Parallel processing question.

[selig]

Just for YI selig- i get a peak @ 0.000004 with a noise floor of -132db in REAper.!
That's what i call "tighter than a nuns...."
Big difference in db per 0.000000 value!

So this proves it's a level thing and not a timing thing, right?

If so it would also mean that this has nothing to do with "punch" or "clarity" or whatever you're talking about when you mention the "hollow" sound.

Not sure what you mean by chicken/egg thing, and of course VMG cannot solve a "level only" problem - it's only for solving latency problems.

I've proven it's a level thing - remember what I said about using a slow LFO to achieve perfect nulling, albeit temporary? That would of course be totally impossible if it was a delay issue. Additionally, though there was no need to mention it here IMO, I did try VMG-01 and every setting INCREASED the audio level and introduced a comb filter effect.

Not sure how much further you want to take this, but I'm still "in" if you have another situation you want to explore.

[Puniho]

Indeed, Normen. I'm still open minded on the issues, but the total lack of examples leads me to believe both our comments still stand. Anyone got examples of how VMG is "horrendously" (or otherwise) flawed in regards to not being able to compensate for any live or automated adjustments in a mix?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This isnt a personal challenge to the dev or anyone here. I'm just a guy trying my limited best to understand this latency issue, so I have been reading as much as I can here, which is difficult as its spread over multiple threads. To be honest, I have to agree that the manual for VMG isnt much help, and I can only find one video tutorial online. I have conducted my own tests, attempting to come to grips with this on my own. See the other threads I have commented on which have been unaswered so far. From my own observations a considerable number of devices display differing latencys depending on the settings including Reasons own Scream.

[selig]

Always willing to try to help where I can.
What do you need help with that's not in the manual?
How are you using Scream where you run into VMG-01's limitations?

[Puniho]

I think I may have lost the thread of the debate here sorry.. ..Easy to do when you're trying to find pertinent info over multiple threads in multiple forum sections.Especially while frustrated and scratching your head. Why does everything have to be so unnecessarily complex..? Anyway.. I dont find any limitation in the VMG itself at its nuts and bolts level. It does what it says on the tin. It's more my frustration with the measuring and gettng a consistant number to compensate for. Again, perhaps its my misunderstanding, but it does seem like there is some spurious info on here which is inaccurate. ie the zero latency list. I was using the Scream distortion as an example of a commonly used Reason device which to me seems to give multiple latency readings depending on settings. How do you know what number to pick? And of course, having picked a number and compensated for it, you cannot automate any parameters without upseting that compensation. I'm starting to feel like its all too difficult and convoluted a process, Maybe I'll just trust my ears!

Anyway, its not all in vain! I have learned something from my struggles. While trying to set up my sends with latency compensation, I ended up with quite a large compensation and was getting a really cool prereverb effect when the reverb that was uncompensated for could be heard before the audio!

[submonsterz]

I think I may have lost the thread of the debate here sorry.. ..Easy to do when you're trying to find pertinent info over multiple threads in multiple forum sections.Especially while frustrated and scratching your head. Why does everything have to be so unnecessarily complex..? Anyway.. I dont find any limitation in the VMG itself at its nuts and bolts level. It does what it says on the tin. It's more my frustration with the measuring and gettng a consistant number to compensate for. Again, perhaps its my misunderstanding, but it does seem like there is some spurious info on here which is inaccurate. ie the zero latency list. I was using the Scream distortion as an example of a commonly used Reason device which to me seems to give multiple latency readings depending on settings. How do you know what number to pick? And of course, having picked a number and compensated for it, you cannot automate any parameters without upseting that compensation. I'm starting to feel like its all too difficult and convoluted a process, Maybe I'll just trust my ears!

Anyway, its not all in vain! I have learned something from my struggles. While trying to set up my sends with latency compensation, I ended up with quite a large compensation and was getting a really cool prereverb effect when the reverb that was uncompensated for could be heard before the audio!

Maybe stick the file on here or a video showing what you have going on and normen or selig or some one else will tell you how to fix it.
I find lots of things cause miss readings in vmg for a few different reasons . One must do if you finding strange readings on a device that is meant to be a non latent device is add a selig gain between the device out to the VMG return in and make shure at least it's getting a signal it can read and adjust if not -8 to -12 seems to be a good number here to know it's getting the right level in (a thing normens device needs right from the start is an return Input level reading on the device itself for the test). Then when your shure it's right then it's down to vmg .I get strange readings often on chains where I use distorted high signals into the fader etc etc.

