- From: Frederick Umminger <frederick.umminger@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:04:12 -0700
- To: Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPJnUh9-7BcgQr0dQT9-v5rqo=Cs8agbBGFwyN6iiuAOEk06_A@mail.gmail.com>
Jean-Marc, > Well, it depends on the amount of clipping that goes on. Also, > clipping is unavoidable even with a compressor, so it's probably a > good idea to to it smoothly anyway. > What I was trying to say, is that if a soft-clipper clips just a little at 0 dB FS, it will clip a lot at 6 dB over, and a huge amount at say 24 dB over. No matter what your soft-clipping wave-shaper curve is to start with, at that point the output will be hard-clipped. > > Compressors also have their own artefacts, especially full-band ones. > For example, if there's a low frequency burst, it'll modulate any high > frequencies present in the signal. So for large excursions, > compressors may be unavoidable, but it we can avoid those, > soft-clipping may be a better option. One important advantage of > (soft-)clipping is that when there are no overflows, it does not cause > any artefact at all. > Compressors can have artifacts, but final-output limiters are designed to be transparent. And it is a fact that in professional audio production across a variety of industries, limiters rather than soft-clippers are primarily used to deal with overs. It should be noted that a truly transparent sound can be difficult to achieve and that is why people can make their living selling better-quality limiters. I have no opinion on the relative quality of the current dynamics processing in the WebAudio implementations. Sincerely, Frederick
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:04:38 UTC