'FeralA' decoder -- free-to-use

[Night Rain]

Thanks for the effort.

[Night Rain]

10 hours ago, jabbr said:

I am having good initial results with 1.6.5B using

 

--cdd --fcs="4,-44.5,fcx=g" --floatout

 

Tried those and it sounds muffled.

[Night Rain]

13 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Did you first make sure that the album actually had Feral-A encoding, which is sometimes done to make the recording brighter sounding ? 

One of the giveaways is often excessive sibilance, but some artists do often have a little too much sibilance in their recordings. Kenny Rogers for example

 

  Yes, tried ABBA and Supertramp. It mostly affects the mids.

[Night Rain]

Any updates at all?

[Night Rain]

It sounds way off on my setup. The highs are prominent and there's no life. Like a table AM radio.

[Night Rain]

You simply cannot do this with headphones. They are only useful for final mix checks. I mean you were doing this with defective headphones and you didn't even notice!

[Night Rain]

You cannot get judge proper bass response from headphones which id why the fustercluck happened in the last release. Honestly the decoder sounded far better in July.

[Night Rain]

The top is the original and the bottom is decoded.

[Night Rain]

The left is "decoded" and the right is the original. As you can imagine it sounds completely different and not in a good way.

[Night Rain]

2 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

Thanks -- they used to give me the most difficult projects at Bell Labs because I didn't give up, and use every resource available to me.  Of course, at the Labs, I did have access to some of the biggest experts in the country (perhaps world.)   Standing alone (thankfully with encouraging help from time to time) has been challenging.

 

This last LF problem is one of my long, random walks, finally finding my way.   I kept trying to morph what should have been a simple MF->LF EQ into something that sounded right at the low bass.   So, I had unknowingly been damaging the curve to get a reasonable lower bass.

 

By recognzing that a 0.75+0.75dB 2nd order LF shelving boost at 80Hz/Q=1.0 allowed using the  rest of the curve that seemed correct.   I am pretty thorough -- I ran all kinds of test, trying to figure out if a single 1.5dB boost, a staggered boost, or using Q=0.50, 0.7071, 0.8409, 1.0 or even 1.17 (the 80Hz DolbyA band splitting filter).   The best result was Q=1.0.

 

Also, the lowest freq EQ (with a bunch of -6dB 1st order EQ) had to include 25Hz, 20Hz, 12.5Hz and 10Hz.   Also, the 25Hz isn't really 25Hz, but has an anti-distortion pattern added to it (it is -6dB at 35Hz, +6dB at 20Hz, -6dB at 5Hz.)   I doubt that most people would be focused enough to work out these details (it is a blessing and curse for me.)   The HF EQ is even more intricate, but was also less dependent on my sense response balance in my hearing.   The HF band was more about distortion cancellation and response errors are more profound to me at >3kHz.)

 

The MF range between 1kHz and 3kHz was another tricky game.   It requires three pairs of shelving filters.

 

If all of these aren't done correctly, the sound will have all kinds of weird distortions.   I am still listening for troubles, and WILL hear them if a cogent explanation is provided (I mean real help instead of 'ugly sound' or some other condemnation!!!)

 

Thanks again -- and I sure hope that this new release:  V2.1.2E really fills the bill!!!

 

 

 

Is the truth a condemnation? Okay here goes, the sound has been turned into what one might expect from an AM radio. There's no depth, the midrange is muffld and the highs are like white noise instead of a cymbal tap. I cannot find one area that is improved, indeed it's like putting a blanket over the speakers. There's also a terrible tightening of the bass like the drums were misstuned.

 Tracks used were Jennifer Warnes - The Hunter, Holst/Walter Susskind - Jupiter and Gordon Lightfoot - Sit Down Young Stranger.

[Night Rain]

2 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

I don't hear the 'white noise' on the decoded versions -- I hear a correlated signal instead of a time smeared FA signal.   You must compare the current version anyway to be able to make cogent comments.   Peoples brains who are accomodated to FA might actually be resmearing a clean signal.   (Keep an open mind about this -- I used to think that my hearing was 'absolute' also.)

 

I cannot show you the upcoming SACD Love Over Gold publically, but that is more of my kind of test material.   I also use 'Crime', 'Breakfast', 'Quiet' and 'Crisis' on Supetramp.  ABBA is interesting also -- because of the extreme time smearing, and the re-correlation of the signal by the decoder.

 

Those who are accomdated to FA might have some extra processing going on that will actually distort the clean signal that they are listening to.   This 'accomdation' happens just like adapting to smells and colors.

 

Whenver listening to the decoder, stay away from the FA listening for at least a few hours, if not a few days.   I know what to expect now, but also have real experience on these matters.

 

 

Just sharing my opinion. It's like the life has been sucked out of the recordings and instead of a 3 dimensional reproduction it has been completely flattened. Have been following this project for about a year.

[Night Rain]

Just now, John Dyson said:

About fuzz or lack of definintion -- oh, come on now -- listen to this.   This is very typical of the results.  Sure aint fuzzy, and you can hear the details in the percussion, not just a compressed FA , time smeared blob...  Note even the ambience is more natural,  isn't amplified/compressed like in FA, and essentially inaudible hiss.   Many FA recordings will tend to be hissy, especially done on analog tape, but even those done on digital tape also have some hiss.

 

With the FA process, digital isn't really digital, but has been passed through an analog processor.

 

FA is just YUCK!!!

 

03 - DIRE STRAITS - INDUSTRIAL DISEASE-snippet.flac 4.46 MB · 0 downloads

You asked for opinions and you got one. I didn't kick your dog.

[Night Rain]

Just now, John Dyson said:

General comments of the general terms like 'muddiness' , not 3d or other things that aren't specific and oriented towards fixing the problem, just not kind.   BTW -- compressed hash does give a sense of detail, and I do suspect that is what people sometimes are missing.

 

It is obvious that FA is a problem, and the FA compression is  a deficit -- and the FA decoder is really working  produces results much closer to a raw recording.

 

I tell people who prefer FA -- just talk into a good quality mic, through a board, no processing.   You will NOT get FA sound.   Even if you use a good quality compressor, the sound is NOT like most consumer recordings.

 

Sometimes people REALLY like the music.   When people REALLY like the music, they'll even listen to AM radio.

 

 

 

 

Carry on. I should have known from this thread you don't take kindly to criticism. I wish other people would speak up but seems they're censored or too afraid to tell you the obvious truth. It's a disaster.

[Night Rain]

1 minute ago, John Dyson said:

I take VERY KINDLY to kind, constructive criticism.   Suggestions strong enough that imply the effort is unwise -- that is what I read of your comments.

 

PARTICIPATE, not ARM-CHAIR QUARTERBACK.

 

John

 

Well John Idid. You are decidedly on the wrong path here. Nobody needs a fancy tone control.

[Night Rain]

2 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

I take VERY KINDLY to kind, constructive criticism.   Suggestions strong enough that imply the effort is unwise -- that is what I read of your comments.

 

PARTICIPATE, not ARM-CHAIR QUARTERBACK.

 

John

 

Where you got on the wrong path was when you decided things needed multiple layers decoded and it has just gotten worse since then.

[Night Rain]

There you go again, as I sit in an armchair to listen thank you. My speakers do not editorialize, Revel Salon 2s are accurate.

 I am sorry but what is being decoded is a mess and unlistenable.  If the truth hurts I apologize but somebody has to be honest with you.

[Night Rain]

Just now, John Dyson said:

You DID editorialize, that is why I responded.   I would appreciate constructive comments.   Your truth hurts me, but it isn't reality.  Sorry, just being honest with you.

 

How much more honest can I be? It's an unmitigated and unlistenable disaster. NOTHING sounds right. Drums sound like people hitting the top of a pringles can. The mids are horrendous they're muffled and lacking any depth.

 It's a version of the horrendous DBX expander from the 70s. You have succeeded  in making everything sound the same. Bad and lacking in any detail. It's a travesty of the artist's intentions.

 And trust me I am being kind.

[Night Rain]

1 minute ago, John Dyson said:

 

Thank you - you prove my point.

BTW -- if you knew what it did, it is NOTHING like a DBX expander -- obviously misunderstanding what the decoder is.

A DBX expander is a trivial toy.   It doesn't even attempt to match the input, the decoder does.

 

If there is only one minor parameter that is incorrect on decoder (I mean <%1 error is needed), the result is incorrect.  If you could only understand (or hear.)

 

Oh I hear just fine. EVERYTHING IS OFF. There's no tweaking that can fix this. EVERYTHING sounds like a scale model of the original music.

 You need to rethink this and figure out where it all went so horribly wrong.

[Night Rain]

Just now, John Dyson said:

Okay -- it isn't any skin off your back.   You won't convince me into being wrong, and I cannot correct your misimpressions.

You won't pester if you didn't have a lot of envy. 

'Scale model', 'tweaking', EVERYTHING IS OFF...   proof of your attitude, and it started from your first posting.

 

 

Yes John. I'm envious you have found a way, after years of work, to totally destroy every recording. Super jealous here. 👍

[Night Rain]

1 minute ago, John Dyson said:

Heh?   How did I destroy the recordings?  I didn't destroy what you listen to -- whomever did the FA compression did.

Do you believe that I could have jumped in and destroyed your library?

 

You should learn about accomodation in hearing, it is very similar to becoming used to a bad smell or a color scheme.

 

 

Have spent years in recital and orchestra halls so I can speak with certainty as to good sound. If you think this sounds good, and I defy anyone to listen and then post their impressions here, more power to you.

[Night Rain]

59 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

 

Honestly, I have always had troubles in dealing with immature or deranged people...  For that, I apologize.

Mature people make personals attacks? You're program is crap. I challenge ANYONE to download it and hear what a total mess it creates. The the horrible sound challenge today.

 As for being deranged working on the same crap for years only to make it worse and worse must be the very embodiment of deranged. What a waste of a life.

 If the truth hurts don't BLOODY ask for it. If you ask for it handle it like a man not a 6 year old. Grow up.

[Night Rain]

11 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

PS:   constructive feedback is welcome.   Kindness is very important to me.

The decoder IS complete, but needs some polishing.

 

Just double checked the results, and the only other thing that bothers me is that once

I added the 80Hz EQ, then some of the old Carpenters stuff got 'heavy' again.   The --fa='L'

EQ still exists and is still valid.

 

I just updated the 'StartUsing' doc to mention the use of --fa=L.   The ONLY recordings, so far,

after the EQ corrections, that need --fa=L are the old Carpenters stuff.   I have been checking

my archives, and wonder if they were just done differently?   (The difference is that more

EQ (-3dB) appears to be needed at 200Hz.)

 

Regarding 'increasing' the 80Hz (with the 'M' commands.)   My headphones are not light on the

true LF bass, but my hearing varies on the order of 6-10dB -- probably blood flow.   The EQ

 has been tested in enough conditions to know that it is very close to correct.   Also,

the EQ sequence is something that a hardware developer would use.   It all fits together.

 

However, I ALWAYS listen for EQ help, and with 1st order EQ, the strangest problems can appear,

even misjudged as distortion!??!?   (I mean, REALLY.)   However -- when describing needed EQ,

in order to keep my frustration minimized -- here are some suggestions:

 

When judging decoded sound -- remember that the FA recording has at least 10dB excess  compression

at LF, has lots of compression at HF -- but a quantized set of levels.   The highs can be loud or soft, but

the HF signal levels have a terraced & compressed  scheme.

 

One can accommodate these characteristics, but it is good to be aware of the FA defects when judging

non-FA material.  (Basically, FA compressor is brings very low HF signals upwards to terraced/quantized levels,

therefore giving the impression of detail.)   FA does NOT compress high levels, but there is fuzz and time

distortion associated with the larger HF events that give a strange, unreal sound to everything.

 

Since it is easy to mistake what I mean by 'criticism', it is definitely not intended that the decoder be condemned

and I should stop the project.   That won't happen anyway.  The only possible direction is IMPROVEMENT, not

capitulation to the mediocracy!!!

=============================

 

Here are the suggestions:

 

Specify the recording, the time offset if useful.  

More deep bass, Less deep bass.

More midrange, Less midrange, the sound 'Honks'.

(Also, describe the sound of instruments, perhaps defects -- a common problem, that even I hear -- pianos are sometimes muddy.)

Time offsets needed for the below, since 'highs' are more time dependent:

 

Cymbals too strong,  instead of 'crashing' cymbals fuzz out.  Cymbals not sharp

Lost definition in percussive sounds.

 

 

 

The "decoder" is so far off the mark and destructive I have no idea what you're trying to do beyond destroying any listenable music. Anyone that does everything on headphones, and discovers the headphones were defective cannot possibly be taken seriously. This is just tremendously sad.

[Night Rain]

1 minute ago, John Dyson said:

As you probably know -- near perfection has been attained, but I have noticed something just a little 'off'. 

 

The big issue for me, my hearing isn't reliable. 

 

 

 

That explains why this decoder destroys music. If making music unlistenable is your idea of perfection you've reached your goal. TRUST PEOPLE WHO CAN HEAR.