Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
free Orban loudness meter app now available
free Orban loudness meter app now available
Orban has developed a stand-alone loudness meter for Windows,
which we are releasing as a free public beta. The meter can be
downloaded from this link (watch any line wrapping)
* w w w .orban . com /meter/setup_Free_Orban_Loudness_Meter
_1.00.exe
Be sure to read the readme file, which is the meter's manual. The
installer will offer to open the readme as part of the installation
process.
Here is the press release:
ORBAN INTRODUCES FREE LOUDNESS/LEVEL METERING
SOFTWARE
San Leandro, CA, April 10, 2008 -- Orban today announced that
the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download from
w w w .orban . com /meter.
This is the first of a family of Orban meters. Future paid versions
will offer upgraded features including logging, surround
monitoring, and oversampled peak measurements that accurately
indicate the peak level of the audio after D/A conversion.
This software simultaneously displays instantaneous peaks, VU,
PPM, CBS Technology Center loudness, and ITU BS.1770
loudness. All meters include peak-hold functionality that makes
the peak indications of the meters easy to see.
The software accepts two-channel stereo inputs. The VU and PPM
meters are split to indicate the left and right channels. The PPM
meter also displays the instantaneous peak values of the L and R
digital samples.
The CBS meter is a"short-term" loudness meter intended to
display the details of moment-to-moment loudness with dynamics
similar to a VU meter. It uses the Jones & Torick algorithm
developed at the CBS Technology Center and published in 1981 in
the SMPTE Journal. Created using Orban-developed modeling
software, the DSP implementation typically matches the original
analog meter within 0.5 dB on sinewaves, tone bursts and noise.
The Jones & Torick algorithm improves upon the original loudness
measurement algorithm developed by CBS researchers in the late
1960s. Its foundation is psychoacoustic studies done at CBS
Laboratories over a two year period by Torick and the late
Benjamin Bauer. After surveying existing equal-loudness contour
curves and finding them inapplicable to measuring the loudness of
broadcasts, Torick and Bauer organized listening tests that
resulted in a new set of equal-loudness curves based on octave-
wide noise reproduced by calibrated loudspeakers in a
semireverberant 16 x 14 x 8 room, which is representative of a room
in which broadcasts are normally heard. In 1966, they published
this work in the IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics,
along with results from other tests whose goal was to model the
loudness integration time constants of human hearing.
In 2006, the ITU-R published Recommendation ITU-R BS.1770:
"Algorithms to measure audio programme loudness and true-peak
audio level." Developed by G.A. Soulodre, the BS.1770 loudness
meter uses a frequency-weighted r.m.s. measurement intended to
be integrated over several seconds -- perhaps as long as an entire
program segment. As such, it is considered a "long-term"
loudness measurement because it does not take into account the
loudness integration time constants of human hearing, as does the
CBS meter.
Orban's BS.1770 loudness meter uses the Leq(RLB2) algorithm as
specified in the Recommendation. This applies frequency
weighting before the r.m.s. integrator. The frequency weighting is
a series connection of pre-filter and RLB weighting curves. The
Orban meter precisely implements equations (1) and (2) in this
document by using a rolling integrator whose integration time is
user-adjustable from one to ten seconds.
Additionally, the Orban meter offers an experimental long-term
loudness indication derived by post-processing the CBS
algorithm's output. This uses a relatively simple algorithm that
attempts to mimic a skilled operator's mental integration of the peak
swings of a meter with "VU-like" dynamics. The operator will
concentrate most on the highest indications but will tend to ignore
a single high peak that is atypical of the others.
Researchers have long been curious about the Jones & Torick
meter but been unable to evaluate it and compare it with other
meters. Orban developed this software because the company
believed it would be useful to practicing sound engineers and
researchers and also because Orban is using it in its new Optimod
8585 Surround Audio Processor. Thanks to this free software,
engineers and scientists will now have the opportunity to easily
compare the CBS algorithm with others, including the BS.1770
Recommendation.
The Orban software runs on Windows XP and Vista computers
having 1.5 GHz or faster Intel Pentium 4 or Intel-compatible
processors that implement the SSE2 instruction set. While the
software can be driven by any installed Windows sound device,
monitoring playback from an application like Windows Media
Player requires the sound hardware to support Windows Wave
I/O.
Bob Orban
Orban has developed a stand-alone loudness meter for Windows,
which we are releasing as a free public beta. The meter can be
downloaded from this link (watch any line wrapping)
* w w w .orban . com /meter/setup_Free_Orban_Loudness_Meter
_1.00.exe
Be sure to read the readme file, which is the meter's manual. The
installer will offer to open the readme as part of the installation
process.
Here is the press release:
ORBAN INTRODUCES FREE LOUDNESS/LEVEL METERING
SOFTWARE
San Leandro, CA, April 10, 2008 -- Orban today announced that
the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download from
w w w .orban . com /meter.
This is the first of a family of Orban meters. Future paid versions
will offer upgraded features including logging, surround
monitoring, and oversampled peak measurements that accurately
indicate the peak level of the audio after D/A conversion.
This software simultaneously displays instantaneous peaks, VU,
PPM, CBS Technology Center loudness, and ITU BS.1770
loudness. All meters include peak-hold functionality that makes
the peak indications of the meters easy to see.
The software accepts two-channel stereo inputs. The VU and PPM
meters are split to indicate the left and right channels. The PPM
meter also displays the instantaneous peak values of the L and R
digital samples.
The CBS meter is a"short-term" loudness meter intended to
display the details of moment-to-moment loudness with dynamics
similar to a VU meter. It uses the Jones & Torick algorithm
developed at the CBS Technology Center and published in 1981 in
the SMPTE Journal. Created using Orban-developed modeling
software, the DSP implementation typically matches the original
analog meter within 0.5 dB on sinewaves, tone bursts and noise.
The Jones & Torick algorithm improves upon the original loudness
measurement algorithm developed by CBS researchers in the late
1960s. Its foundation is psychoacoustic studies done at CBS
Laboratories over a two year period by Torick and the late
Benjamin Bauer. After surveying existing equal-loudness contour
curves and finding them inapplicable to measuring the loudness of
broadcasts, Torick and Bauer organized listening tests that
resulted in a new set of equal-loudness curves based on octave-
wide noise reproduced by calibrated loudspeakers in a
semireverberant 16 x 14 x 8 room, which is representative of a room
in which broadcasts are normally heard. In 1966, they published
this work in the IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics,
along with results from other tests whose goal was to model the
loudness integration time constants of human hearing.
In 2006, the ITU-R published Recommendation ITU-R BS.1770:
"Algorithms to measure audio programme loudness and true-peak
audio level." Developed by G.A. Soulodre, the BS.1770 loudness
meter uses a frequency-weighted r.m.s. measurement intended to
be integrated over several seconds -- perhaps as long as an entire
program segment. As such, it is considered a "long-term"
loudness measurement because it does not take into account the
loudness integration time constants of human hearing, as does the
CBS meter.
Orban's BS.1770 loudness meter uses the Leq(RLB2) algorithm as
specified in the Recommendation. This applies frequency
weighting before the r.m.s. integrator. The frequency weighting is
a series connection of pre-filter and RLB weighting curves. The
Orban meter precisely implements equations (1) and (2) in this
document by using a rolling integrator whose integration time is
user-adjustable from one to ten seconds.
Additionally, the Orban meter offers an experimental long-term
loudness indication derived by post-processing the CBS
algorithm's output. This uses a relatively simple algorithm that
attempts to mimic a skilled operator's mental integration of the peak
swings of a meter with "VU-like" dynamics. The operator will
concentrate most on the highest indications but will tend to ignore
a single high peak that is atypical of the others.
Researchers have long been curious about the Jones & Torick
meter but been unable to evaluate it and compare it with other
meters. Orban developed this software because the company
believed it would be useful to practicing sound engineers and
researchers and also because Orban is using it in its new Optimod
8585 Surround Audio Processor. Thanks to this free software,
engineers and scientists will now have the opportunity to easily
compare the CBS algorithm with others, including the BS.1770
Recommendation.
The Orban software runs on Windows XP and Vista computers
having 1.5 GHz or faster Intel Pentium 4 or Intel-compatible
processors that implement the SSE2 instruction set. While the
software can be driven by any installed Windows sound device,
monitoring playback from an application like Windows Media
Player requires the sound hardware to support Windows Wave
I/O.
Bob Orban
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
> Orban today announced that
> the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
> Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
I thought Orban was dead.
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
"Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
> Orban today announced that
> the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
> Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
I thought Orban was dead.
