The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
could I make my own VU/PPM meter?
Old 24th July 2020
  #1
could I make my own VU/PPM meter?

I was wondering if it's possible to design/make my own dual VU/PPM meter? I know we are living in 2020 but there's just something nice about having a real analog meter in front of you, has anyone done this before who could help?
Old 25th July 2020
  #2
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pencilextremist View Post
I was wondering if it's possible to design/make my own dual VU/PPM meter? I know we are living in 2020 but there's just something nice about having a real analog meter in front of you, has anyone done this before who could help?
So, you want to build one of these from scratch?

Or a PPM physical, mechanical meter?

Or...do you want to build one of these...from scratch?



You can buy either a physical meter and build a driver, or you can buy the LED version, pretty much ready to go.

The next thing to note is a VU meter is an average meter. It's not a peak meter, nor an RMS meter. Its indications are useful in judging relative volume, but it's not a loudness meter either. The VU meter was intended to aid in adjusting levels to how the would appear on another VU meter.

The PPM is different, it's a semi-peak meter (not true peak) with an entirely different scale and reference. The scale is logarithmic, black, and uses a white pointer. The two meters can co-exist, but they show completely different things.

Then you'll find the true-peak meters in a DAW, which are useful in display of actual peaks relative to 0dBFS. They are not loudness meters, or average meters, but represent, hopefully, true peaks no matter how short.

Either way, if you're mixing in a DAW, its own meters have one very important advantage: they're calibrated. Any external meter you get will have to be calibrated and referenced properly to be useful. Neither a VU meter (led or mechanical), nor a PPM (same options) will display the same as your DAW meter, and you will have to make a decision as to what 0VU is relative to 0dBFS.

If you want a physical mechanical meter, eBay is your friend. Many on the used market for not too much money. Not bad for LED meters either, though there are other sources too.
Old 25th July 2020
  #3
yes to design and build one from scratch including a schematic, must be all analog as well, it will be need to be adjustable as well where it can be calibrated

I know I could just do this all in a DAW but I want meters in front of me all the time so I don't have to rely on staring a a screen. I like to see big meters!

My absolute worst nightmare to is be looking at bright LED's all day, I'm making it for the precise reason to avoid that crap, this will have to be visually stimulating and I'm going to make a box, drill the holes, do everything, I can't see it being too complex, what I need to know more about is circuit design and basically how to do it, are there any books anyone could recommend for this kind of thing? I don't want links to youtube, I want real knowledge, this is just a personal project for my own fun/pleasure.

I do a LOT of music production and mixing and would find on of these to be invaluable despite all the modern metering and digital meters in a DAW.

so to make it clear I want BOTH a VU and PPM meter two mono ones so four meters and all in one box, it's very likely I'll use vintage meters as well not new ones because I prefer the way they look.
Old 25th July 2020
  #6
I'm in the UK not USA just thought I'd add.
Old 25th July 2020
  #7
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by pencilextremist View Post
yes to design and build one from scratch including a schematic, must be all analog as well, it will be need to be adjustable as well where it can be calibrated ....
Hmmmm.... it seems you're in need of a line-level version of a top-of-my-head solution I had proposed for another GS member. Just leave the gain down and it might save you a lot of work. It's here:
Inline XLR VU Meter
Old 25th July 2020
  #8
Lives for gear
 

JLM audio sells various metering DIY kits: https://www.jlmaudio.com/shop/vu-met...y_tax_prices=1
Old 26th July 2020
  #9
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
Yes, but there are so many others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
Most of the schematics shown on the first page are wrong. A real VU meter is an AC meter with internal rectifiers, and should be driven through the proper build-out resistor/pad from an AC audio source. No diodes, no caps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
The article is chock-full of errors and inaccuracies. I won't list them here, but it's so dumbed-down as to be largely in error. One example, a dBFS meter does not display "volume", and a VU meter doesn't respond like we hear.

Here's a better reference.
Old 26th July 2020
  #10
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pencilextremist View Post
I'm in the UK not USA just thought I'd add.
That explains the PPM.

Ward-Beck made a 4-meter panel with two VU and two PPM, plus adjustable calibration gain, etc. I'd watch for one on eBay. It's not a construction project, but the end result will be way better.

Meters are all DC movements. For a meter to read an AC voltage, like audio, there is a rectifier, and in the case of the VU, it's inside the meter.

Note that while a VU meter can be driven from an opamp via resistor, to realize a PPM you need the meter movement (a linear DC movemet) and extensive driver electronics. The electronics establish the ballistics and log scaling, so a peak detector, controlled release circuit, and a logarithmic amplifier to get the required extended dynamic range scale. Not a project for the beginner.
Old 27th July 2020
  #11
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

A few more thoughts.

Keep an eye out on eBay for a Ward Beck VU/PPM panel, also sold under WBS. It's really exactly what you want, and done properly according to all the standards. Usually go for 200-400 pounds, but it's all done, and in a box. You can't duplicate this DIY for any less and do any better.

If you want to go a bit non-standard, there's the Dorrough Loudness Meter. It's kind of an oddity, but did find it's way into many facilities to the point of becoming a sort of standard in its own right. The first problem is it's not a VU meter or a PPM, and not a legitimate loudness meter either, despite the unfortunate name. It is, however, and extended scale average and true peak meter on the same display. A PPM is not true peak, and a Vu meter doesn't have the extended scale. But it's a pretty and impressive display. And useful. A single meter handles two channels, and the used analog version is very affordable now. Again, not "standard", and I don't usually recommend them, but might be something worth looking at if you can't find the WBS panel. I'm not sure how they proliferated in the UK, but they're easy to find in the US.
Old 30th July 2020
  #12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post
Yes, but there are so many others.
Most of the schematics shown on the first page are wrong. A real VU meter is an AC meter with internal rectifiers, and should be driven through the proper build-out resistor/pad from an AC audio source. No diodes, no caps.
The article is chock-full of errors and inaccuracies. I won't list them here, but it's so dumbed-down as to be largely in error. One example, a dBFS meter does not display "volume", and a VU meter doesn't respond like we hear.

Here's a better reference.
Not knowing exactly what the OP wanted I found some information for him. Sorry if it "offended" you.

This from a well respected source. https://sonicscoop.com/2018/03/29/ev...o-meteringand/ and from the WWW.

Why use a VU METER?

Hidden Secret #1: It’s Built Like a Human Ear

FS meters are technically more accurate, yes. You see each momentary peak in the volume level.

But our ears don’t hear sound like that.

person listening to music with headphones

We hear sound just like a VU meter… in averages!

So even though we’re looking at an “inaccurate” meter, we’re seeing how our ears are perceiving the instrument.

And ultimately, our ears are what’s important. Accuracy be damned.

Another way of thinking about it is this: FS meters show volume. VU meters show loudness.

When you put a VU meter on your instrument, you’re seeing the energy and intensity of the sound. You’re seeing how your listeners are going to hear it.


There are numerous other references to this "fact" on the WWW and this is what I was taught back in College.

As to the inaccuracies in the article quoted I would be interested in knowing them so if you could please elaborate I would be grateful.

Thanks in advance!
Old 30th July 2020
  #13
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
Not knowing exactly what the OP wanted I found some information for him. Sorry if it "offended" you.

This from a well respected source. https://sonicscoop.com/2018/03/29/ev...o-meteringand/ and from the WWW.

Why use a VU METER?

Hidden Secret #1: It’s Built Like a Human Ear
It is not. The ear responds in a manner of a dynamically changing spectrally weighted RMS detector. In other words, it's sensitivity changes with frequency AND level. The VU is an average responding meter, not RMS. It's spectral sensitivity, or frequency response is flat by definition regardless of level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
FS meters are technically more accurate, yes. You see each momentary peak in the volume level.
While true the scale is expanded at the top, it's not more accurate. You do not see momentary peaks in volume level, you see peaks in meter response as it's not a peak-responding meter. The expanded scale was because building a log-scale mechanical meter is very difficult and expensive, so the meter displays linear voltage, which results in an expanded dB scale at the top. The VU meter is a Volume Unit meter, but since volume is assumed to be identical to loudness, it fails to live up to it's name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
But our ears don’t hear sound like that.

person listening to music with headphones

We hear sound just like a VU meter… in averages!

So even though we’re looking at an “inaccurate” meter, we’re seeing how our ears are perceiving the instrument.
Nope, not at all. If that were true there would have been no need for 60 years of research into how to actually measure and quantify true "loudness". Many papers, many meter attempts, ITU-BS.1770-4 is what finally became accepted. And guess what? It's NOT a VU meter!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
And ultimately, our ears are what’s important. Accuracy be damned.

Another way of thinking about it is this: FS meters show volume. VU meters show loudness.
No, and no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
When you put a VU meter on your instrument, you’re seeing the energy and intensity of the sound. You’re seeing how your listeners are going to hear it.[/I][/B]
No, you see only what another user will see on a standardized VU meter. And THAT was the entire point of the VU meter in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
There are numerous other references to this "fact" on the WWW and this is what I was taught back in College.
Review the "facts". I linked a source or two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
As to the inaccuracies in the article quoted I would be interested in knowing them so if you could please elaborate I would be grateful.

Thanks in advance!
You're welcome.

Oh, and by the way, the meter pictured in your linked article isn't even a VU meter at all! Not by any definition.
Old 30th July 2020
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post
[/b][/i]It is not. The ear responds in a manner of a dynamically changing spectrally weighted RMS detector. In other words, it's sensitivity changes with frequency AND level. The VU is an average responding meter, not RMS. It's spectral sensitivity, or frequency response is flat by definition regardless of level.
While true the scale is expanded at the top, it's not more accurate. You do not see momentary peaks in volume level, you see peaks in meter response as it's not a peak-responding meter. The expanded scale was because building a log-scale mechanical meter is very difficult and expensive, so the meter displays linear voltage, which results in an expanded dB scale at the top. The VU meter is a Volume Unit meter, but since volume is assumed to be identical to loudness, it fails to live up to it's name.
Nope, not at all. If that were true there would have been no need for 60 years of research into how to actually measure and quantify true "loudness". Many papers, many meter attempts, ITU-BS.1770-4 is what finally became accepted. And guess what? It's NOT a VU meter!
No, and no.
No, you see only what another user will see on a standardized VU meter. And THAT was the entire point of the VU meter in the first place.
Review the "facts". I linked a source or two.

You're welcome.

Oh, and by the way, the meter pictured in your linked article isn't even a VU meter at all! Not by any definition.
You say a lot of things but never answered my question.

"The article is chock-full of errors and inaccuracies. I won't list them here, but it's so dumbed-down as to be largely in error. One example, a dBFS meter does not display "volume", and a VU meter doesn't respond like we hear.the VU Meters"

My question is what are the errors???? and or inaccuracies???

The article you supplied a link to would be suitable for an EE and, IMHO, not for the average reader.
Old 30th July 2020
  #15
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
You say a lot of things but never answered my question.

"The article is chock-full of errors and inaccuracies. I won't list them here, but it's so dumbed-down as to be largely in error. One example, a dBFS meter does not display "volume", and a VU meter doesn't respond like we hear.the VU Meters"

My question is what are the errors???? and or inaccuracies???

The article you supplied a link to would be suitable for an EE and, IMHO, not for the average reader.
So, you actually want me to dissect the article? I have limited time, but here's a start.

The article is The VU Meter: The Best Kept Secret of the Pros

1. The title is completely inaccurate. The VU meter is hardly a secret. It's been standardized since the early 1940s, and has appeared on every broadcast audio console and recording console, every professional analog recording device in the USA since then. Its specifications have been published and are clearly stated. Every broadcast and recording engineer and operator has depended on them. How is that a secret at all?

2. "Once DAWs came around, programmers switched to FS meters (full scale meters) to measure volume." Wrong, in several ways. A) There is no such thing as an FS meter. There are peak meters scaled to dBFS. Even the term dBFS was not the initial name for the scale. B) A peak meter scaled in dBFS does not measure volume. It measures the instantaneous peak value of the signal. That has very little to do with volume. Volume is equated with Loudness. Loudness takes time to be perceived. A true peak meter will read full scale on a peak so short and fast as to be nearly inaudible. That's not a volume meter at all, but it does give the user some very important and valuable information.

3. "Since then, you’ve seen fewer and fewer VU meters on the market. And the pros are just fine with that…" Nonsense. VU meters proliferate in various forms today. They are still a valuable tool, and a PPM or True Peak meter does not replace them. It's common now to have a bar-graph meter (that's not a digital meter, necessarily) that shares the same basic scale and response time as a standard VU meter along with a true-peak meter or peak indicating light.

4. "...Because it’s a closely guarded secret that VU meters do more than just show the volume of an instrument. A VU meter shows the AVERAGE moment-to-moment volume of an instrument. This is the opposite of the FS meters in your DAWs. They show the EXACT moment-to-moment volume of an instrument.

So technically, VU meters are less accurate than their newer FS cousins. They’re slower."
Wrong. Just because they are slower doesn't mean they are less accurate. The true peak meter and the VU meter are both accurate, but they show different kinds of information. A peak meter cannot, and does not display average level. Does that make it inaccurate? NO! A VU cannot and does not display true peak data. Does that make it inaccurate? NO! The statement is completely wrong.

5. "We hear sound just like a VU meter… in averages!" Wrong! We do NOT hear averages! Human hearing perceives loudness as a complex blend of several qualities, RMS (RMS is NOT the same as Average!!!), spectral density (how much of the total audio spectrum a sound occupies), and with highly non-flat response curve that changes with SPL. Take a 1kHz tone on a VU meter at -10...and listen. We can easily hear that, and if we turn our monitor down so that tone is somewhere around normal speech level (about 65dB SPL) we can still very easily hear the tone. Now put up a 20Hz tone at the same level on the VU meter. If you can hear it at all, it's very, very quiet. Yet the VU meter (and the peak meter) will read that tone at the very same level. How is that like human hearing? And that's just one example of the disparity, there are thousands.

6. "Another way of thinking about it is this: FS meters show volume. VU meters show loudness." The author has just made up his own definition of volume and loudness. A dBFS meter (he's still using FS, which is wrong) shows the instantaneous peak level of a signal relative to 0dBFS of a digital signal. The VU meter has no reference relative to any digital signal. A VU meter does NOT display loudness, despite what it is named. The example in 5. shows just one way in which that is the case. Ears do not responded equally to all frequencies, and ears respond to RMS value, not average, and ears respond to spectral density, none of which a VU can display. But that doesn't make the meter wrong, it just means you have to understand what it's telling you. A VU meter displays what audio will look like on another VU meter, and is average-based. That's it, that's all. It's not any more wrong than saying a hammer is a bad tool because it can't cut wood.

7. "When you put a VU meter on your instrument, you’re seeing the energy and intensity of the sound. You’re seeing how your listeners are going to hear it." Wrong. A VU meter is not measuring the intensity of the sound, it's measuring the average level of an electrical signal. Between the VU meter and your listeners there are many things, amps and speakers being the big ones. The meter bouncing along at Zero can be either quiet or deafening depending on how the lister adjusts his system. You see, the meter is measuring an electrical signal, not the sound itself. And your mix will sound very different at high SPL vs low SPL, even though the VU will read the same.

8. "That means it’s way more useful for your mix. For example, let’s think about a bass guitar. If you look at your DAW’s FS meter while it’s playing, you’ll see the bar jumping up and down every millisecond. To your eyes, it might look like the bass is extremely dynamic. But to your ears, it just sounds like a nice fat bass.

Now, let’s put a VU meter on that same bass guitar and check it out. You’ll see that where it was jumping up and down 10 dB before, it’s staying around the same area on the volume meter.

So now your meter matches your ears. You can see that it’s not a heavily dynamic part. In fact, it’s staying around the same volume the entire time."


The above is a study in not understanding what either meter is telling you. It implies the peak meter is wrong, or telling you something that is not true. It's not wrong, it's telling you exactly what it's supposed to, a display of instantaneous peak. The VU meter isn't right either, because if you listened to the loudness of the bass guitar line, then played a ringing bell so it deflected the VU meter to the same degree, you'll find they are completely different in loudness.

9. "Hidden Secret #2: It Can Save Your Track’s Dynamics"
There's simply too much wrong here to go into. But simply put, if you're mixing with your meter instead of your ears, you'll never get it right. A VU meter doesn't respond like human hearing, neither does a peak meter. Subjective mix judgments must be made by ear, and must be made without being glued to any meter...because the meters are all lying! The "rules" in this section are taking amateur recordists down a very wrong path that will insure they remain amateurs.

10. "Hidden Secret #3: It Can Show You What’s Missing in Your Mix"
This section actually has some reasonable information, but...again, the assumption is the VU meter responds like your ears. Again, it does not, and I've already given examples. However, there are better tools. The ITU BS.1770 meter, or a realization of it in software, is not hard to find, nor expensive. It's much closer to human loudness perception. Orban offers a free meter app for computers that gives the use multiple types of meters, including real, actual, loudness meters. Why would anyone use a VU meter in a way for which it was never intended?

11. "Hidden Secret #4: It Can Find the Sweet Spot".
This is about gain-staging to find the sweet spot in the system. Frankly, while you can sort of use the VU for that, if you really want to do it right, what matters is the peak levels. No peaks should clip any stage (something the VU won't show you, BTW) and yet no stage should have radically more or less headroom. If you want to properly gain stage, why would you use a meter that can't display what is really the main concern: maximizing S/N while minimizing distortion? The VU is the wrong tool for that job.

...and that's all I have time for. That should be enough to make the point. The article is so dumbed down as to be inaccurate. Clearly the author doesn't understand what the VU meter was designed to do, what it cannot do, and what it does do very well.
Old 31st July 2020
  #16
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post
So, you actually want me to dissect the article? I have limited time, but here's a start.

The info sheet you listed is mainly designed for a Electrical Engineer and not for the home D. Maybe you should write up your own sheet and post it on the WWW.

The article is The VU Meter: The Best Kept Secret of the Pros

1. The title is completely inaccurate. The VU meter is hardly a secret. It's been standardized since the early 1940s, and has appeared on every broadcast audio console and recording console, every professional analog recording device in the USA since then. Its specifications have been published and are clearly stated. Every broadcast and recording engineer and operator has depended on them. How is that a secret at all?

2. "Once DAWs came around, programmers switched to FS meters (full scale meters) to measure volume." Wrong, in several ways. A) There is no such thing as an FS meter. There are peak meters scaled to dBFS. Even the term dBFS was not the initial name for the scale. B) A peak meter scaled in dBFS does not measure volume. It measures the instantaneous peak value of the signal. That has very little to do with volume. Volume is equated with Loudness. Loudness takes time to be perceived. A true peak meter will read full scale on a peak so short and fast as to be nearly inaudible. That's not a volume meter at all, but it does give the user some very important and valuable information.

