DeltaWave null-testing audio comparator (beta)

[esldude]

@Jud

So you can use my 8th generation files, load them into this software.  Let it do a match.  Then let it play reference in one channel and 8th gen in the other to see how close you get to a dead center mono signal.  

[esldude]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I think turning off nonlinear drift correction will help. I'll likely remove that option in an upcoming release, as it causes more harm than good

N

But, you may have something, there, Frank. I see a larger phase error for the first 1-2 seconds, and then it goes down to  less than 1/10th of that error for the rest of the track. Maybe that's actually in the original track, but could be something DW is doing wrong. I'll check into it.

I have seen non-linear drift help some on some tracks.  Though usually not, and only a small amount when it does.  Maybe the entire non-linear box could have a header that says, Strongly Not Recommended. 

 

It seems the non-linear level can very slightly help most files you just have to find which order to choose.  I don't think any order beyond 4 has helped anything I've tried yet.  OTOH, I can understand doing away with something that rarely helps at all, only helps a small amount when it does, and much more often causes trouble.  

[esldude]

Just now, pkane2001 said:

 

I'm thinking that:

• Non-linear gain correction should be replaced with the new EQ feature (your suggestion) that will automatically match the two spectra based on their averages. Still need more time to play with it, but I'll post a new version so others can play with it, too
   
• The non-linear clock drift correction should probably go away as being too dangerous. It's almost impossible to tell if it's correcting for a real clock error or locking onto some noise in the signal. And because it's non-linear, it can cause serious damage to timing even though the overall null values may seem to improve

 

Probably the right call.  I was thinking if you keep non-linear options, maybe they should uncheck themselves every time the program is closed.  Also under where you choose the Q maybe there could be "Non-Linear Options in USE" displayed in red.  I'll be sending you a link to a file upload in a minute. 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Tried unchecking all the display options, now get the following error when trying to play Ref&Comp:

 

2019-03-14 18:44:05.1812|ERROR|Wave.Program|Unhandled thread exception
   at Wave.WaveForm.GetAll(Control control, Type type) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 4388
   at Wave.WaveForm.currentWavePlot() in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 4264
   at Wave.WaveForm.playRefCompToolStripMenuItem_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 5403
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripItem.RaiseEvent(Object key, EventArgs e)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripMenuItem.OnClick(EventArgs e)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripItem.HandleClick(EventArgs e)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripItem.HandleMouseUp(MouseEventArgs e)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStrip.OnMouseUp(MouseEventArgs mea)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripDropDown.OnMouseUp(MouseEventArgs mea)
   at System.Windows.Forms.Control.WmMouseUp(Message& m, MouseButtons button, Int32 clicks)
   at System.Windows.Forms.Control.WndProc(Message& m)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStrip.WndProc(Message& m)
   at System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripDropDown.WndProc(Message& m)
   at System.Windows.Forms.NativeWindow.Callback(IntPtr hWnd, Int32 msg, IntPtr wparam, IntPtr lparam)

You mean you've broken it already? 🤯

 

It is a nice piece of software with some very good uses.  Paul has really done something good for us. 

 

I can confirm with everything unchecked I get the result Jud did. Also that if you leave only Lissajous checked it doesn't show you anything and does not have any errors.  So for now that workaround will do.  

 

So with this Jud you can play Ref and file A, then Ref and file B.  One should be the cleanest mono when both files are actually the same, and one should show something different. 

 

[esldude]

I'm getting somewhat different results Frank.  I am on .17b though.  I'll have to try the upsampling first, haven't done that.  

 

DeltaWave v1.0.17, 2019-03-15T19:56:17.1174564-05:00
File 1:  Bob Marley A.wav[L] 1377376 samples 44100Hz 16bits, MD5=00
File 2: Bob Marley B.wav[L] 1377376 samples 44100Hz 16bits, MD5=00
Settings: 
    Gain:True, Remove DC:True
    EQ FFT Size:32768, EQ Frequency Cut: 0Hz, EQ Threshold: -120dB
    Correct Drift:True, Precision:8
    Upsample:True, Window:Hann
    Spectrum Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrum Size:16384
    Spectrogram Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrogram Size:2048, Spectrogram Steps:2048
    Dither:False

Discarding: Start=0s, End=0s
Discarding: End  =0s, End=0s

Initial peak values File 1: -1.283dB   File 2: -1.549dB
Initial RMS values File 1: -17.372dB   File 2: -17.348dB

Null Depth=28.447dB
X-Correlation offset: -2 samples

Final peak values File 1: -1.283dB   File 2: -1.512dB
Final RMS values File 1: -17.303dB   File 2: -17.368dB

Gain= 0.0642dB (1.0074x) Phase offset=-0.090703ms (-4 samples)
Difference (rms) = -35.9dB [-48.16dBA]
Correlated Null Depth=40.28dB [43.1dBA]
Clock drift: -4.59 ppm

Files are NOT a bit-perfect match (match=0.14%) at 16 bits
Files match @ 50% when reduced to 6.41 bits

Phase difference (full bandwidth): 30.6305180909281°
                 0-10,000Hz: 8.80643908444472°
                 0-20,000Hz: 15.2122297572583°
                 0-24,000Hz: 30.6305180909281°
                 0-44,100Hz: 30.6305180909281°
                 0-48,000Hz: 30.6305180909281°
RMS of the difference of spectra: -79.6963687839119dB
DONE!

Signature: e42489c0aa175eee70d482acfc62b1e1

[esldude]

37 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Another interesting screen grab, of the Bob Marley samples, showing frequencies >5kHz - the level of distortion is quite marked, of levels of the order of say 20dB down, from peaks,

 

Are you using dither when you upsample these?  Anytime you resample you need dither. Have you tried maybe shaped instead of triangular in Audacity? Triangular will put some of the noise in the audible band while shaped I think will put all or nearly all of it above the audible band which would mean less influence on the top two octaves of the 44.1 khz sourced recording.  

 

I don't know the details of sourcing the MSB files.  I know they were from gearslutz.  It could be the MSB DAC being better (which it should be) or it could be the ADC, my ADC is not state of the art.  Also you are using a loopback measure, vs the 8th time thru with the Marley file.  Even the MSB would show some larger differences. 

 

I also don't know if someone loopbacked on the same gear or shared clocks.  You'll take out a source of error in timing, timing drift and phase issues if you lock clocks.  Maybe that is a good experiment to try.  Locking clocks vs unlocked clocks.   

 

But I like the idea of comparing how well DACs perform vs each other.  And seeing if Deltawave is useful for determining why or how better DACs are better.   That is what we'd all like to know.  This lets us compare with music. 

 

I could upload the first generation copies I have if you'd like.  

[esldude]

3 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

In my mind, extremely significant - the objectivists say the gear typically used is transparent, because the distortion artifacts, measured conventionally, are so low ... DW is saying that otherwise, that the real distortion is transient, and at high levels compared to the correct signal. Get an LP record, perfectly clean, and sprinkle some dust particles over it, and capture the waveform - every now and again there is a little glitch; is this, 'inaudible'?

 

The ear doesn't listen to spectrums, it listens to waveforms - and registers the 'glitch', as a difference.

 

The delta waveform has no meaning, as 'music' in itself; the brain will discard it as being of no substance - but added to a "clean" signal it becomes a disturbing difference from the "correct" - exactly what we are trying to find, here. An interesting exercise would be to amplify the delta multi-fold, and add to clean - when is it easily audible?

Good idea to add amped delta and see when it is heard. 

 

I also could supply all 8 generations of copies if you'd like to see if you think it becomes audible between 1 and 8.  My internet upload speeds are pathetic.  But I could manage one.  Would you prefer Marley to the others?

[esldude]

54 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

No dither, ever. I always work at 32 bit floating, and only when exporting to a WAV file do I select the required format. I have done experiments in Audacity a number of times of upsampling and downsampling to an extreme degree, and then diff'ing after going through a number of cycles - the accuracy is excellent, way below -90dB levels, say.

 

If you upload the first generation, that would be excellent, thanks!

That brings up a point @pkane2001 might know about or want to know.  I need to redo it.  But I was saving some files without dither in Audacity.  Just to convert from either 16 or 24 bit to 32 bit float. When you save them to 32 bit floating it seems the nulls and matching were better no matter what the reference file in use was.  I believe he has said Deltawave works internally all 32 bit so I wonder why saving a file to it helps?  Again I need to repeat this and make sure I didn't get it mixed up along the way.  

[esldude]

@fas42

 

Okay here it is>

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0jciymo33xv14sx/Bob Marley all generations.zip?dl=0

 

I went ahead and saved it all in 32 bit float to save you a bit of trouble.  I also included the 1st and 4th gen in 24 bit, and the original reference in its original 16 bit form as well as 32 float for all of these.  Unless the file title says otherwise these are in 32 bit float. 

 

I was not particularly careful about trimming the ends.  You may wish to even that up or you can see how Deltawave works with it. 

[esldude]

I apparently got confused along the way.  I re-did some of these and they work out the same.  I'm aware of Audacity's dither and have it turned off unless doing rate or bit depth conversions.  Had it off when saving to 32 bit float.  So float works the same as regular PCM on the same file like it should.  Sorry for the false concern. 

[esldude]

9 hours ago, fas42 said:

Purely done in Audacity, this is what the amplitude envelope looks like,

 

 

Zooming in,

 

 

and again,

 

 

No aspect of DW contaminated this story, - what gives??

Those amplitudes are very small.  Is this from a difference signal, was the difference done in Audacity or is it a near silent portion? If you aligned to the nearest sample in Audacity and differenced them then I would say it is happenstance.  Sometimes the ADC would have sampled so this works and sometimes you are rather in between sample times.  

 

I'm not seeing those waveforms in Audacity looking at the the raw files themselves.  

[esldude]

6 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

The copy samples were brickwalled at 19kHz in Audacity, and aligned. So you're looking at the >19k content - which after the 3rd copy matches excellently with the previous generation. And, they come from the area where I posted the earlier clips, where the waveform mismatch was so obvious.

 

Going to change tack now - will look at full spectrum waveform, and do what's necessary to achieve best null; the raw match at 352k in DW is very poor, because of variance with frequency.

I was thinking brickwalled in the opposite direction. 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Frank, you keep running into Audacity issues. To avoid any kind of truncation or dithering, please use the following settings when processing and exporting from Audacity:

 

 

Then, when exporting, use WAV 32-bit floating PCM format. 

 

Here's what I get when I do that with the -0.38dB processed file (note the nulls). A little better? Note that it shows NOT BIT PERFECT but 100% of the samples matched. That's because some small fraction of one percent of samples didn't match due to the level change:

 

Did you mean export as 32 bit signed PCM?  I was thinking when I tried running 32 bit float directly into Deltawave it didn't work.   Running Audacity as 32 bit float and exporting to either signed 24 bit PCM or signed 32 bit PCM does work.  Or is my Deltawave working wrong somehow?

[esldude]

I've seen the same thing now Frank.  If I save a file to 32 bit float or 32 bit PCM Deltawave stops on an error.  If I use for instance the 16 bit Marley B and reduce it by .38 db saving the result in 32 bit PCM still errors out.  Saving as 24 bit PCM results in 100%  bit perfect match with null depth at 267 db and difference at -284 db.  So apparently Deltawave isn't working with 32 bit files.  Reduction done in Audacity with no dither.  Working internally 32 bit float. 

[esldude]

The log file shows 32 bit files with initial peak values that are positive.  Like when using 32 bit wav pcm it is showing 770 db peak.  Deltawave sees it as a 32 bit file, but doesn't seem to work with it.  After adjusting gain or attempting to for 32 bit it shows NaNdb.

 

Here is a log file with both 32 bit.

 

 

2019-03-20 01:29:16.4432|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Signature: 9f0269cc1c8f6a0731584ab69946631e
2019-03-20 01:43:03.7428|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|ProcessAll
2019-03-20 01:43:03.8990|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|DeltaWave v1.0.18, 2019-03-20T01:43:03.8990752-05:00
2019-03-20 01:43:03.8990|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|File 1:  Bob Marley 2nd gen.wav[L] 1547432 samples 44100Hz 32bits, MD5=00
2019-03-20 01:43:03.8990|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|File 2: Bob Marley 3rd gen.wav[L] 1570828 samples 44100Hz 32bits, MD5=00
2019-03-20 01:43:03.8990|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Settings: 
    Gain:True, Remove DC:False
    Non-linear Gain:False    EQ FFT Size:32768, EQ Frequency Cut: 0Hz - 0Hz, EQ Threshold: -130dB
    Correct Drift:True, Precision:8
    Upsample:False, Window:Hann
    Spectrum Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrum Size:16384
    Spectrogram Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrogram Size:2048, Spectrogram Steps:2048
    Dither:False

2019-03-20 01:43:04.0553|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Discarding: Start=0s, End=0s
2019-03-20 01:43:04.0709|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Discarding: End  =0s, End=0s
2019-03-20 01:43:04.2740|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|
Initial peak values File 1: 770.637dB   File 2: 8dB
2019-03-20 01:43:04.2740|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Initial RMS values File 1: NaNdB   File 2: NaNdB

2019-03-20 01:43:04.2896|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Null Depth=NaNdB
2019-03-20 01:43:04.3990|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Trim: skipping 54 samples at start, and 2 samples at end that are below 3.72529029846191E-09 level
2019-03-20 01:43:04.4615|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Trim: skipping 0 samples at start, and 2 samples at end that are below 3.72529029846191E-09 level
2019-03-20 01:43:05.8837|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Phase inverted
2019-03-20 01:43:05.8837|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|X-Correlation offset: 1 samples
2019-03-20 01:43:08.0610|ERROR|Wave.WaveForm|Stopped!
   at System.Threading.Tasks.Task.WaitAll(Task[] tasks, Int32 millisecondsTimeout, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
   at Wave.Analysis.ComputeDriftSpline(Double[] L, Double[] L1, Int32 freq, Int32 data_length, Int32& inc, Int32 steps, Boolean fractional, Double& error, Double& drift, Boolean bLinear) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\Analysis.cs:line 894
   at Wave.WaveForm.InitialDriftCorrect(Double[]& L, Double[]& L1, Double& spline_drift, Int32 data_length, Int32 freq, Double min_drift) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 2326
   at Wave.WaveForm.ProcessAll(Double[] L, Double[] L1, Int32 freq, Int32 freq1, Int32 freq2, Int32 bits1, Int32 bits2, Boolean bMatch, Boolean bLoadOnly) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 1631
2019-03-20 01:43:08.0766|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Stopped! One or more errors occurred.
2019-03-20 01:43:08.0766|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Signature: 7a04b178245e32cb8305fd5a920c878a

 

 

And with only one file 32 bit.

 

 

2019-03-20 01:26:41.9963|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|ProcessAll
2019-03-20 01:26:42.1369|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|DeltaWave v1.0.18, 2019-03-20T01:26:42.1369300-05:00
2019-03-20 01:26:42.1369|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|File 1:  Bob Marley B.wav[L] 1377376 samples 44100Hz 16bits, MD5=00
2019-03-20 01:26:42.1369|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|File 2: Bob Marley B 38 drop 24bit.wav[L] 1377376 samples 44100Hz 32bits, MD5=00
2019-03-20 01:26:42.1525|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Settings: 
    Gain:True, Remove DC:False
    Non-linear Gain:False    EQ FFT Size:32768, EQ Frequency Cut: 0Hz - 0Hz, EQ Threshold: -130dB
    Correct Drift:True, Precision:8
    Upsample:False, Window:Hann
    Spectrum Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrum Size:16384
    Spectrogram Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrogram Size:2048, Spectrogram Steps:2048
    Dither:False

2019-03-20 01:26:42.2777|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Discarding: Start=0s, End=0s
2019-03-20 01:26:42.2933|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Discarding: End  =0s, End=0s
2019-03-20 01:26:42.4652|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|
Initial peak values File 1: -1.549dB   File 2: 770.628dB
2019-03-20 01:26:42.4808|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Initial RMS values File 1: -17.348dB   File 2: NaNdB

2019-03-20 01:26:42.4964|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Null Depth=NaNdB
2019-03-20 01:26:42.5902|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Trim: skipping 511 samples at start, and 529 samples at end that are below 0.000244140625 level
2019-03-20 01:26:42.6371|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Trim: skipping 507 samples at start, and 512 samples at end that are below 0.000244140625 level
2019-03-20 01:26:43.9653|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Phase inverted
2019-03-20 01:26:43.9653|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|X-Correlation offset: 1 samples
2019-03-20 01:26:45.9619|ERROR|Wave.WaveForm|Stopped!
   at System.Threading.Tasks.Task.WaitAll(Task[] tasks, Int32 millisecondsTimeout, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
   at Wave.Analysis.ComputeDriftSpline(Double[] L, Double[] L1, Int32 freq, Int32 data_length, Int32& inc, Int32 steps, Boolean fractional, Double& error, Double& drift, Boolean bLinear) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\Analysis.cs:line 894
   at Wave.WaveForm.InitialDriftCorrect(Double[]& L, Double[]& L1, Double& spline_drift, Int32 data_length, Int32 freq, Double min_drift) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 2326
   at Wave.WaveForm.ProcessAll(Double[] L, Double[] L1, Int32 freq, Int32 freq1, Int32 freq2, Int32 bits1, Int32 bits2, Boolean bMatch, Boolean bLoadOnly) in C:\Users\ypa\documents\visual studio 2015\Projects\Wave\Wave\WaveForm.cs:line 1631
2019-03-20 01:26:45.9619|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Stopped! One or more errors occurred.
2019-03-20 01:26:45.9775|INFO|Wave.WaveForm|Signature: 22826c7e3da2d2ccfcebafc2cb6c67f1

 

[esldude]

Here is two different 32 bit float files against each other.  Infinite db shown.  THAT is really loud.

 

If I compare a 32 bit float against itself in 16 bit or 24 bit pcm form it works, but not against other 32 bit or other 16 or 24 bit files.  

 

DeltaWave v1.0.18, 2019-03-20T08:23:43.5136409-05:00
File 1:  Bob Marley 1st gen.wav[L] 1654652 samples 44100Hz 32bits, MD5=00
File 2: Bob Marley 3rd gen.wav[L] 1570828 samples 44100Hz 32bits, MD5=00
Settings: 
    Gain:True, Remove DC:False
    Non-linear Gain:False    EQ FFT Size:32768, EQ Frequency Cut: 0Hz - 0Hz, EQ Threshold: -130dB
    Correct Drift:True, Precision:8
    Upsample:False, Window:Hann
    Spectrum Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrum Size:16384
    Spectrogram Window:BlackmanHarris, Spectrogram Size:2048, Spectrogram Steps:2048
    Dither:False

Discarding: Start=0s, End=0s
Discarding: End  =0s, End=0s

Initial peak values File 1: -1.443dB   File 2: ∞dB
Initial RMS values File 1: -18.103dB   File 2: NaNdB

Null Depth=NaNdB
Phase inverted
X-Correlation offset: 1 samples
Stopped! One or more errors occurred.
Signature: fa78aa468a04ceb14d63b50de7fe7e04

[esldude]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0jciymo33xv14sx/Bob Marley all generations.zip?dl=0

 

These I uploaded earlier for Frank were all saved in 32 bit float from Audacity with it set to default internally to 32 bit float.  Unless it says otherwise in the file name it is 32 bit float.  I did leave the original as 16 bit, and 1st, 4th and 8th gen copies with both 24 bit and 32 bit float.  No dither in use at all.   Other than the original reference file in 16 bit, all the other generations were 24 bit files when I opened them in Audacity. 

 

Though not part of those files,  I opened the original and reduced it .38 db and saved as 32 bit pcm, float and 24 bit pcm.  Both 32 bit versions error out.  The 24 bit version shows a 200+db null depth.  I haven't tried saving it as 16 bit.  I know about what to expect.  The issue seems to be getting 32 bit to work on Frank's and my end of things right now. 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Thanks, guys. As I said, 32-bit floating point format has been working, it's 32-bit/24-bit integer formats. I've tracked down a problem and will have a fix ASAP. Meanwhile, I'm following up on the tests that Frank reported to try to understand what could've caused them. The likely contender for the lower than expected null for 16-bit files appears to be the use of overlap-add and the choice of the FFT window. This is similar to what I had fixed before in other parts of the software, but appears to behave slightly differently, so I'll need more time to investigate. 

 

Unless I misunderstood, the current version of the software is not working for me at 32 bit float. That was one of the logs I posted. Those 32 bit float files in the Dropbox link will error out.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I'll check again on 32-bit floating, but that's a format I've been using extensively during testing. It's not the same as 32-bit signed PCM -- that's an integer format, not floating point.

Yes I'm clear on integer and float.  If there is any particular way I can do a comparison that is helpful describe it and I'll run it later today.

[esldude]

Not had time for a complete shakedown, but so far this is the best version yet.  I haven't seen any gotchas, and the colored graph showing spectrogram levels is very nice.  Thank you!

[esldude]

I understand what Franks wants.  It is what I wanted too.  You want perfect or so near perfect time alignment it is a non-issue, and the same for timing drift, and the same for gain.  All those are what Bill Waslo of Diffmaker and Liberty instruments called uninteresting differences.  Meaning anything left was from some other factor.  

 

Deltawave isn't that perfect.  It is better than Diffmaker by far, offers many more tools by far, and so many useful things.  It still may not tell you, the null was ruined by distortion, or frequency response (though it has enough tools to determine this one) or some other factors.  But it is a darned useful set of tools for these purposes.  Most important to me is when it gives you a deep null you can count on it being for real.  Maybe some relatively unimportant factor prevents a deep null and it isn't obvious why, but if the null is deep the match is really good.   

 

So at this point Paul's Deltawave is one heck of a piece of software.  If all he does is iron out bugs he has managed that.  So far he keeps adding useful features and conveniences to the core function of it at a very rapid clip.  So many kudos to Paul for that.   And kudos to all the "tough customers" who point out problems or suggest useful features.  

[esldude]

7 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Just looking at what wasn't working in Lissajous plot. Turns out this was yet another third-party component that wasn't designed for this amount of data. It's fixed now, but in the process, came across some interesting looking plots

 

 

 

 

 

What in the world is that last one?

[esldude]

I've been busy and unable to try much the last two weeks.  You have added many neat new features and the precision improvement is welcome in the current version.  I like the Manual adjustments feature too.  I've managed to improve some results a couple db, but not more.  Optimize seems to get worse the more it runs so not sure what I think of it yet. 

 

I do have a question about the delta spectrogram.  You added the colored scale at the side at my request and it is a welcome addition.  The last three versions at least the delta spectrogram itself looks different than it used to look, and doesn't really make sense to me.  The scale chosen by the software seems much too narrow and it isn't showing anything of interest in the spectrogram.  The spectrograms for the files themselves still looks like you'd expect.  Here is one for Bob Marley reference vs 1st generation copy. 

 

Here is the delta spectrogram for the Marley reference vs 8th gen copy. 

 

The spectrogram of the compare file looks fine. 

[esldude]

I don't know if this has always been there or added and I missed it.  On any of the charts, you can click and hold the mouse scroll wheel which then lets you draw a box around any part of the chart of interest.  When you release it the selected part of the chart expands to fill the chart area with scaling of the axis set appropriately.  I find this much quicker and more convenient than scrolling the chart or scrolling one axis of the chart.  I box the area of interest, and then hit reset axis when done.   Or sometimes I box part of the chart to zoom in, box a portion of that and zoom in further before resetting axis. 

 

EDIT to add:

You also can put the mouse pointer on either axis in the label area and do a scroll click to select a narrow section all the way across or all the way up.  

 

 

[esldude]

Looks like the new version has a Y-axis bug on any chart that displays a waveform. 

 

 

Also any method of zooming the y-axis causes it to change the labeled scale in reverse of what it should though the waveform display acts as expected.