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
> > Orban today announced that
> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>
> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it fills
your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
> I thought Orban was dead.
Why?
MrT.
"Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
> > Orban today announced that
> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>
> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it fills
your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
> I thought Orban was dead.
Why?
MrT.
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>
> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>> > Orban today announced that
>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>
>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
> fills
> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>
>
>> I thought Orban was dead.
>
> Why?
>
> MrT.
>
>
Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound quality
in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime when
over there to see how good classical music can sound even after processing.
S.
--
* audiopages.googlepages . com
"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>
> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>> > Orban today announced that
>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>
>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
> fills
> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>
>
>> I thought Orban was dead.
>
> Why?
>
> MrT.
>
>
Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound quality
in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime when
over there to see how good classical music can sound even after processing.
S.
--
* audiopages.googlepages . com
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
<sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>
>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>> > Orban today announced that
>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>
>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>
>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>> fills
>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>
>>
>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> MrT.
>>
>>
>
>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound quality
>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime when
>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after processing.
>
Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
ugly at all".
In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
there is no place for devices like Optimod.
d
--
d
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
<sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>
>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>> > Orban today announced that
>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>
>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>
>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>> fills
>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>
>>
>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> MrT.
>>
>>
>
>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound quality
>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime when
>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after processing.
>
Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
ugly at all".
In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
there is no place for devices like Optimod.
d
--
d
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam . com > wrote in message
news:47ff3bbc.187183906@usenet.plus . net ...
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
> <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>
>>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>>
>>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>>> > Orban today announced that
>>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>>
>>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>>
>>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
>>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
>>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of
>>> a
>>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>>> fills
>>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
>>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>> MrT.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound
>>quality
>>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime when
>>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after
>>processing.
>>
> Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
> phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
> ugly at all".
>
> In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
> there is no place for devices like Optimod.
>
> d
>
> --
>
> d
Perhaps not with digital radio, provided that receiver manufacturers
actually implemented dynamic range control. However, much (most?) listening
is done on FM, and even AM, where processing has its uses. As with
everything, it all depends on how well something is done. Near me in
Suffolk, there are two small stations, Star FM and 209Radio. Both process,
but in a car, both station have an excellent sound, especially on speech.
The Hospital Radio station I work with has a low-power AM license, and
without fairly heavy processing, it would be completely unusable. It's
marginal even so.
Consequently, it's not correct to say there's no place for Optimods, there
are many cases where the Optimod is appropriate.
S.
--
* audiopages.googlepages . com
"Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam . com > wrote in message
news:47ff3bbc.187183906@usenet.plus . net ...
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
> <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>
>>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>>
>>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>>> > Orban today announced that
>>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>>
>>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>>
>>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
>>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
>>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of
>>> a
>>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>>> fills
>>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
>>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>> MrT.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound
>>quality
>>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime when
>>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after
>>processing.
>>
> Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
> phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
> ugly at all".
>
> In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
> there is no place for devices like Optimod.
>
> d
>
> --
>
> d
Perhaps not with digital radio, provided that receiver manufacturers
actually implemented dynamic range control. However, much (most?) listening
is done on FM, and even AM, where processing has its uses. As with
everything, it all depends on how well something is done. Near me in
Suffolk, there are two small stations, Star FM and 209Radio. Both process,
but in a car, both station have an excellent sound, especially on speech.
The Hospital Radio station I work with has a low-power AM license, and
without fairly heavy processing, it would be completely unusable. It's
marginal even so.
Consequently, it's not correct to say there's no place for Optimods, there
are many cases where the Optimod is appropriate.
S.
--
* audiopages.googlepages . com
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Serge Auckland" <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote in message
news:GZidnYi4Y4H6zWLanZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@bt . com ...
> "Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam . com > wrote in message
> news:47ff3bbc.187183906@usenet.plus . net ...
>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
>> <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>>
>>>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>>>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>>>
>>>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>>>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>>>> > Orban today announced that
>>>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>>>
>>>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>>>
>>>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship
>>>> to
>>>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>>>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
>>>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version
>>>> of a
>>>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>>>> fills
>>>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
>>>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> MrT.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>>>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>>>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound
>>>quality
>>>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime
>>>when
>>>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after
>>>processing.
>>>
>> Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
>> phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
>> ugly at all".
>>
>> In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
>> there is no place for devices like Optimod.
>>
>> d
>>
>> --
>>
>> d
>
>
> Perhaps not with digital radio, provided that receiver manufacturers
> actually implemented dynamic range control. However, much (most?)
> listening is done on FM, and even AM, where processing has its uses. As
> with everything, it all depends on how well something is done. Near me in
> Suffolk, there are two small stations, Star FM and 209Radio. Both process,
> but in a car, both station have an excellent sound, especially on speech.
>
> The Hospital Radio station I work with has a low-power AM license, and
> without fairly heavy processing, it would be completely unusable. It's
> marginal even so.
>
> Consequently, it's not correct to say there's no place for Optimods, there
> are many cases where the Optimod is appropriate.
Not only that, but the main reason "processing" came into widespread use was
because commercial radio stations wanted to be louder than their
competitors. The dynamic range of most commercially available program
material doesn't exceed the dynamic range of FM (or AM in many situations).
I am not referring to the recording medium itself (e.g., CD), I am referring
to the dynamic range of the actual program material being broadcast. Even
Nirvana is dead silent between tracks. Big deal.
It would not surprise me if digital radio stations begin using audio
processing when the competition begins to pick up. If you doubt me, look at
what they're doing to CDs. Yet, CDs certainly have the dynamic range to
accommodate, without processing, any program material you'd care to listen
to. Audio processing (and sadly, its abuse) won't go away.
Bob Orban was (and is) a respected audio engineer, and he was dedicated to
getting the best quality sound in spite of the loudness wars. I have to give
him credit for that.
"Serge Auckland" <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote in message
news:GZidnYi4Y4H6zWLanZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@bt . com ...
> "Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam . com > wrote in message
> news:47ff3bbc.187183906@usenet.plus . net ...
>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
>> <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>>
>>>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>>>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>>>
>>>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>>>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>>>> > Orban today announced that
>>>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>>>
>>>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>>>
>>>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship
>>>> to
>>>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>>>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
>>>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version
>>>> of a
>>>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>>>> fills
>>>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
>>>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> MrT.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>>>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>>>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound
>>>quality
>>>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime
>>>when
>>>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after
>>>processing.
>>>
>> Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
>> phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
>> ugly at all".
>>
>> In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
>> there is no place for devices like Optimod.
>>
>> d
>>
>> --
>>
>> d
>
>
> Perhaps not with digital radio, provided that receiver manufacturers
> actually implemented dynamic range control. However, much (most?)
> listening is done on FM, and even AM, where processing has its uses. As
> with everything, it all depends on how well something is done. Near me in
> Suffolk, there are two small stations, Star FM and 209Radio. Both process,
> but in a car, both station have an excellent sound, especially on speech.
>
> The Hospital Radio station I work with has a low-power AM license, and
> without fairly heavy processing, it would be completely unusable. It's
> marginal even so.
>
> Consequently, it's not correct to say there's no place for Optimods, there
> are many cases where the Optimod is appropriate.
Not only that, but the main reason "processing" came into widespread use was
because commercial radio stations wanted to be louder than their
competitors. The dynamic range of most commercially available program
material doesn't exceed the dynamic range of FM (or AM in many situations).
I am not referring to the recording medium itself (e.g., CD), I am referring
to the dynamic range of the actual program material being broadcast. Even
Nirvana is dead silent between tracks. Big deal.
It would not surprise me if digital radio stations begin using audio
processing when the competition begins to pick up. If you doubt me, look at
what they're doing to CDs. Yet, CDs certainly have the dynamic range to
accommodate, without processing, any program material you'd care to listen
to. Audio processing (and sadly, its abuse) won't go away.
Bob Orban was (and is) a respected audio engineer, and he was dedicated to
getting the best quality sound in spite of the loudness wars. I have to give
him credit for that.
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Chronic Philharmonic" <karl.uppiano@verizon . net > wrote in message
news:1ZULj.5732$tw3.1511@trnddc03...
>
>
> "Serge Auckland" <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote in message
> news:GZidnYi4Y4H6zWLanZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@bt . com ...
>> "Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam . com > wrote in message
>> news:47ff3bbc.187183906@usenet.plus . net ...
>>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
>>> <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>>>>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>>>>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>>>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>>>>> > Orban today announced that
>>>>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>>>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>>>>
>>>>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship
>>>>> to
>>>>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>>>>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly
>>>>> ones.
