XPost: rec.audio.pro   
   From: kludge@panix.com   
      
   In article , Randy Yates   wrote:   
   >kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:   
   >>   
   >> That depends entirely on which averaging standard you decide to use.   
   >> Most common is LKFS according to ITU BS.1771 loudness standard.  You   
   >> will never, never see this in the US, but RTW standalone meters can   
   >> display it.   
   >   
   >Scott, sorry but I didn't see this until just today. Thanks. In   
   >searching for info on BS.1771 I also found this paper from Grim Audio,   
   >which, at a cursory glance, looks like it touches on many of the same   
   >issues I've been asking about here.   
      
   It seems like most of the messages I have sent, you haven't seen.   
      
   Let me reiterate here:   
      
   If it says dBFS, it is a peak-reading meter that reads relative to the   
   highest digital value on the system.   
      
   If it is some kind of average reading meter, it is not reading dBFS, but   
   is reading something else.  Because there are so many different standards   
   for average reading, precisely WHAT it is measuring can be hard to tell.   
      
   For example, the average meters on Pro Tools don't seem to match anything   
   else or meet any known standard.   The ballistics are faster than VU.   
      
   If you actually need to have consistent and accurate average metering on   
   digital systems, you use BS.1771 metering.  Most people don't, though.   
      
   Calling something RMS when it produces a weighted average is not correct.   
   --scott   
   --   
   "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)