On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 23:13 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 12:42 -0700, Niels Mayer wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:35 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Not really, EQ normally being pre-fader. Post-fader meters in a mixer > > > strip are useful only of the signal being metered is actually one > > > that is physically available on some connector, e.g. as a direct out. > > > It would not indicate any overload that occurs pre-fader. > > > > The only time I've seen EQ pre-frader is low-cut on a microphone > > preamp. I was using standard "mixing board" definitions of PFL and AFL > > per, http://www.mackie.com/support/faq/index.html > > ...... > > What are PFL and AFL? > > PFL and AFL are acronyms that describe a mixer's SOLO function. PFL > > stands for "Pre-Fader Listen" and allows the user to "solo" or > > audition the audio in mono at a point in the signal path before the > > channel fader. Perfect for a live sound situation where you need to > > dial in an instrument before bringing it into the mix. AFL stands for > > "After-Fader Listen" and allows the user to solo the channel at a > > point in the signal path after the channel fader. This is more > > commonly used for recording applications (the signal is also typically > > after the EQ and pan controls). The Main Output signal is not affected > > by PFL or AFL solo functions, though the Phones and Control Room > > outputs are. On all Mackie mixers, the solo function serves as the > > preferred way to set input levels. > > ...... > > PFL is to level the input, so it's before everything, but the trim.
It's for trim (gain), but for my mixer it's post-EQ and pre-fader. I was mistaken. > Solo is behind everything. > > I didn't follow the thread, but I guess envy24ccontrol shouldn't become > a complete mixer, but a hw control. > > > > > Using a real mixer analogy, here the PFL levels are the current "peak" > > levels from the ice1712 architecture diagram I've posted; its values > > displayed in the meters present in "Monitor Inputs" and "Monitor PCMs" > > panels of mudita24. The AFL levels are available (as I mentioned > > earlier) only by "soloing" (aka muting all others) the channel for > > which the AFL's are being determined, and looking at the resulting > > levels on the digital mixer output. > > > > In this case, Tim E. Real's: > > "post-fader meter value = pre-fader meter dB value + slider dB value" > > is a trivial computation that could easily be displayed, and would be > > helpful to debug situations like "why can't i hear myself in the > > monitors" (because mute was on). Having a narrow second meter > > displaying the AFL levels (stereo), dynamically shadowing the PFL > > displayed, would be a helpful visualization of mixer function. Even > > more-so with an automatic fall-off of the side peak-level. > > > > In contrast, it would be less helpful, and potentially more confusing > > to have a modal interface that would require clicking a button to see > > the PFL's, if only AFL's displayed, or vice versa. Especially for > > people that might not be able to tell their AFLs from their PFLs and > > just want to see some dancing meters as sings of activity. > > > > > If the signal just goes to a mixing bus (as in the case we are discussing) > > > then it's individual level is irrelevant - the level on the mixing bus > > > (all > > > signals summed) may be. But in this case you can't overload the mixing > > > bus, so even that would be useless. > > > > I think that we are both in agreement that the AFL level meters are > > not strictly necessary. > > > > However, they may not be sufficient to provide a good visualization: > > having the AFL levels in the meters could help with understanding > > what's actually going on, hidden in the hardware. Similar to how > > useful it is here > > http://osx.iusethis.com/screenshot/osx/traktordjstudio3.png ... My > > suggestion would be similar, except that it would either show the > > computed AFL value, or it could be switched to display the overall > > stereo mix output. With its function made superfluous by that option, > > the standalone digital mix meter could go away. Such side-by-side > > metering functionality makes it easier to visualize the level of > > contribution a given input has to the overall mix level. > > > > > In this case, just individual buttons for L and R instead of the panner > > > would be just fine, and you wouldn't need the mute buttons anynore. > > > > The mute buttons are useful since there's no "solo" and one might want > > to set levels independently of whether a channel is monitored. The > > individual levels are useful because one might just want to use this > > thing as a mixer anyways, maybe because you don't have another one, > > and because, now that it's adequately metered, it actually performs > > the function of "midi-controlled outboard synth submix" quite nicely, > > and with better fidelity than an external mixer. > > > > -- Niels > > http://nielsmayer.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