>>>>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version
>>>>> of a
>>>>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>>>>> fills
>>>>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and
>>>>> possibly
>>>>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> MrT.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>>>>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>>>>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound
>>>>quality
>>>>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime
>>>>when
>>>>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after
>>>>processing.
>>>>
>>> Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
>>> phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
>>> ugly at all".
>>>
>>> In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
>>> there is no place for devices like Optimod.
>>>
>>> d
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> d
>>
>>
>> Perhaps not with digital radio, provided that receiver manufacturers
>> actually implemented dynamic range control. However, much (most?)
>> listening is done on FM, and even AM, where processing has its uses. As
>> with everything, it all depends on how well something is done. Near me in
>> Suffolk, there are two small stations, Star FM and 209Radio. Both
>> process, but in a car, both station have an excellent sound, especially
>> on speech.
>>
>> The Hospital Radio station I work with has a low-power AM license, and
>> without fairly heavy processing, it would be completely unusable. It's
>> marginal even so.
>>
>> Consequently, it's not correct to say there's no place for Optimods,
>> there are many cases where the Optimod is appropriate.
>
> Not only that, but the main reason "processing" came into widespread use
> was because commercial radio stations wanted to be louder than their
> competitors. The dynamic range of most commercially available program
> material doesn't exceed the dynamic range of FM (or AM in many
> situations). I am not referring to the recording medium itself (e.g., CD),
> I am referring to the dynamic range of the actual program material being
> broadcast. Even Nirvana is dead silent between tracks. Big deal.
>
> It would not surprise me if digital radio stations begin using audio
> processing when the competition begins to pick up. If you doubt me, look
> at what they're doing to CDs. Yet, CDs certainly have the dynamic range to
> accommodate, without processing, any program material you'd care to listen
> to. Audio processing (and sadly, its abuse) won't go away.
>
> Bob Orban was (and is) a respected audio engineer, and he was dedicated to
> getting the best quality sound in spite of the loudness wars. I have to
> give him credit for that.
>
As far as I'm aware, most if not all UK digital station already do process.
The BBC uses the Optimod 6200, which is Orban's specialist DAB/DSAT
processor. Parts of GCAP also use the 6200, other smaller stations have used
the TC Finalizer and even Behringer. All do so to reduce the dynamic range
and increase loudness. Unfortunately, DAB/DSAT receiver manufacturers have
not universally implemented Dynamic Range Control on their receivers,
consequently Broadcasters have done what they've always done, and processed
at source.
Processing on FM can be done well, bearing in mind the intended audience,
i.e. people in cars, portable radios in kitchens and the like. Audiophiles
listening under ideal conditions just doesn't figure in Broadcasters'
thinking. BBC Radio 2 has an excellent sound on a portable radio/in a car.
It's processing done well, for the intended audience.
S.
--
* audiopages.googlepages . com
"Chronic Philharmonic" <karl.uppiano@verizon . net > wrote in message
news:1ZULj.5732$tw3.1511@trnddc03...
>
>
> "Serge Auckland" <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote in message
> news:GZidnYi4Y4H6zWLanZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@bt . com ...
>> "Don Pearce" <nospam@nospam . com > wrote in message
>> news:47ff3bbc.187183906@usenet.plus . net ...
>>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:59 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
>>> <sergeauckland@btinternet . com > wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
>>>>news:47feff9a$0$13113$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
>>>>> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
>>>>>> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>>>>>> > Orban today announced that
>>>>>> > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
>>>>>> > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>>>>>
>>>>> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship
>>>>> to
>>>>> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
>>>>> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly
>>>>> ones.
>>>>> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version
>>>>> of a
>>>>> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it
>>>>> fills
>>>>> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and
>>>>> possibly
>>>>> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought Orban was dead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> MrT.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Agreed. A free-of-charge working but stripped-down version is often very
>>>>welcome. As to Orban being dead, the Optimod is still the best and most
>>>>widely used audio processor. The 8500 is capable of excellent sound
>>>>quality
>>>>in the right hands. Listen to Radio France , France Musique, sometime
>>>>when
>>>>over there to see how good classical music can sound even after
>>>>processing.
>>>>
>>> Damning with faint praise! "Even after processing" is a very revealing
>>> phrase. It is like selling makeup with the slogan "It hardly makes you
>>> ugly at all".
