Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implemented audio limiter effect with logistics curve #41551

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Implemented audio limiter effect with logistics curve #41551

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Tony-Goat
Copy link
Contributor

Implemented to address issue #36631

This is more of a soft-clipper than a true audio limiter, however, it corrects the clipping issue at hand until a true limiter can be implemented.

I couldn't tell why the old code was acting up, so given the parameters, I completely reimplemented the audio limiter effect using a logistics curve and documented everything well.

I chose the logistics curve because it provides a smooth, semi-linear transition up to a maximum point, which perfectly fits the description of what was needed for this limiter effect.

Old
This is the old waveform that I captured in Audacity

New
And this is the new one with the logistics curve soft clipping.

I couldn't tell why the old code was acting up, so given the parameters,
I completely reimplemented the limiter using a logistics curve and
documented everything well.

I chose the logistics function because it provides a smooth, semi-linear
transition up to a maximum point, which perfectly fits the description of
what was needed for this limiter effect.
@Calinou Calinou added bug cherrypick:3.x Considered for cherry-picking into a future 3.x release topic:audio labels Aug 26, 2020
@Calinou Calinou added this to the 4.0 milestone Aug 26, 2020
@aaronfranke
Copy link
Member

aaronfranke commented Feb 27, 2021

@Tony-Goat Is this still desired? If so, it needs to be rebased and tested on the latest master branch. While there are no conflicts, rebasing is important so that reviewers can easily test the PR.

@Tony-Goat
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Tony-Goat Is this still desired? If so, it needs to be rebased and tested on the latest master branch. While there are no conflicts, rebasing is important so that reviewers can easily test the PR.

I can't seem to find the branch in my repo this is from. I'll have to recreate it and resubmit it.

@Tony-Goat
Copy link
Contributor Author

I had to create a new branch on my end, I'll open a new PR and reference this one in it.

@Tony-Goat Tony-Goat closed this Mar 2, 2021
@aaronfranke aaronfranke added archived and removed cherrypick:3.x Considered for cherry-picking into a future 3.x release labels Mar 2, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants