"Show Clipping" Options

[Gale Andrews]

Here's a new patch, it must be applied INSTEAD of the previous patch, it gives you 2 more things to play with:

Code: Select all

#define EXTRA_CLIP_INDICATOR_SPACE 4
#define EXTRA_MOMENTARY_INDICATOR_SPACE 4
#define EXTRA_PEAK_INDICATOR_SPACE 4

wider.png

In the above image the red rectangle refers to EXTRA_CLIP_INDICATOR_SPACE, the blue rectangle refers to EXTRA_PEAK_INDICATOR_SPACE and the orange rectangle refers to EXTRA_MOMENTARY_INDICATOR_SPACE.

Might wide indicators be an issue with the Space Saver meters (because the numbers are written over the bars)?

Gale

[Gale Andrews]

Can you even see -6 with the default meters?

Easy way to fix that. Linear scaling with dB labelling.

Gale

[Gale Andrews]

I would propose a name change: "Label Clipped Samples" or, for brevity's sake: "Label Clipping".

There is a minor problem with the shorter version in that "Label" could be interpreted as a noun. Why not just "Clipping..."?

Currently, the other 2 elements are effectively real-time but use slightly different concepts in determining when to trigger their display; the determining factor is the number of concurrent clipped samples - 1 for the wave track, 4 for the meters.

• Should these numbers be in lockstep? If so, only by default or, should the user be able to change either or both?
  
  Are the current values reasonable?

I've posted my firm opinion about that. The default for both should be one clipped sample. Koz won't get configurable Show Clipping unless he presses for it, otherwise Meter Prefs will configure the clipped samples threshold for the meters only, which can push the meter and waveform clipping out of step.

Since the meters have 2 clipping indicators (the momentary one which shows up within the meter's range and the latched one which is drawn at the extreme right-hand edge and remains until dismissed by clicking on the meter or starting a new recording/playback) fading need some definition.

Should there only be one meter indicator? If so, within its range or at the extreme right-hand edge?

I'm confused by this - there is only one clipping indicator. See http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/me ... #annotated. I think you are talking about Maximum Peak, which is blue (despite that colour has no meaning in a gradient meter).

If we retain both indicators, which should fade?

We could leave the latched one as is and fade the currently momentary one.

We could leave the currently momentary one as is and fade out the latched one either to completely faded out until the next clipping occurs or leave just a little bit of color until the next clipping occurs and then make it fully saturated.

Or we could have both Maximum Peak and clipping indicator just turn off.

Or both could fade in the same way (I prefer that both fade to invisible rather than they just "turn off", but only if this is easy to do).

Note that my strong preference is that the default should be for the clipping indicator to stay on as soon as one clipped sample is encountered. That gives correspondence with Show Clipping.

One alternative default I would also support is for the clipping indicator to only stay on when it encounters four clipped samples (so that would be the same behaviour as now). I don't like that as much, unless we modify Show Clipping to only display a run of four samples as red, and "some other colour" or "some other representation" such as dotted for < 4 samples. Two shades of lighter red "might" work instead of yellow and orange for < 4 samples.


Gale

[steve]

There is a minor problem with the shorter version in that "Label" could be interpreted as a noun. Why not just "Clipping..."?

"Clipping" could be interpreted as an effect.
Perhaps there would be less ambiguity about the name if we have consistency with other "detect and label" tools (Beat Finder, Silence Finder, Sound Finder, Find Clipping).

[kozikowski]

Koz won't get configurable Show Clipping

That may be misleading. Several times in the thread people have pressed for visible warning before clipping. I have a mixer whose flasher goes approx. 3dB before sound damage. That idea is what the manual configuration would provide.

Koz

[Edgar]

I'm confused by this - there is only one clipping indicator. See http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/me ... #annotated. I think you are talking about Maximum Peak, which is blue (despite that colour has no meaning in a gradient meter).

No – I'm confused! Someplace along the line the new gradient meters lost the blue color and the maximum peak now paints in whatever color was prevalent at the end of the color bar. This means that if the last segment of the meter was painted red (clipping) the maximum peak indicator will also be painted red. Since the maximum peak indicator is latched this gives the effect of 2 red bars at the extreme end of the meter. With the traditional meter the maximum peak indicator is indeed blue.

Now that I have spent a few warm cozy days with the meter code, here is what I want:
Show Clipping in the waveform to remain exactly as is – at least by default – color is a fully saturated red, one sample triggers, runs are ignored (sequential clipping draws a big red rectangle). I would give the user ONLY the ability to change the color not the trigger sample number nor painting runs differently.