>>>
>>> In these days of digital radio with decent signal to noise ratios,
>>> there is no place for devices like Optimod.
>>>
>>> d
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> d
>>
>>
>> Perhaps not with digital radio, provided that receiver manufacturers
>> actually implemented dynamic range control. However, much (most?)
>> listening is done on FM, and even AM, where processing has its uses. As
>> with everything, it all depends on how well something is done. Near me in
>> Suffolk, there are two small stations, Star FM and 209Radio. Both
>> process, but in a car, both station have an excellent sound, especially
>> on speech.
>>
>> The Hospital Radio station I work with has a low-power AM license, and
>> without fairly heavy processing, it would be completely unusable. It's
>> marginal even so.
>>
>> Consequently, it's not correct to say there's no place for Optimods,
>> there are many cases where the Optimod is appropriate.
>
> Not only that, but the main reason "processing" came into widespread use
> was because commercial radio stations wanted to be louder than their
> competitors. The dynamic range of most commercially available program
> material doesn't exceed the dynamic range of FM (or AM in many
> situations). I am not referring to the recording medium itself (e.g., CD),
> I am referring to the dynamic range of the actual program material being
> broadcast. Even Nirvana is dead silent between tracks. Big deal.
>
> It would not surprise me if digital radio stations begin using audio
> processing when the competition begins to pick up. If you doubt me, look
> at what they're doing to CDs. Yet, CDs certainly have the dynamic range to
> accommodate, without processing, any program material you'd care to listen
> to. Audio processing (and sadly, its abuse) won't go away.
>
> Bob Orban was (and is) a respected audio engineer, and he was dedicated to
> getting the best quality sound in spite of the loudness wars. I have to
> give him credit for that.
>
As far as I'm aware, most if not all UK digital station already do process.
The BBC uses the Optimod 6200, which is Orban's specialist DAB/DSAT
processor. Parts of GCAP also use the 6200, other smaller stations have used
the TC Finalizer and even Behringer. All do so to reduce the dynamic range
and increase loudness. Unfortunately, DAB/DSAT receiver manufacturers have
not universally implemented Dynamic Range Control on their receivers,
consequently Broadcasters have done what they've always done, and processed
at source.
Processing on FM can be done well, bearing in mind the intended audience,
i.e. people in cars, portable radios in kitchens and the like. Audiophiles
listening under ideal conditions just doesn't figure in Broadcasters'
thinking. BBC Radio 2 has an excellent sound on a portable radio/in a car.
It's processing done well, for the intended audience.
S.
--
* audiopages.googlepages . com
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
> > "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
> > > Orban today announced that
> > > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
> > > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
> >
> > In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it fills
> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>
>
> > I thought Orban was dead.
>
> Why?
>
> MrT.
You'r responding to an impostor troll. Look at the headers.
--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
> "Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in message
> news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net ...
> > "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
> > > Orban today announced that
> > > the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software for
> > > Windows XP and Vista is now available for free download
> >
> > In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
> In *my* long computing experience, price has very little relationship to
> quality. I would have thought Microsoft was enough proof of that.
> There are freeware packages available not bettered by more costly ones.
> However Bobs press relase makes it clear this is a "stripped" version of a
> commercial package, often a very cost effective solution I find, if it fills
> your requirements. And a great way to get people to try it and possibly
> upgrade. That's what this marketing model is all about after all.
>
>
> > I thought Orban was dead.
>
> Why?
>
> MrT.
You'r responding to an impostor troll. Look at the headers.
--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"hank alrich" <walkinay@nv . net > wrote in message
news:1if8crd.n2jfk0ptwciqN%walkinay@nv . net ...
> You'r responding to an impostor troll. Look at the headers.
Point taken, but checking the headers on every post just so I don't get
caught is somewhat time consuming.
I think I'll just live with it. This is only usenet after all.
MrT.
"hank alrich" <walkinay@nv . net > wrote in message
news:1if8crd.n2jfk0ptwciqN%walkinay@nv . net ...
> You'r responding to an impostor troll. Look at the headers.
Point taken, but checking the headers on every post just so I don't get
caught is somewhat time consuming.
I think I'll just live with it. This is only usenet after all.
MrT.
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in
message news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net
> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>> Orban today announced that
>> the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software
>> for Windows XP and Vista is now available for free
>> download
>
> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
> I thought Orban was dead.
>
>
> Bob Morein
> (310) 237-6511
It's not Bob Morein, it's the Buzzardnews forger. :-(
"Soundhaspriority" <moreinwebreg@verizon . net > wrote in
message news:C42537E1.45506%moreinwebreg@verizon . net
> "Robert Orban" <donotreply@spamblock . com > wrote:
>> Orban today announced that
>> the first public beta of Orban Loudness Meter software
>> for Windows XP and Vista is now available for free
>> download
>
> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
> I thought Orban was dead.
>
>
> Bob Morein
> (310) 237-6511
It's not Bob Morein, it's the Buzzardnews forger. :-(
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
Soundhaspriority wrote:
> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never heard of Ubuntu?
Hi Bob!
Soundhaspriority wrote:
> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay for.
>
Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never heard of Ubuntu?
Hi Bob!
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
"rktz" <nothere@nowhere . com > wrote in message
news:R_idnU2OHLL_wWLanZ2dnUVZ_ufinZ2d@earthlink . com
> Soundhaspriority wrote:
>
>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay
>> for.
>
> Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never
> heard of Ubuntu?
> Hi Bob!
Check the properties of the post. It ain't Bob. It is the Buzzardnews
forger.
"rktz" <nothere@nowhere . com > wrote in message
news:R_idnU2OHLL_wWLanZ2dnUVZ_ufinZ2d@earthlink . com
> Soundhaspriority wrote:
>
>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay
>> for.
>
> Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never
> heard of Ubuntu?
> Hi Bob!
Check the properties of the post. It ain't Bob. It is the Buzzardnews
forger.
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
Arny Krueger wrote:
> "rktz" <nothere@nowhere . com > wrote in message
> news:R idnU2OHLL wWLanZ2dnUVZ ufinZ2d@earthlink . com
>> Soundhaspriority wrote:
>>
>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay
>>> for.
>> Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never
>> heard of Ubuntu?
>> Hi Bob!
>
> Check the properties of the post. It ain't Bob. It is the Buzzardnews
> forger.
>
>
I was saying "Hi" to Bob O.
I have never heard of the other fellow. Is there a reason I should have?
Arny Krueger wrote:
> "rktz" <nothere@nowhere . com > wrote in message
> news:R idnU2OHLL wWLanZ2dnUVZ ufinZ2d@earthlink . com
>> Soundhaspriority wrote:
>>
>>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay
>>> for.
>> Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never
>> heard of Ubuntu?
>> Hi Bob!
>
> Check the properties of the post. It ain't Bob. It is the Buzzardnews
> forger.
>
>
I was saying "Hi" to Bob O.
I have never heard of the other fellow. Is there a reason I should have?
Re: free Orban loudness meter app now worthless vapourware
On Apr 11, 9:34 am, rktz <noth...@nowhere . com > wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > "rktz" <noth...@nowhere . com > wrote in message
> >news:R idnU2OHLL wWLanZ2dnUVZ ufinZ2d@earthlink . com
> >> Soundhaspriority wrote:
>
> >>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay
> >>> for.
> >> Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never
> >> heard of Ubuntu?
> >> Hi Bob!
>
> > Check the properties of the post. It ain't Bob. It is the Buzzardnews
> > forger.
>
> I was saying "Hi" to Bob O.
>
> I have never heard of the other fellow. Is there a reason I should have?
'cause he's named BOB, is there another reason? ;)
On Apr 11, 9:34 am, rktz <noth...@nowhere . com > wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > "rktz" <noth...@nowhere . com > wrote in message
> >news:R idnU2OHLL wWLanZ2dnUVZ ufinZ2d@earthlink . com
> >> Soundhaspriority wrote:
>
> >>> In my long computing experience, you get what you pay
> >>> for.
> >> Are you trying to be a bung or what? Have you never
> >> heard of Ubuntu?
> >> Hi Bob!
>
> > Check the properties of the post. It ain't Bob. It is the Buzzardnews
> > forger.
>
> I was saying "Hi" to Bob O.
>
> I have never heard of the other fellow. Is there a reason I should have?
'cause he's named BOB, is there another reason? ;)
Next: What determines the audio quality of a VD track?
Previous: My favorite analog audio storage = B&W variable-density optical track of old...
