[PD] tanh() or a compressor?

[Mario Mey]

El 01/10/13 00:54, Brian Fay escribió:
> Are you using a pop filter or windscreen or anything in front of the 
> mic? Maybe that could help filter out some of the super-loud plosive 
> and fricative sounds.
No beatboxer uses a pop filter or windscreen... unless he/she is at a 
recording studio.
>
> Moving further away from the mic would definitely lower the volume, 
> too (the SM58 is a cardioid mic, so it has proximity effect, where 
> bass gets emphasized the closer you are to the mic). I guess the 
> proximity effect will actually sound pretty nice on the kicks, but it 
> also would explain why the peaks are so high.
Yes, the proximity is very important. Unfortunatly, I can't move further 
away the mic.

Well, I wrote in DIY2 thread in Forum, because I want to use Hardoff's 
compressor and I wanted his opinion, too. Because, after several tests, 
I realized that I can't get rid of the first peak of a kick (more or 
less, signal = 4). So, I thought about using the compressor with attack 
and release at lowest and, inmediatly after that, something like [expr~ 
(tanh($v1/1.5))*1.5]. So, tanh() "compress" the highest peaks to 1.5, 
but it doesn't distort so much the sound.

Can anybody tell me if I am very wrong?
Is the math correct?

As when writting the arrays to disk, Pd has to normalized them to 1, I 
can't see really the difference in a sound editor, between the original 
and the compressed one.





>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Mario Mey <mariomey at gmail.com 
> <mailto:mariomey at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Now, I am checking volumes of my looper patch. I had to raise [*~
>     4] the volume of the mic, to get a razonable volume, compared to a
>     song file, for example. But, using this looper patch, I make
>     beatbox. So, kicks and snares from my mouth get in the mic. And,
>     using a visual array to test it, I realize that the kicks and
>     snares are so much higher volume than the vocals.
>
>     The patch has FXs with feedbacks, so, they can make signal > 1.
>     So, at the end of the patch, there's [expr tanh($v1)] to to avoid
>     that...  tanh() is simpler than a a compressor, but it loose some
>     sounds (I think). Or I should trust in tanh()?
>
>     Multiple choice:
>     1- Use tanh() in the input, after adc~ and before dac~.
>     2- Use a compressor patch in the input, after adc~ (and tanh()
>     before dac~)
>     3- Use a compressor at the end of the patch, before dac~
>     4- Stay as it is now...
>
>     Also, I can't spend more CPU process...
>
>     What do you recommend me to use?
>
>     Thanks.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Pd-list at iem.at <mailto:Pd-list at iem.at> mailing list
>     UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>     http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20131001/6e1a9e55/attachment.htm>