Dan is at it again. This made me laugh so hard!

"...beat that you little millenial snowflake"

 

+2.3 LUFS integrated
3.5 LU
+7.7 dBTP

Hahahaha. Squashed over the limits. Louder than the loudest maximums ahahaha.

 

Funny comments and vid but: +2.3LUFS at +7.7dBTP -> -6.4 LUFS at -1TP and that probably isn't the record.

 

What? I can't hear you!

 

It lowkey slaps

 

If my monitors could speak, they just surrendered and requested to go into hibernation for 100 years

 

The countdown has caused me to shock which in turn caused absolute hectic when looking for dim on the remote. Good joke!

 

Late for the party : (

This true peak values are because all the individual samples are either -1, or +1. Guess you can imagine what happens with the DA converter.
That's also the reason why the mix can destroy the speakers.
Digital true peak limiter will probably reduce it by 2 dB-ish, so it's still hella loud.
I'd love to put an analog clipper on this tho. Man that would be hilarious.
Also who in 20 fucking 21 utilizes -1 TP?

 

That's clear.

A TP limiter set to -1 should reduce the TP to -1, so by 8.7dB.

Err, what? Everyone, or at least almost all platforms and that's why it's usefull to master accordingly (apart from the general aim to avoid DAC clipping)?

 

No, because limiters are dynamic. It doesn't just lower the volume, it waveshapes around. So it'll move a few samples (probably 2/3 of the samples honestly) away from the ceiling instead of toning down the whole file.

-0.2 dBTP is enough for that.

Almost all of my currently preferred music actually goes into positive TP. We live in different worlds.

 

Anyway, his music sucks.

 

Ok, I'm always eager to learn, so I just did test it myself. I set a TP limter on a wave with +8dBTP and set the limiter to -1TP. Result, -1TP with accordingly lowerded LUFS.

TBH, I don't know which TP is really sufficient to avoid DAC clipping. Are you just supposing or do you have a serious source for this statement? Just asking.

Absolutely possible.

 

I either have to appeal to authority or make things up, with no in-between, do I get it right? Well, it's neither.
It's my personal experience of 6 years. My production haven't clipped any output far as I know, be it studio gear or consumer earplugs. I leave precisely 0.2 dB of headroom.
Modern DACs clip at least at 0 dB. A headroom of 0.2 is precisely twice the size needed to account for lossy conversion and dithering.

That's one wave. It'll either get clipped or effectively normalized, if you chose the "transparent" algorithm. Plus, in a single wave sample peaks pretty much equals true peaks, if it's not a distorted square. That's not really an adequate comparison. Tho I admit my estimate might be too mild as well. After all, I'm performing a true peak limiting in my brain, visually. That can be imprecise.

 

@No Avenger Here's a closer-to-source experiment. I took one of my tracks, reduced its bit depth to 1 and clipped it, then normalized without true peak protection.

Notice the true peak and loudness values.

 

Last edited: Nov 21, 2021

Then here's exactly the same track, now limited with true peak protection on.

See, true peaks are down by 5.5 dB, but the loudness is only down by like 2.5.

 

Also I beat Dan Worrall in the loudness war lol

Spoiler

sounds like shit tho

 

Not as much as your comments though.

 

Right, that's where I apply a TP limter, on one wave, the sum.

I don't use FF L2.

Surprisingly high LUFS for a normalized wav (to 0dB, I assume).

Which confirms my statement in post #9 and my little test, right?

Depends on the source, I guess.

Yep, that's the problem.

 

@No Avenger
Yes, it's normalized to 0. You can see it on the meters. No, it doesn't confirm your statement in its entirety, because it goes like "LUFS and TP are reduced by the same amount", if I got it correctly. Anyways, that's the statement I've been arguing with. I believe I demonstrated this is not the case.

 

lol what an amateur