Meters basically useless without peak dB readout

Ugly Bunny

Power User
Anyone else find this to be the case? I can generally tell if a signal is passing/receiving any signal, lateral signal, and if the signal is generally strong or weak. But without the red line or a number telling me where each block is outputting at, I basically have no idea where I'm at. I'm trying to think of a way to add this to a constructive wish item. Maybe if the meter itself displayed the peak number overlayed on it, with the number in red if it went over zero?

I definitely appreciate the meter in the Axe Edit III or FM3 edit output block, but on the unit itself, it really serves little value as a meter; as a signal indicator, it's great - if I'm not hearing anything, I can see where the signal stops - but the meters need to give more info to better serve their purposes; like trying to level presets for the soundman, for instance.

Thoughts? Am I missing a setting that would display useful information in the meters?
 
i don't think the peak information helps out when balancing presets. guitar is a very dynamic instrument, and transients from hitting the strings can cause the peak to be much higher than the rest of the signal, as chords ring out for example.

if you adjust your levels to the peak volume, your resulting "normal" volume might be way too quiet as the strings ring out for example.

sure, adding peak meters would be a nice piece of additional information. but i think it would cause people to level set their presets so the peak is on the nominal line, then ask why everything is so quiet. just my thought on it, though this topic has come up a lot.
 
i don't think the peak information helps out when balancing presets. guitar is a very dynamic instrument, and transients from hitting the strings can cause the peak to be much higher than the rest of the signal, as chords ring out for example.

if you adjust your levels to the peak volume, your resulting "normal" volume might be way too quiet as the strings ring out for example.

sure, adding peak meters would be a nice piece of additional information. but i think it would cause people to level set their presets so the peak is on the nominal line, then ask why everything is so quiet. just my thought on it, though this topic has come up a lot.
We've had this discussion before. I use the current meters so that my leads tickle the red, i.e. just go above 0dB, but the peak info is still useful to spot transients that can clip things downstream. As stated above by someone else, the current metering is good for showing signal presence and generally correct levels, but the peak info is still desired. A simple 1px wide line that hangs out a second or so to show you where it peaked recently is pretty standard fare for metering, and many, myself included, find it to be useful....
 
Last edited:
I think the subject here is the output meter. IMHO you want to know two things:

1) Is my signal high enough that I've got decent amplitude resolution?
2) Is my signal low enough that I'm not clipping my output?

The layout zoom meters do a fine job for number 1, but not number 2. Strictly speaking, I think what's needed is an overload indicator, not necessarily a peak indicator. Something that lights up when clipping, and stays lit until it is cleared.

In the studio this is all a moot point. The input meters on your DAW will be better for this purpose than the AxeFX front panel. But if you're in the unfortunate situation of trying to balance preset levels at a gig, I suppose you might have to rely on the front panel meters.
 
Last edited:
Maybe a wish to add a soft limiter to the output block?
You could add a compressor block just before the output acting as a limiter. But the problem could also be before the output. Axe processing is not floating point, so you could even have clipping in one block but then reduce level in a later block, so you don't see the clipping at the output. Also, to get eliminate clipping, the limiter had to be brickwall, and some lookahead is necessary. This increases latency and uses lots of CPU, so many would prefer to about it.

I think Chris's point is valid that many might focus too much on the peak level, while the loudness is the most important thing in most situations. However especially with acoustic sounds (simulated or with an actual acoustic), I often hear crackling which I assume is clipping, and I often struggle to find the point where it clips. In this case, a peak level indicator would be very useful.
 
How about a Loudness Block... LUFS you could enable it... play a section and see the calculated percieved loudness. This is an industry standard measurement which was/is supposed to stop the loudness war on TV etc. I use a plug in on my DAW to normalise backing track content to a known standard (-23LUFS) and I then try and balance my presets to those. It would be much easier to level if the calculation could be done on the AxeFX. Incidentally, once you’ve set your nominal value, the LUFS scale is pretty similar to the DB scale, so if you want to adjust from there all other DB adjustments in the AxeFX would make sense.
 
How about a Loudness Block... LUFS you could enable it... play a section and see the calculated percieved loudness. This is an industry standard measurement which was/is supposed to stop the loudness war on TV etc. I use a plug in on my DAW to normalise backing track content to a known standard (-23LUFS) and I then try and balance my presets to those. It would be much easier to level if the calculation could be done on the AxeFX. Incidentally, once you’ve set your nominal value, the LUFS scale is pretty similar to the DB scale, so if you want to adjust from there all other DB adjustments in the AxeFX would make sense.

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/level-matching-algorithm.92953/#post-1117223
 
You could add a compressor block just before the output acting as a limiter. But the problem could also be before the output. Axe processing is not floating point, so you could even have clipping in one block but then reduce level in a later block, so you don't see the clipping at the output. Also, to get eliminate clipping, the limiter had to be brickwall, and some lookahead is necessary. This increases latency and uses lots of CPU, so many would prefer to about it.

I think Chris's point is valid that many might focus too much on the peak level, while the loudness is the most important thing in most situations. However especially with acoustic sounds (simulated or with an actual acoustic), I often hear crackling which I assume is clipping, and I often struggle to find the point where it clips. In this case, a peak level indicator would be very useful.
It is floating point. A block can't clip (unless it's designed to).
 
I guess I don't rank enough to view this:

View attachment 67812

ah, link doesn’t work anymore. Here’s the quote:

Cliff: "ITU-R is a standard for loudness measurement. Broadcasters use it to monitor the apparent loudness of program material and comply with regulations, i.e. making sure commercials aren't louder than the programming. The measurement includes a simple head model and hearing perception model to give a fairly accurate indication of relative volume."
 
Regarding meters my wish is to add a window to editor that either detaches or slides out/collapses on the side when needed. Then you wouldn't have to toggle between block controls and output to use the primary editor meter.

A single more DAW type meter with peaks, number readout, LUFS, whatever, could be developed. Have a toggle feature on it to choose between Main Output or Focused Block. Then you would have an advanced meter system for anything you selected with more detail, improved workflow, and the developers would have a single focus for upgrades and improvements.
 
When I set my sounds with the meters in Axe Edit III, I typically don't pay that much heed to the transients (I do sort of) - I mainly see where the loudness hangs out when I let a chord ring out. So I wouldn't just blindly set the levels based on transient peaks. I like the idea of a persistent 1 pixel-wide peak indicator though.

I think the subject here is the output meter.
Input AND output, I'd say, but primarily output. I've needed it for input too, when my signal is clipping a delay, for instance.


You could add a compressor block just before the output acting as a limiter.
I've done this before, and it only kinda works. The problem would be for, say, an FM3 user, where DSP is at a premium; needing to reserve the DSP for one more necessary block wouldn't be ideal, as the unit is severely limited in comparison to the Axe already.

add a window to editor that either detaches or slides out/collapses on the side when needed. Then you wouldn't have to toggle between block controls and output to use the primary editor meter.
I love this idea - if it had the current block level's output AND the main output's level (or multiple outputs, if you're using multiple).
 
Back
Top Bottom