GA: is the output amplification only applied when needed i.e. you are talking about the “overload prevention”?
S: Yes, it is only applied if necessary.
GA: Then I wondered if the technical details should clarify that.
…
GA: Why not turn that into nouns as we do in most plug-ins and maybe a bit less verbose “Output Level Reduction (for clipping prevention)”?
Yes I can clarify that in the Technical Details, but with the wording “Reduce Output Level if necessary to prevent distortion” I think it is already clear that it is only applied if necessary to prevent distortion.
If the wording is changed to “Output Level Reduction (for clipping prevention)” then I think that it is no longer (as) clear that it is only applied if necessary to prevent distortion.
As a compromise it could be: “Output Level Reduction - if necessary to prevent distortion”, though this looks and reads badly IMO.
I see that turning it into nouns is the convention, but as the original premise is to make it easy to use for new users, I prefer clarity over convention. Ideally the user should be able to understand what the effect does and how to use it without reading the Technical Details, or even without reading the Help.
I’m open to any ideas for alternative wording that is as clear as the current wording.
BTW, the Nyquist interface always adds a colon at the end of the “text-left”, which does not look good if the last character in the “text-left” is a punctuation mark (a close bracket looks similar a sad “smilie” ): and a question mark looks wrong?:
S: What about the Vocal Remover effect? Doesn’t the wording overflow in that also?
GA: Yes, bigtime > 
> … And so do some others but it does make them look crappy IMO.
I agree. If possible, I think this needs fixing in the Audacity code so that the box can be expanded.
Depending on the characters used there may only be enough space for as few as 8 characters.
At least the text expands when clicked on.
I would expect that if you test on a 10 minute selection, the time taken will be identical whether it is set to Yes or No.
I would also expect that if you try processing a 60 minute selection, processing with Level Reduction enabled will be extremely slow, or even crash.
It all depends on the available RAM. As soon as data swapping from RAM to disk is grinds down to dead slow.
On XP with 512 MB RAM, a 5 minute selection will process at virtually the same speed regardless of whether Level Reduction is enabled or not, but a 15 minute track will seize up for a long time.
On Linux with 3 GB of RAM, a 35 minute selection will process at virtually the same speed, but a 70 minute selection will seize up.
I have added a note to the Technical Details to clarify this:
TECHNICAL DETAILS:
Tone adjustment uses two second-order 'shelf Eq' filters.
The half-gain point of the filters are set to 600 Hz (bass)
and 2 kHz (treble).
Maximum boost/cut is +/-15 dB for all controls.
'Level Reduction' is applied to the sound post filter and is
only applied if the output will otherwise exceed 0 dB.
If the selected data is too large to be read entirely into RAM,
processing will be very slow as data is swapped from RAM to
disk. This is unavoidable in the current implementation of
Nyquist in Audacity and applies to all Nyquist plug-ins that
use a "Normalize" function.
As Nyquist processes audio at 32 bit (float) there is no risk
of distortion being introduced provided that the output level
is set such that the final output level is below 0 dBFS.
Both channels of stereo tracks are amplified equally (linked).
A 10 Hz eight-pole Butterworth high-pass filter is applied
to the entire selection to remove DC off-set and sub-sonic
frequencies.
bass-treble.ny (3.09 KB)
I think any of them are better than what we have now. My first choice is (4) and second choice is (7).
) it’s easy to add custom turnover frequencies for own own private version.