The Analyze Effect could be renamed ("Clipping Finder…" is OK, but I find these "Finder" names clunky). It's interface needs to be reworded so that the user does not need to read the manual to figure out what the controls do. I have not tested its functionality beyond trying it once with the default setting on a five second chirp with a single clipping sample, 2 sequential clipping samples, 3 sequential clipping samples, 4 sequential clipping samples and 5 sequential clipping samples (all of these separated by numerous non-clipping samples).

The meters should stay just exactly the way they are with the minor exception of making the vertical indicators wider. Currently there are 3 indicators and all are painted 2 pixels wide. One is momentary (Recent Peak) - make this one 3 pixels wide. The other 2 are latched (Maximum Peak & Clipping); make the Maximum Peak indicator 3 pixels wide and the Clipping indicator 4 pixels wide. This means that the 2 indicators that might possibly be co-drawn with a textual number would only be one pixel wider than currently. Since the text is drawn on top of the indicators (but is anti-aliased) this is only slightly more visually intrusive:

clip.png (925 Bytes) Viewed 1147 times

If we were to unlatch the clipping indicator (-1) it should probably be made even wider than the above 4 – maybe as much as 6 or 8 (or even something between 5 & 9 but proportional to the current width of the meter). If unlatched it should probably flash a couple of times at full saturation then fade very gradually (I have one piece of hardware which does this but without the fade and the latch time is too brief – less than 5 seconds). The latch duration should be at least 5 or more seconds – probably closer to 8 or 10.

[waxcylinder]

The way it is right now you can have the meters more or less the same way they are right now in 2.0.6

Select the RMS "style" from each Meter's options dialog (and AFAIK that option is likely to stay)

Undock 'em and drag down to resize 'em to full height meters and redock 'em.

"Job done" to quote one of your ex-Presidents ...

Peter.

[Gale Andrews]

There is a minor problem with the shorter version in that "Label" could be interpreted as a noun. Why not just "Clipping..."?

"Clipping" could be interpreted as an effect.

In the Analyze Menu? I think it is a reasonable suggestion to drop the "Find" word. Is Analyze > Contrast... perceived as a "contrast effect"? We could have Analyze > Frequency... . The window that pops up says "Frequency Analysis". Or Analyze > Spectrum... and change the window title.

Still, I agree since "Find Clipping" does labelling, it may be better to make its name consistent with other analyze effects that produce labels.

Perhaps there would be less ambiguity about the name if we have consistency with other "detect and label" tools (Beat Finder, Silence Finder, Sound Finder, Find Clipping).

I agree the name "Clipping Finder" would work better with those other "finders".

"Label Beats", "Label Silences" and "Label Sounds" arguably work quite well. It is fairly obvious that "Label" is a verb. I agree "Label Clipping" is less ambiguous if the other labelling effects were named as "Label <what we're labelling>. "Label Clipping" is still a little ambiguous. "Label Clipped Regions" is clear.

But then, "Track Splitter" or similar would be a better name for most people's usage of Silence Finder.


Gale

[steve]

In the Analyze Menu?

What could "Label Clipping" in the Analyze menu mean other than "Label(verb) Clipping"?
"Label(noun) Clipping" makes no more sense in the Analyze menu than "Clipping" interpreted as an effect in the Analyze menu.
I don't see that either misinterpretation is more likely than the other.

"Label Clipped Regions" is clear

+1

But then, "Track Splitter" or similar would be a better name for most people's usage of Silence Finder.

except that it doesn't "split tracks"

[Gale Andrews]

Koz won't get configurable Show Clipping

That may be misleading.

I think you'll have to lobby for it. I'm not convinced, only about meter customisation.

Differentiating clipping lines (without letting them be configurable) does have some benefit. It could save user having to zoom in to look more closely, and it would provide a reasonable way to let the meters still clip and hold on four clipped samples or more, as now. Otherwise I think the only sane default is a trigger of one clipped sample for both Show Clipping and meters.

Several times in the thread people have pressed for visible warning before clipping. I have a mixer whose flasher goes approx. 3dB before sound damage. That idea is what the manual configuration would provide.

That seems contradictory to you wanting to only flag up clipping that is likely audible, Koz.

Displaying samples above -3 dB, or perhaps more usefully, samples at a configurable level that are all at the same level, are yet more options. I think either would complicate the display of Show Clipping for only occasional benefit. Where there is benefit, the user may want to see both hard and soft clipping, making the display even more complex.

And do we really need a -3dB flash for the meters, given gradient meters are default?

if we need to show clipping below 0 dB, my suggestion would be to add dB level and/or flat-topped wave detection, perhaps with text output, to Find Clipping. Those are perhaps better kept as a separate issue in the hope of getting more important changes accepted.

If you wanted your complete dialogue implemented (with user-friendly wording) then I think that would have to go in the main Preferences, taking up space there and making the new settings less accessible. So again, I don't think that's the best approach.


Gale