier route to go. And it's not the first time I see you doing this.
I ask myself what (or whom in this case) is more pathetic...
*backs away slowly*
We could still have an interesting discussion - but you do you.
clintmartin wrote:It's a great meter for a very good price.
A meter where it's Pro features can't be tested beforehand without investing any funds.
Tries to be sarcastic with a "too long, didn't read" comment, responds regardless.
I wouldn't be quite that dramatic, but things don't get under my skin that easily. At any rate, I've spent $27 USD on far worse things. A bad dinner while eating out. Crappy cocktails.
I bought the pro version just to support Youlean, since he's offered this fantastic plugin for free for the past 2 years - I just felt like supporting him. Obviously, YMMV..
There is nothing to laugh about - for me at least. If you have the money to burn because you say "I've spend xyz amount on far worse things
" - all the more power to you. But that's not the argument here.
The argument in this case is completely different - and a lot(!) of the people going into attack mode seem to completely blend that out once more.
"Just support the developer! He deserves the money
". I'm not
saying he doesn't. What I'm saying is, that how this is handled is far(!) from being okay and it's business practices I rather not support (I had my fair share of wasted funds as well). Yet I will burn for that in the long run because I currently speak with my wallet. And if I want to jump into this later, I pay x-amount more than early adopters (already announced price increase), and will then be laughed at for "not jumping on the band wagon in the first place".
But sure... only see one side of the medal. Throw the opinion and arguments of others out the window. This is the internet. An audio community where criticism is not necessarily welcome anymore - only 10/10 reviews and praise.
This is the really sad part of this whole "OMG just STFU and leave!" commentary.
Your mileage may not
vary in this case.
Hermetech Mastering wrote:The current TP metering is fine, doesn't need anything else, IMO. Can set it to warn red wherever you like, I leave it at 0.0 for most things, and try to avoid them completely. If it's music which will be submitted for streaming, set it at -1.0 and forget about it (unless it turns red). As long as you have a good TP limiter to go along with it, you should be fine.
Not all so called ISP meters are "save".
Case in point:https://www.saintpid.se/en/isp-true-peak-limiters-test/
That list isn't up-to-date btw.
Hermetech Mastering wrote:For TP you either don't mind having them (many commercial CD masters are full of them), or you don't want them at all (for streaming, or being conservative with levels, or worried about how they might sound on different consumer DACs etc). So I also don't understand the need for a counter telling you how many there have been, what would the use case scenario be for that?
I also don't see a reason other than for logging purposes for distribution plants or broadcast stations. Though in case of the latter, if you exceed your given boundaries, you're in for hefty fees. So if there is a logging system that can proof "nothing happened" or only a certain amount of time at a specific value, then you're on the save side - or in for less fees.
The problem is - the more non white-paper/standard specs features you add, the more and more it turns problematic in the long run. Because as we all know - rules are there to be bent, or plain downright broken. "I have occasional ISP incident? As long as I don't have more than 5, it's fine
" - we don't really need to go down that rabbit hole again.
If a range higher than the 0dBTP ceiling is introduced, I'm for a +9 range (cause overshots can be that high, if you're really pushing the average signal strength). But since all ITU-R BS.1770-x (and it's "presets"/derivatives) speak of a ceiling of -1dBTP absolute max, and you shall never exceed it in day-to-day use... do we really need that?