[selig]

I think I may have lost the thread of the debate here sorry.. ..Easy to do when you're trying to find pertinent info over multiple threads in multiple forum sections.Especially while frustrated and scratching your head. Why does everything have to be so unnecessarily complex..? Anyway.. I dont find any limitation in the VMG itself at its nuts and bolts level. It does what it says on the tin. It's more my frustration with the measuring and gettng a consistant number to compensate for. Again, perhaps its my misunderstanding, but it does seem like there is some spurious info on here which is inaccurate. ie the zero latency list. I was using the Scream distortion as an example of a commonly used Reason device which to me seems to give multiple latency readings depending on settings. How do you know what number to pick? And of course, having picked a number and compensated for it, you cannot automate any parameters without upseting that compensation. I'm starting to feel like its all too difficult and convoluted a process, Maybe I'll just trust my ears!

Anyway, its not all in vain! I have learned something from my struggles. While trying to set up my sends with latency compensation, I ended up with quite a large compensation and was getting a really cool prereverb effect when the reverb that was uncompensated for could be heard before the audio!

It's no problem IMO if you have to ask your question again. These things are not always straight forward, and the confusion is not always on your end! (talking about ME, if anyone is wondering)

The measurement process isn't going to be perfect when the device is one that is designed to mangle the sound such as Scream. I don't find that Scream adds any latency at any setting - I don't hear comb filtering when testing it in parallel. There's no reason for a distortion device to add latency unless they are doing something advanced under the hood. But again, it's a mangling device, so it's not easy to hear or to test. For example, normally you can use a null test (inverting the polarity of one of the two parallel paths), but you have to match levels perfect - and once you go and distort and EQ the signal as Scream does, you'll never get a perfect cancel, even at it's most subtle settings.

But just for grins, let's say one of the modes gave you latency - the only way you'd run into this is if you automated the mode setting. In this case it would be easy enough to also automate the bypass on the VGM-01, or switch between two different VGM-01s (they are extremely efficient).

[Puniho]

Ok, that makes sense to me. And it leads me to my other nagging question: how about delays and reverbs? Do they cause phasing problems we need to be concerned about? From my own experiments I've discovered the chorus type devices like Polar and Echobode give he largest readings. But how much of that is the intended effect? After all they have parameters where we can alter the phasing . Is it better to correct for audible problems there rather than using the VMG further down the chain?

[selig]

Ok, that makes sense to me. And it leads me to my other nagging question: how about delays and reverbs? Do they cause phasing problems we need to be concerned about? From my own experiments I've discovered the chorus type devices like Polar and Echobode give he largest readings. But how much of that is the intended effect? After all they have parameters where we can alter the phasing . Is it better to correct for audible problems there rather than using the VMG further down the chain?

Delays and reverbs are delayed by definition, so no they don't cause problems.
Polar has it's latency listed in the manual, it's up in the double-digit millisecond range depending on the algorithm chosen, and Echobode is a delay.

Plus these effects already have a built in dry/wet control, so if you use those you won't have any issues.

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[lowpryo]

*Update*

After another examine session,i have these extra findings,which after all this time using REason,never actually came to my attention straight away...i did'nt think they needed to,but,live 'n' learn as you do. =)

Here's a list of stock devices that i find certain 'mis-measurements' with so far..
1 dry source & 1 duplicated 'dry/wet' channel were used (so no confusion with fx sends/returns was introduced.)

These are stock devices that can take an audio input in whatever way they do,some have wet/dry control,and some are directly fed with no input (dry/wet) controls.
Certain fx are active by default and use phase/filter cutoff's or db for the effect,some are dry until engaged.

1.Malstrom
2.Pulveriser
3.Alligator
4.Scream
5.Line 6's (both)
6.Mclass compressor
7.DDL-1 delay
8.D-11
9.ECF-42 filter
10.CF-101 chorus

As mentioned,some fx 'rely' on delay to make the fx,but i would expect input devices like the Malstrom not to have DB levels that are not giving null results.
The VMG in such cases cannot compensate because the real differences are DB,not time based issues.

Basically what some devices are doing is adding or subtracting gain!!

Hopefully this is usefull to others..
Cheerz.

I'm a little confused by the practical application here. why are you looking to get null results? the goal of using parallel FX is to add character to your signal that isn't originally there, right? so why are you testing things to null? VMG is used to compensate for delay to fix phasing issues, but it's not meant to help null anything...

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[Puniho]

Ok, that makes sense to me. And it leads me to my other nagging question: how about delays and reverbs? Do they cause phasing problems we need to be concerned about? From my own experiments I've discovered the chorus type devices like Polar and Echobode give he largest readings. But how much of that is the intended effect? After all they have parameters where we can alter the phasing . Is it better to correct for audible problems there rather than using the VMG further down the chain?

Delays and reverbs are delayed by definition, so no they don't cause problems.
Polar has it's latency listed in the manual, it's up in the double-digit millisecond range depending on the algorithm chosen, and Echobode is a delay.

Plus these effects already have a built in dry/wet control, so if you use those you won't have any issues.

I kindof always thought that was the case, but not being highly technical in nature, I begin to doubt myself. I thought I had read somewhere here about reverbs causing phasing issues on parallel channels? Echobode is also a chorus type of effect, no..? Again, I dont fully understand why latency is considered a big issue on chorus effects and not others. All I know is that when I did try VGM on Polar I definitely hear a distinct improvement in sound. And how about EQ devices like the one used in the video by Eauhm? Again, I have some vague recollection of having read somewhere that EQs work by using micro delays, which again, I dont fully understand, but surely if you start mucking around with timing at the sample level you are also interfering with the intended effect?

Thank you for your patience.

[Puniho]

I'm a little confused by the practical application here. why are you looking to get null results? the goal of using parallel FX is to add character to your signal that isn't originally there, right? so why are you testing things to null? VMG is used to compensate for delay to fix phasing issues, but it's not meant to help null anything...

The purpose of what i post is this--- REason has a 'built in' problem with core fx phasing,due to db mis-matching.
The cancellation tests 'prove' the VMG- or any other compensation device,cannot deal with internal 'programme issues'- and mixes will always sound dull,lack clarity/punch if a null signal cannot be produced.

You will also find interesting reverse fx results with invertion-- so this basically also acts as a double whammy-- your getting reverse effects,which in itself can be 'usefull'

So, you are suggesting that the inconsistent readings with VGM are the result of this "db mismatching"..?

As an aside, I have to say, I'm surprised at the almost deafening silence surrounding this subject! Not like how I remember the PUF at all at all!

[lowpryo]

I'm a little confused by the practical application here. why are you looking to get null results? the goal of using parallel FX is to add character to your signal that isn't originally there, right? so why are you testing things to null? VMG is used to compensate for delay to fix phasing issues, but it's not meant to help null anything...

The purpose of what i post is this--- REason has a 'built in' problem with core fx phasing,due to db mis-matching.
The cancellation tests 'prove' the VMG- or any other compensation device,cannot deal with internal 'programme issues'- and mixes will always sound dull,lack clarity/punch if a null signal cannot be produced.

You will also find interesting reverse fx results with invertion-- so this basically also acts as a double whammy-- your getting reverse effects,which in itself can be 'usefull'

you seem to be basing all of this on some theory that if signals can't null, there are phasing problems... but that is just totally inaccurate. in order to get a null, the two signals need to be IDENTICAL. so are you saying that any time you have 2 signals that aren't identical, clarity is lost? are you saying that any time you add distortion or delay or FX to a signal, they are "dB mismatched" and can't be used? i'm just SO confused by your logic here...

[mcatalao]

Yep, that... I don't get why are you expecting a given processing device wont have a different level compared to the original. Simply think of an eq, it works by attenuating and amplifying specific frequency ranges. But the simple fact you put the device on will make it apply filter resonance at the crosses. The simple fact of you saying there are db mismatches is an inconsistency, where db is only a measure of intensity (and a relative one). And what about that measure, at what frequency was it done?

Imho, there is no practical application for this. Suppose a different processor, like Scream. The process of adding harmonic distortion to a chain will add content to specific frequencies of the original sound (ignore the latency/phase issue). And this applies for every device.

After processing apparent and definitive level changes and you act upon that change with you channel fader. Its like that on analogue and in digital since always...

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[lowpryo]

Yes i am basing this on signals not nulling will lead to shortcomings of outputs and fx,which is totally accurate for me to suggest,imo.
If the signals don't null dry,once they are reverted to normal,there will be losses instead of boosts due to the offset(phase.)

but why are you judging the quality of an FX unit based on how it nulls dry, when it will never be used like that in a real situation? FX units aren't meant to be used 100% dry. they are used wet, which will then NEVER null, because they are intentionally adding character and changing the signal.

the reality is, any time you combine ANY two sounds with overlapping frequencies, there WILL be both "losses" and "boosts". when people talk about phase problems, they aren't referring to two signals combining and causing a "loss" because that happens literally ALL THE TIME in every mix.

a phase PROBLEM only occurs when this creates sounds that are AUDIBLY UNPLEASANT i.e. significant cancellation or comb filtering. there is nothing inherently wrong with two signals combining and cancelling each other out at certain points, unless you HEAR it. so stop trying to use your brain and start using your ears.

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[lowpryo]

so stop trying to use your brain and start using your ears.

Lol- i prefere using eyes/ears/feelings and brain combined =) [] perhaps you could try it sometime
I think i'm about done here..

if you think you objectively lose quality every time two signals combine and overlap in a way that cancels at certain frequencies, then you do not have enough knowledge on this subject to discuss it at the level that you're trying to. so yes, you are definitely done here!

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[lowpryo]

...then you do not have enough knowledge on this subject to discuss it at the level that you're trying to. so yes, you are definitely done here!

Please share some of yours??.. help me understand this underlaying problem of fine adjustment ason obviously lacks...

what i've been trying to explain is that what you call a "problem" is not actually a real problem. an FX signal not nulling with the original signal does not indicate a "problem". phase interference is going to occur whenever ANY two sounds are combined and it's not a "problem" unless it audibly creates one. yet you are ignoring my posts and continuing on with your ignorant and illogical complaints that are not based in reality.

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[selig]

I'm a little confused by the practical application here. why are you looking to get null results? the goal of using parallel FX is to add character to your signal that isn't originally there, right? so why are you testing things to null? VMG is used to compensate for delay to fix phasing issues, but it's not meant to help null anything...

The purpose of what i post is this--- REason has a 'built in' problem with core fx phasing,due to db mis-matching.
The cancellation tests 'prove' the VMG- or any other compensation device,cannot deal with internal 'programme issues'- and mixes will always sound dull,lack clarity/punch if a null signal cannot be produced.

You will also find interesting reverse fx results with invertion-- so this basically also acts as a double whammy-- your getting reverse effects,which in itself can be 'usefull'

Wait, I thought you agreed the differences under discussion were based on LEVEL. Yet, you say here the problem is with PHASING, which by definition means DELAY.

Decibel differences as we agreed upon absolutely do not cause mixes to always sound dull, lack clarity/punch etc.

I think there is a fundamental concept being overlooked here…

[selig]

Yes i am basing this on signals not nulling will lead to shortcomings of outputs and fx,which is totally accurate for me to suggest,imo.

And everyone here is saying no, this is absolutely not true. When there is a level difference of less than 1/10 of a dB between the input vs the output, all you get is a level difference. Nothing more, nothing less. That is all.

If the signals don't null dry,once they are reverted to normal,there will be losses instead of boosts due to the offset(phase.)

Not if the reason they don't null is that there is a 1/10 of a dB difference between them, as in the example we were discussing here. In that case phase absolutely plays no part in the equation!!!

They can still be used of course and may sound great,but it will be a slight deception to your ears and metering of what could be achieved,and will lack the full power of the fx.

If by lack of full power you mean that there is a 1/10 dB difference, than I would totally agree. Not that it lacks MUCH power - after all, it could be the effect is ADDING that 1/10 dB (all we know is there is a DIFFERENCE, not which one is louder) So would adding gain make something "lack the full power"?

Sometimes music and metering is not about how loud a signal is,but how quiet it is... meters can show definate readings while your ears 'hear nothing'--- what's your lowest normal range of hearing with speakers and headphones??
Mine differs with environment background noise,as yours will also... i get 'audible' headphone readings around -80db // -60db depending on the background noise.

Try getting a 1ms ddl delay to null-- with or without VMG-- you will see for yourself using the big meter,but you may not hear it.
Ok?

Try getting a 1 ms ddl delay to null WITH WHAT? You need two signals to get a null, and you've only mentioned one.

Plus I got lost in your example about how loud vs how soft a sound is. It's all relative to me.

Also add Neptune & BV512 to previous list,as they are stock devices-- we have'nt gone into other territory-- yet..

There's a tread for this if you're interested.
http://reasontalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7477975