3. "Since then, you’ve seen fewer and fewer VU meters on the market. And the pros are just fine with that…" Nonsense. VU meters proliferate in various forms today. They are still a valuable tool, and a PPM or True Peak meter does not replace them. It's common now to have a bar-graph meter (that's not a digital meter, necessarily) that shares the same basic scale and response time as a standard VU meter along with a true-peak meter or peak indicating light.

4. "...Because it’s a closely guarded secret that VU meters do more than just show the volume of an instrument. A VU meter shows the AVERAGE moment-to-moment volume of an instrument. This is the opposite of the FS meters in your DAWs. They show the EXACT moment-to-moment volume of an instrument.

So technically, VU meters are less accurate than their newer FS cousins. They’re slower."
Wrong. Just because they are slower doesn't mean they are less accurate. The true peak meter and the VU meter are both accurate, but they show different kinds of information. A peak meter cannot, and does not display average level. Does that make it inaccurate? NO! A VU cannot and does not display true peak data. Does that make it inaccurate? NO! The statement is completely wrong.

5. "We hear sound just like a VU meter… in averages!" Wrong! We do NOT hear averages! Human hearing perceives loudness as a complex blend of several qualities, RMS (RMS is NOT the same as Average!!!), spectral density (how much of the total audio spectrum a sound occupies), and with highly non-flat response curve that changes with SPL. Take a 1kHz tone on a VU meter at -10...and listen. We can easily hear that, and if we turn our monitor down so that tone is somewhere around normal speech level (about 65dB SPL) we can still very easily hear the tone. Now put up a 20Hz tone at the same level on the VU meter. If you can hear it at all, it's very, very quiet. Yet the VU meter (and the peak meter) will read that tone at the very same level. How is that like human hearing? And that's just one example of the disparity, there are thousands.

6. "Another way of thinking about it is this: FS meters show volume. VU meters show loudness." The author has just made up his own definition of volume and loudness. A dBFS meter (he's still using FS, which is wrong) shows the instantaneous peak level of a signal relative to 0dBFS of a digital signal. The VU meter has no reference relative to any digital signal. A VU meter does NOT display loudness, despite what it is named. The example in 5. shows just one way in which that is the case. Ears do not responded equally to all frequencies, and ears respond to RMS value, not average, and ears respond to spectral density, none of which a VU can display. But that doesn't make the meter wrong, it just means you have to understand what it's telling you. A VU meter displays what audio will look like on another VU meter, and is average-based. That's it, that's all. It's not any more wrong than saying a hammer is a bad tool because it can't cut wood.

7. "When you put a VU meter on your instrument, you’re seeing the energy and intensity of the sound. You’re seeing how your listeners are going to hear it." Wrong. A VU meter is not measuring the intensity of the sound, it's measuring the average level of an electrical signal. Between the VU meter and your listeners there are many things, amps and speakers being the big ones. The meter bouncing along at Zero can be either quiet or deafening depending on how the lister adjusts his system. You see, the meter is measuring an electrical signal, not the sound itself. And your mix will sound very different at high SPL vs low SPL, even though the VU will read the same.

8. "That means it’s way more useful for your mix. For example, let’s think about a bass guitar. If you look at your DAW’s FS meter while it’s playing, you’ll see the bar jumping up and down every millisecond. To your eyes, it might look like the bass is extremely dynamic. But to your ears, it just sounds like a nice fat bass.

Now, let’s put a VU meter on that same bass guitar and check it out. You’ll see that where it was jumping up and down 10 dB before, it’s staying around the same area on the volume meter.

So now your meter matches your ears. You can see that it’s not a heavily dynamic part. In fact, it’s staying around the same volume the entire time."


The above is a study in not understanding what either meter is telling you. It implies the peak meter is wrong, or telling you something that is not true. It's not wrong, it's telling you exactly what it's supposed to, a display of instantaneous peak. The VU meter isn't right either, because if you listened to the loudness of the bass guitar line, then played a ringing bell so it deflected the VU meter to the same degree, you'll find they are completely different in loudness.

9. "Hidden Secret #2: It Can Save Your Track’s Dynamics"
There's simply too much wrong here to go into. But simply put, if you're mixing with your meter instead of your ears, you'll never get it right. A VU meter doesn't respond like human hearing, neither does a peak meter. Subjective mix judgments must be made by ear, and must be made without being glued to any meter...because the meters are all lying! The "rules" in this section are taking amateur recordists down a very wrong path that will insure they remain amateurs.

10. "Hidden Secret #3: It Can Show You What’s Missing in Your Mix"
This section actually has some reasonable information, but...again, the assumption is the VU meter responds like your ears. Again, it does not, and I've already given examples. However, there are better tools. The ITU BS.1770 meter, or a realization of it in software, is not hard to find, nor expensive. It's much closer to human loudness perception. Orban offers a free meter app for computers that gives the use multiple types of meters, including real, actual, loudness meters. Why would anyone use a VU meter in a way for which it was never intended?

11. "Hidden Secret #4: It Can Find the Sweet Spot".
This is about gain-staging to find the sweet spot in the system. Frankly, while you can sort of use the VU for that, if you really want to do it right, what matters is the peak levels. No peaks should clip any stage (something the VU won't show you, BTW) and yet no stage should have radically more or less headroom. If you want to properly gain stage, why would you use a meter that can't display what is really the main concern: maximizing S/N while minimizing distortion? The VU is the wrong tool for that job.

...and that's all I have time for. That should be enough to make the point. The article is so dumbed down as to be inaccurate. Clearly the author doesn't understand what the VU meter was designed to do, what it cannot do, and what it does do very well.
The sheet you linked to is designed for an Electrical Engineer and not for the home DIYer. Maybe YOU should write up a description on post it on the WWW since you seem to find fault with everything else. FWIW
Old 31st July 2020
  #17
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Hahaha it turned into a meter dlck measuring contest fast. Classic.

Op, there is a guy on ebay who sells VU meters AND driver boards. I think he's in Lithuania. Been ogling them myself as I feel the same. 25 quid for just the driver board for stereo that goes with any normal VU needle meters or 120 quid for totally finished VU meter box. Nothing like a real needle. Tells stories nothing on a screen can. Not gone there myself yet though.
Old 31st July 2020
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Hahaha it turned into a meter dlck measuring contest fast. Classic.

Op, there is a guy on ebay who sells VU meters AND driver boards. I think he's in Lithuania. Been ogling them myself as I feel the same. 25 quid for just the driver board for stereo that goes with any normal VU needle meters or 120 quid for totally finished VU meter box. Nothing like a real needle. Tells stories nothing on a screen can. Not gone there myself yet though.
I was originally trying to help a potential VU meter DIYer. I don't know what provoked jaddie. Anyway on GS for every post there is an opposite and contradictory post. It is just a natural law kinda like Newton's third law of motion>>>

Formally stated, Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object.

I guess I will simply bow out and let jaddie take over.
Old 31st July 2020
  #19
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
I was originally trying to help a potential VU meter DIYer.
As was I.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
I don't know what "provoked" jaddie.
(quotes added by me) The posting of misinformation that would hinder...not help... The OP.

When someone is clearly a novice, you will not help them by handing them incorrect information. They'll adopt it as fact, and proceed down an errant pathway.

I'm not provoked at all. That's just how you read being corrected. You asked me to detail my objections to the article, I did that. Did you even read it?

I'm motivated to provide good and accurate information to those asking for it. But if I see misinformation posted as fact, I'm going to "fix" it too.

Hopefully, in the processes, the OP and other readers gained some knowledge of the single most common level indicating device in the world for the last 80 years.

