The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Airwindows Acceleration: AU, Mac and PC VST
Old 23rd February 2018
  #31
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by b0se View Post
You're an absolute diamond to the digital audio world @ chrisj ! Thanks so much.

I really—really—hope a DAW gets implemented using your stuff as the backbone. Imagine it!
Anybody who is able to code such a thing can just take an open source DAW, fork it, and do just that. You already have PurestDrive, Acceleration, BitShiftGain, PurestGain, TPDFDither and PurestConsole out as open source under the MIT license, and that can be used with for instance Ardour's GPL license (GPL can use MIT, MIT can't use GPL as it's more restrictive). And there will be more and more.

I can't do it, but my choices of using open source means that anyone sufficiently motivated can run off and do just that. You can even start with an existing, working open source DAW and fork that (easier than talking the DAW maintainers into doing it).

This is how I ported everything to LinuxVST. I didn't. I put out stuff as open source, and somebody who knew how, came up with a script, and it was a script I could use. So I did
Old 24th February 2018
  #32
Deleted 691ca21
Guest
I used this on a master yesterday. The hats and cymbals had been deliberately sent through distortion for a bit of a trashy sound, but it was making the very high end transients ultra pokey and fatiguing to listen to. I sent the track through TDR DeEdger, Acceleration, and TDR Slick EQ M (with a high shelf cut at 22k) in series, all with very minimal settings, and it worked a treat. The high end sounded much better when A/Bing with the original file, but none of the processors drew attention to themselves.

I was working in 48k, I understand Acceleration may work differently at different sample rates?

What I found was it was inaudible at low settings, then suddenly became audible at a slightly higher setting, as if it had triggered some threshold internally. I basically adjusted until it was audible and then backed it off a little. At max settings it was EXTREMELY audible, and not in a good way, but then I'd imagine you'd never really want that much processing.

Fantastic stuff Chris, keep it up!
Old 24th February 2018
  #33
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermetech Mastering View Post

I was working in 48k, I understand Acceleration may work differently at different sample rates?
From my experience so far using it at 96kHz (mostly on individual tracks), it sounds like it's a lot more extreme at lower rates. I still wouldn't use it at higher settings on a full mix, but it never sounds BAD, I'd say the top setting at 96kHz is comparable to the lowest setting in Average, but with a different character, and still useful.

I'd actually compare the sound of it at extreme settings to play wear in vinyl. The actual GrooveWear plugin/setting in ToVinyl evokes groove damage from tracking distortion to my ear, but the more subtle loss of high end that a record gets from being overplayed without suitable cooldown periods between plays (for the softened surfaces of the grooves to resolidify) is more like the upper range of Acceleration IMO, and I can tell that at lower sample rates it would get well beyond anything that would be pleasing in most circumstances.
Old 24th February 2018
  #34
Lives for gear
 
StoneyBCN's Avatar
 

You will see Acceleration make two little nodes (similar to Average) where it does it's thing: One at the sample rate and one at half the sample rate. I don't think the algorithm says "Let's filter frequency X, depending on sample rate" - it won't even kick in unless a certain waveform criteria is met (the zig/zag/zig Chris mentions).

I suspect that the algorithm is actually the same at any sample rate, but the difference in performance of the plugin at different sample rates is actually because the material itself that you are feeding it is different. I'm liable to be wrong about these things, of course, but here goes:

Imagine taking a bucket of 4 x 4-sized lego bricks. Try making a really rounded, smooth, and curvey "wave" shape with those lego bricks. Now, remeber that all the bricks are 4 x 4-sized. So you can imagine, the bigger the wave, the more accurately we can represent it using 4 x 4-sized blocks. Very fast and thin waves present the biggest challenge to represent. The fastest wave might be so fine that all we can do is use a single 4 x 4 brick to represent something that's supposed to be round and smooth.

The lego is your digital audio bits, and the wave you are reconstructing is that of your audio. This is my crappy and likely flawed analogy for digital audio sample encoding.

It's hard enough to make singular waves out of lego blocks. Now try to make a whole sea front. Big waves made of lego look great, small ones look harsh and jagged, and probably at best are just a rough approximation. The bigger waves = lower frequency and the smaller ones = higher frequencies. Stand back and look at the picture you made of lego - it should still resemble the source, but the resolution is non-linear with frequency.

Now try again, but using smaller 2 x 2 blocks.... Those smaller waves are now twice as accurate, but it takes twice the effort to produce.

Keep in mind that the sample rate is basically "the highest frequency to be sampled". Therefore, at 44100hz sample rate, you're going to start running out of resolution in the highs much sooner than if you run 96000hz.

My thinking is this: Where things start to get more and more innacurate, right around the sample rate frequency (and also at half of that), is where you're more and more likely to get that "zig/zag/zig" behaviour, because for example the sharper edges on the waves up there. Hence, you start to see Acceleration kick in at the sample rate and also at half the sample rate, resembling Chris's Average filter when it's criteria is met.

If any of that is anywhere near the truth, it means that the algorithm does not change at different sample rates. The difference is the sample rate of the material that you feed into it. And it's got me wondering if there's any potential for using this algorithm to fight aliasing....?

Heck, whether any of this post is accurate or not, I've become so addicted to this that I'm really falling out of love with normal EQ. Here's hoping we get to see more adventures in state-variable filtering
Old 24th February 2018
  #35
Deleted 691ca21
Guest
Hey, I just twiddled the slider till it sounded good. Not so worried how it works, just happy that it does. I'd be happy with just the one slider, no need for a Dry/Wet, but can understand it might be useful in some circumstances, (just not mine). It did sound very hashy and nasty when turned right up, but great at lower levels, very transparent.
Old 24th February 2018
  #36
Lives for gear
 
StoneyBCN's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 691ca21 View Post
Hey, I just twiddled the slider till it sounded good. Not so worried how it works, just happy that it does. I'd be happy with just the one slider, no need for a Dry/Wet, but can understand it might be useful in some circumstances, (just not mine). It did sound very hashy and nasty when turned right up, but great at lower levels, very transparent.
Hehehe, imagine when the wife asks what I want for dinner!

Nothing at all wrong with just using one's ears. I just like solving these little enigmas called Airwindows like a weekly Sudoku

Try duplicating an audio file and nulling it, then drop acceleration on one copy and see what comes out.

At the moment I'm quite intrigued by what this could do for saturators. Fracture comes to mind. Will report back
Old 14th April 2018
  #37
Deleted e71ab78
Guest
Just want to give a shout to this plugin. It's so simple yet brilliant at what it does - It's become my go to for getting rid of excess digital hash and it does it in a better way than anything else I use. Perfect plugin and everyone should check this out.
Old 28th July 2018
  #38
Lives for gear
 
gilmanoel's Avatar
 

I tried to use the plugin through DDMF inside Pro Tools 12.4.

The plugin opens, but even changing the parameters, I can not hear any changes in the audio. Anyone had this problem?

Thank you.
Old 28th July 2018
  #39
Lives for gear
 
StoneyBCN's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gilmanoel View Post
I tried to use the plugin through DDMF inside Pro Tools 12.4.

The plugin opens, but even changing the parameters, I can not hear any changes in the audio. Anyone had this problem?

Thank you.
It's hella subtle at higher sample rates, even when cranked on some stuff. Remember that it only acts when the waveform has a particular shape to it (specific treble conditions).

Try nulling the effect against a dry copy of the same track. You will hear what the effect is doing - likely you will hear some faint clicky/splatty material.

The "rate of change" family of Airwindows plugins are very interesting indeed. Slew and Average are the big daddies of that family IMO. Try putting acceleration against those and compare? It would need to be treble material - crashes, tambs, vocals...

BTW I thought Metaplugin would be perfect for Airwindows by design, but finding the sliders basically unusable - I have to load .fxb presets that I make externally to get the settings I want. Plogue Bidule has been much better for my needs and would recommend it to Airwindows users. Any tips with using Metaplugin/Airwindows?
Old 28th July 2018
  #40
Gear Addict
 

Yeah, I work almost exclusively at 96kHz and Acceleration is for all intents and purposes inaudible on most material until it's almost halfway up and stays pretty subtle all the way to the top. It's much more apparent at lower sample rates. I possible workaround in a DAW like Reaper that supports multiple sampling rates in a single project would be to temporarily change your project sample rate to 44.1k or 48k, adjust Acceeration to your liking, freeze the track or render a stem of it, and then switch back to 88.2k/96k. Better would be if there was a plugin wrapper that UNDERsampled, but that's not the kind of thing anyone is likely to make since it would really only be relevant to Airwindows stuff. But if you could load one of these sampling rate sensitive plugins into a wrapper that would downsample the incoming audio to a user-selectable target rate, run the wrapped plugin at that rate, and then upsample to the project rate again, it would open up some really interesting possibilities (especially if it could use arbitrary, continuously adjustable sampling rates).

I'm not sure of the top of my head but isn't it one of the Airwindows plugins that doesn't agree with oversampling, also? I don't use Metaplugin very often anymore but IIRC it oversamples by default, so that could be an issue, too.
Old 30th July 2018
  #41
Lives for gear
 
StoneyBCN's Avatar
 

Metaplugin doesn't oversample by default but does have x2 and x4 OS options. I think it sounds great on Airwindows saturators.

Been mulling this plugin in my head since the last post. Doubtful that it cares what sample rate you use - it's simply that lower sample rates are more likely to create the type of waveform that Acceleration acts on. At least, that's where my thinking is at. I posted before a longer analysis of that theory (up a few posts), which attempts a possible explanation of why that MIGHT be true.

I think Acceleration shows up nicely when used in conjunction with saturators and exciters, and would probably make for some delicious guitar tones somewhere in a tube amp circuit. Keen to try that some time.
Old 30th July 2018
  #42
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneyBCN View Post
Metaplugin doesn't oversample by default but does have x2 and x4 OS options. I think it sounds great on Airwindows saturators.

Been mulling this plugin in my head since the last post. Doubtful that it cares what sample rate you use - it's simply that lower sample rates are more likely to create the type of waveform that Acceleration acts on. At least, that's where my thinking is at. I posted before a longer analysis of that theory (up a few posts), which attempts a possible explanation of why that MIGHT be true.

I think Acceleration shows up nicely when used in conjunction with saturators and exciters, and would probably make for some delicious guitar tones somewhere in a tube amp circuit. Keen to try that some time.

Chris said that it is sample rate dependent back in post 17.

Quote:
In fairness if wakestyle is using it at a high sample rate like 96K or 192K it'll become a LOT harder for Acceleration to kick in, and harder to hear it when it does
Old 30th July 2018
  #43
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

the filter averages a fixed number of samples regardless of sample rate.
So for example the fc would be Nyquist/2 for a two sample average...etc.
You can see (hear) how that’s not going to be too noticeable as the sample rate gets higher.
Old 30th July 2018
  #44
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkyfingers View Post
the filter averages a fixed number of samples regardless of sample rate.
So for example the fc would be Nyquist/2 for a two sample average...etc.
You can see (hear) how that’s not going to be too noticeable as the sample rate gets higher.
Which, again, makes me wish there was someone making an UNDERsampling plugin wrapper, for easily using plugins whose sound vary with the sampling rate without having to plan your entire project around it, but so few plugins other than Chris' stuff work like that that I don't expect to see a thing like that any time soon. If I had any coding ability I'd make one myself.
Old 14th November 2018
  #45
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
TL;DW: Acceleration limiter tames edge, leaves brightness.
I'm getting amazing results combining this with Distance2. First I route the audio through Acceleration, then I send that and a phase-inverted dry to Distance2 so that it's affecting the part of the signal that Acceleration removes, then I mix Distance2's output with Acceleration's output.

Example settings of Acceleration limit 1.00 wet 1.00 and Distance2 atmosph 0.83 darken 0.05 wet 0.87 sounds really good on a lot of drums.

With max intensity Acceleration the sounds get a chunk removed from the high-end and it has a very distinct sound that I personally find ugly, but Distance2 can chew up the difference, darken it a tad, and slip it back in and it sounds buttery smooth.

The attached MP3 is dry, Acceleration only, Acceleration + Distance2, Dry, Acceleration + Distance2.

I think Atmosphere still has more you can squeeze out of it Chris.
Attached Files

untitled.mp3 (430.5 KB, 613 views)

Old 25th November 2018
  #46
This plugin has been added to the list of "plugins that on my master Buss, on every track, every time.

It simply always helps, even if the highs are needing boosts. I can't think of any scenario in which I would not use it.
Old 7th December 2018
  #47
Lives for gear
 

Could someone verify ...

Was checking ACCELERATION with PluginDoc.

There is a significant OUTPUTGAIN of +3.6dB when limit is at 30. It does vary over a small range. By Limit @ 33.7, the Outgain returns to 0dB

Thanks for checking.
Old 11th December 2018
  #48
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
Could someone verify ...

Was checking ACCELERATION with PluginDoc.

There is a significant OUTPUTGAIN of +3.6dB when limit is at 30. It does vary over a small range. By Limit @ 33.7, the Outgain returns to 0dB

Thanks for checking.
I wasn't able to get it to output louder in FL Studio. Most I could do was feed it high-frequency sines and make it distort which made it sound louder, though the meter was showing it as quieter than dry.

I am getting the same results in Plugin Doctor though.
Old 12th December 2018
  #49
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

you don’t measure output level with a frequency plot.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #50
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMOQuantity View Post
I'm not sure of the top of my head but isn't it one of the Airwindows plugins that doesn't agree with oversampling, also? I don't use Metaplugin very often anymore but IIRC it oversamples by default, so that could be an issue, too.
Is there a handy list of the Airwindows plugins that do not agree with oversampling?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #51
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbone1313 View Post
Is there a handy list of the Airwindows plugins that do not agree with oversampling?

Not that I'm aware of.


Incidentally, I switched from 24/96 to 24/48 a few months ago and Acceleration sounds even better/less subtle at lower sampling rates.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #52
Gear Maniac
 

Thanks. But, from my tests, everything else sounds much better at 24/96.
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump