Toscanalyzer

Discuss anything new and newsworthy! See http://planet.linuxaudio.org for more Linux Audio News!

Announcements of proprietary software may fit better in the Marketplace.

Moderators: raboof, MattKingUSA, khz

Post Reply
User avatar
eikakot
Established Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:24 pm
Location: Vilnius, Lithuania
Contact:

Toscanalyzer

Post by eikakot »

http://www.toscanalyzer.org/index.php/en/ this is a new mixing and mastering analyzer which is cross-platform so there is a version for linux. I haven't tried it yet, but definetely will give it a try, because I have an idea of making open source one myself

User avatar
linuxdsp
Established Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:40 pm
Location: Oxford, England
Contact:

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by linuxdsp »

I prefer to just listen to how the mix sounds

User avatar
raboof
Established Member
Posts: 1690
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 11:58 am
Location: Deventer, NL
Contact:

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by raboof »

Free-as-in-beer, but interesting looking.

User avatar
GMaq
Established Member
Posts: 1600
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:42 pm

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by GMaq »

linuxdsp wrote:I prefer to just listen to how the mix sounds
:lol:

i2productions
Established Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 6:14 pm
Location: New Hampshire, US

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by i2productions »

linuxdsp wrote:I prefer to just listen to how the mix sounds
Sure that might be ok for MIXING. But as a mastering anylizer, it's pretty much essential!

StudioDave
Established Member
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 1:12 pm

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by StudioDave »

I saw the announcement on KVR too. I checked it out, it worked fine on a 64-bit Arch Linux system. Neat software with some unusual features. Definitely designed for mastering, not mixing. :)

Best,

dp

User avatar
warkus
Established Member
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by warkus »

Another toy, just what the audio world needs. Oh well if you believe in a "fix it in the mix" aproach to audio then good luck with making your next Mcstudio production a real gem :roll:

StoneCut
Established Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:15 am

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by StoneCut »

I believe my final mixes are quite good (for my equipment at least) and I spent many years learning how to master electronic music after the final mixdown.

But then one day a friend of mine loaded up my final mix (before mastering) into his "AAMS" on Windows and picked a preset similar to my style. We then compared my manual master (about 16 hours work) with the one auto-generated by AAMS and - yeah, I didn't like that - the automatically generated result was *much* better. Looking at both mixes through an analyzer I could see that the spectrum was also much more balanced than my manual mix (which Idid by ear).

I started using Spectrum analyzers for Mastering on that day and will never go back again.

slowpick
Established Member
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:09 am

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by slowpick »

:shock: Truth is not often candy-coated. And honesty doesn't need it.
I have a couple unused analyzers, but now I'm scared how tone deaf they could prove me to be :oops:
Pondering whether to say thanks, or not :? :lol:

User avatar
linuxdsp
Established Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:40 pm
Location: Oxford, England
Contact:

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by linuxdsp »

A lot of great mixes were mastered in the days before FFT analysers and the like. FFT tools are good tools for finding technical problems (e.g. during plugin design or development) and they can reveal problems in a mix / master which you may not be aware of - subsonic problems etc, but they can also lead you to focus on things that aren't relevant to making a good mix (especially if you are not really sure what you should be looking for). Like all the tools an experienced mastering / mix engineer needs or uses, they are only really an assistant to a competent engineer, not a substitute for one. Most experienced engineers know the sound of their 'room' and the equipment they use, and this is just knowledge aquired over years, for which there is no 'quick fix' or substitute.

slowpick
Established Member
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:09 am

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by slowpick »

linuxdsp wrote:A lot of great mixes were mastered in the days before FFT analysers and the like.

Most experienced engineers know the sound of their 'room' and the equipment they use, and this is just knowledge aquired over years, for which there is no 'quick fix' or substitute.
In hard times, one could easily be forced to give up their mixing/mastering room. Being aware of
useful alternatives in such interims, seems like good insurance. Variables in ones personal hearing,
can also be cared for with software. Decades of high gain amp exposure, and years of high volume earbuds, don't make for accurate audio perception.

User avatar
warkus
Established Member
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by warkus »

Analysers were useful while i was studying sound production, a helpful learning tool. Over time i have learnt that good mixing relies on good recording technique.
I have also observed that most people who mix with spectrum analysers are only concerned with the frequency balance and disregard the amount of phase distortion introduced by equalization. Better microphone placement would have negated the need for such equalization, resulting in less distortion.

There are many approaches to sound production, yet so many focus on mixing and mastering. The difference between a good sound and a lesser one begins with the source, and how well it has been captured.

User avatar
autostatic
Established Member
Posts: 1728
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:26 pm
Location: Beverwijk, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by autostatic »

+∞

If the recorded tracks are of good quality and the studio engineer knows what he's doing then creating a good mix becomes easier too. And if the mix is good enough the mastering process should be easier as well.

slowpick
Established Member
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:09 am

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by slowpick »

warkus wrote: There are many approaches to sound production, yet so many focus on mixing and mastering. The difference between a good sound and a lesser one begins with the source, and how well it has been captured.
So true I doubt many of the purists today would queue up to record at the sound quality
which existed when Motown and the Beatles changed history.

User avatar
warkus
Established Member
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Toscanalyzer

Post by warkus »

So true I doubt many of the purists today would queue up to record at the sound quality
which existed when Motown and the Beatles changed history.
The quality of sound from these days i believe came from the restraints put on the engineers. I don't recall right now in which years parametric equalizers were introduced, but in the early days the mic placement was all the tonal control that was required (and still is all that is required, in a good sounding room.)

Post Reply