[PD] Compressor in Pd

[Paulo Casaes]

I made a saturator compressor (a non linear compressor) a few years ago

http://puredata.info/Members/saturno/saturator-non-linear-compressor
http://puredata.info/Members/saturno/saturator.zip/view

It's an external.

Paulo

On 18/05/2010 10:28, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 07:28 -0400, chris clepper wrote:
>    
>> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:54 AM, Roman Haefeli<reduzierer at yahoo.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>          P.S.: @pdmtl guys
>>          It's plain wrong to have a wet/dry parameter for dynamic
>>          processing fx.
>>          It just doesn't make sense at all to have the compressor
>>          output mixed
>>          with the input signal (It not only doesn't make sense, it even
>>          adds
>>          strange phasing effects, if the the dynamic processor uses a
>>          look-ahead
>>          delay).
>>          Can we agree on that? And if not, can we discuss this, so that
>>          we
>>          finally can agree on that?
>>
>>
>>
>> That sounds like parallel (or New York) compression, which is far from
>> being wrong.  It allows for an increase in RMS without affecting the
>> source's transient response, and in many cases this technique is far
>> superior to series compression.  A fair majority of rock/pop records
>> of the past quarter century have had parallel compression applied to
>> the drum bus.
>>
>> In the box, latency has to be compensated for though, so you will have
>> to delay the source to properly mix with the compressed output.  You
>> can simply send the 'dry' signal through the same compression with a
>> 1:1 ratio and high threshold to achieve this.
>>      
> I don't fully understand that last sentence: why sending the dry signal
> through a compression (which makes it not dry anymore) and how does
> threshold matter, when the ratio is 1:1 (which is basically the same as
> sending the signal not through a compressor at all) ?
>
>    
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_compression
>>      
>
> Ok. I stand corrected. Thanks for the link. I was definitely wrong by
> saying, that it doesn't make sense to mix the dry signal with the
> compressed signal. Indeed, the effect is different from just
> 'destroying' the effect of the compressor (which is - simply said -
> lowering the output gain the higher the input gain is). With parallel
> compression the ratio between input and output gain above threshold is
> not linear anymore, but tends towards 1:1 the louder the input signal
> is. Or in other words: the ratio is dependent on the input gain.
>
> Roman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->  http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>