Newton has nothing to do with it.
Old 31st July 2020
  #20
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
The sheet you linked to is designed for an Electrical Engineer and not for the home DIYer. Maybe YOU should write up a description on post it on the WWW since you seem to find fault with everything else. FWIW
No, it written for someone who seeks accurate knowledge, which comes at the cost of learning. Nothing in anything I linked to is terribly engineering centric. Wiki dumbs it down a bit, but is OK, if you need less information.

Simple is not always correct, which I've demonstrated.

I'm confused as to why wrong information is accepted and desired, and right information is viewed as a "meter dlck measuring contest". I was asked to detail my objections, I wasn't going to do that initially. I don't care who is right, just so long as the OP gets correct information.
Old 31st July 2020
  #21
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

pencilextremist is a "novice" now? lol Never been my impression....this is getting better ......
Old 31st July 2020
  #22
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
pencilextremist is a "novice" now? lol Never been my impression....this is getting better ......
Quote:
Originally Posted by pencilextremist View Post
I was wondering if it's possible to design/make my own dual VU/PPM meter? I know we are living in 2020 but there's just something nice about having a real analog meter in front of you, has anyone done this before who could help?
Look at the question. He wouldn't be asking that if he'd done it before.
Old 31st July 2020
  #23
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post
Look at the question. He wouldn't be asking that if he'd done it before.
Built a VU? No. But I never had the impression he was an engineering novice that doesn't know what one is or what to do with one. Nor would such a novice wven know why you would want a real one today.
Old 31st July 2020
  #24
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Built a VU? No. But I never had the impression he was an engineering novice that doesn't know what one is or what to do with one. Nor would such a novice wven know why you would want a real one today.
It seemed to me there was a knowledge gap because the question included building a PPM. Since a VU meter driver is just an audio amp, no problem there. But driving a PPM is much more complex than mounting a meter in a box with an amp behind it, and driver boards are not common. That’s why I outlined the differences, and suggested another approach.

I don’t mean to talk down to anyone. We’re all here to learn. The rubbish in my head might do someone some good if I share it, but I also learn new things every day.

Then there was much sharing of incorrect information, mostly about the VU meter, and things got sticky. I’m not left with any further impression of the OP’s knowledge or experience other than he didn’t know how to build his own VU/PPM meter. But the other information from other sources was just wrong, and not helpful. There was no indication that the OP didn’t understand the VU or PPM or how to use them, but he’s also not the only one reading the thread.

If you want me to just shut up and leave bad information unscathed, you’re talking to the wrong guy. If someone wants to beat me up in the process, that’s fine too, but it’s not likely to change much.
Old 31st July 2020
  #25
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

No no, was just enjoying the show really and trying to slip in where pencilextremist can find the bits to build his VU. And a little surprised to see him called a novice is all.
Old 31st July 2020
  #26
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
And a little surprised to see him called a novice is all.
It wasn’t meant as an insult or to be demeaning. I’m a novice at many things. Audio Engineering isn’t one of them, though.
Old 31st July 2020
  #27
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post
As was I.
(quotes added by me) The posting of misinformation that would hinder...not help... The OP.

When someone is clearly a novice, you will not help them by handing them incorrect information. They'll adopt it as fact, and proceed down an errant pathway.

I'm not provoked at all. That's just how you read being corrected. You asked me to detail my objections to the article, I did that. Did you even read it?

I'm motivated to provide good and accurate information to those asking for it. But if I see misinformation posted as fact, I'm going to "fix" it too.

Hopefully, in the processes, the OP and other readers gained some knowledge of the single most common level indicating device in the world for the last 80 years.

Newton has nothing to do with it.
YES I read the article. It is way over most people's need for information.

The Newton reference was a joke.

I was trying to help the OP but I guess no good deed goes unpunished on GS. No matter what someone says, someone will object to the statement GUARANTEED!!!

WOW!
Old 31st July 2020
  #28
Gear Addict
 
jaddie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe View Post
I guess no good deed goes unpunished on GS.
Agreed.
📝 Reply
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump