# Compression expander



## T3mpest (Dec 25, 2005)

I know some older "loud" SQ car used these in the past for extra dynamics to really take advantage. Well it's been 10+ years since many of these cars were in the lanes and we no longer use modified pro audio gear for processing and have lots of options. I was wondering if anyone knows of any more modern options that can increase dyamic range.. It'd be fun to have something that could do that as I'll have headroom to burn on my next install. Something that is 12v inherently would be nice, or even a program that could be installed on an ipod that could do it, IDK, you guys tell me.


----------



## Rybaudio (May 23, 2008)

Interesting idea. Anyone know how they actually did that? It wouldn't be too hard to apply a basic nonlinear in-out curve to some music and see what it sounds like, but I don't know of any 12V hardware that does that.

If someone has access to Matlab (and can program in it), you can read in a wav file, apply the processing, and write a new processed wave file. I might be able to do that down the line but I'm a bit busy right now.


----------



## T3mpest (Dec 25, 2005)

Rybaudio said:


> Interesting idea. Anyone know how they actually did that? It wouldn't be too hard to apply a basic nonlinear in-out curve to some music and see what it sounds like, but I don't know of any 12V hardware that does that.
> 
> If someone has access to Matlab (and can program in it), you can read in a wav file, apply the processing, and write a new processed wave file. I might be able to do that down the line but I'm a bit busy right now.


IDK there is a pro audio tool that does it.. 3bx DS | dbx Professional Audio

looks like Harman makes this.. Come on JBL lmao!


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

That's what the folks back in the day used...the dBx piece.

Last one I heard in a car was probably 2005...then again, the big shows have dried up around here too since then.

Probably could find schematics and stuff like that for an expander to get an idea on how they work...but translating that to digital is way beyond my pay grade. I can't recall ever seeing a digital expander, but then again I haven't looked in a while either.


----------



## Rybaudio (May 23, 2008)

Did they sound any good? Artificial? I don't think I've ever heard one before.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

the ambience part of this dbx unit is interesting, in the lycan L-R difference signal is produced in various degrees and is adjustable by turning a knob.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I liked it in that particular car...I didn't know he had one in it until we were talking afterwards.

But with the way music is being mixed these days, something like this has no hope of fixing it.

Yeah the ambiance control and impact restoration features are what look really interesting to me.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

T3mpest said:


> I know some older "loud" SQ car used these in the past for extra dynamics to really take advantage. Well it's been 10+ years since many of these cars were in the lanes and we no longer use modified pro audio gear for processing and have lots of options. I was wondering if anyone knows of any more modern options that can increase dyamic range.. It'd be fun to have something that could do that as I'll have headroom to burn on my next install. Something that is 12v inherently would be nice, or even a program that could be installed on an ipod that could do it, IDK, you guys tell me.


I've mentioned this in some other threads, but I've noticed that dipoles definitely sound more dynamic. I believe this is because the impulse response 'fades to black' much faster than a monople.

I posted the impulse measurements in a few threads; this is measurable and quantifiable. You have to put more power into the dipole to get the same SPL, but the dynamics are extraordinary.

Something to consider if you have the space for a dipole, and power to burn.


----------



## P_4SPL (Nov 7, 2009)

* Do you mean Hardware or Software to make the music sound better.

I use an ipad app called Audio Mastering @ $15 , it helps bring out recordings with poor fidelity, it uses harmonics that creates a better presence to the recording in the mid and upper freqs, it also increases stereo separation for improved immersion on mono sounding 2 channel tracks.

The Stereo seperation feature can be added to any freq 30HZ - 20khz it all adds together nicely when you tweak it by ear.

The compression features actually allows the music to play more loosely, basically it allows Mid Low and high freqs to stop slower * thus creating more ambiance to each freq without stoping it hard like in most recordings.

It has a 5 Band Para EQ as well that you can tweak to add High freqs lost when mp3 is encoded.

* The effects can be subtle on some content but can defineatly improve the overall sound without adding noticeable distortion to the sound. And @ $15 it worth more in terms of value and what it brings compared to investing in $500 software.


IMO Recordings on some music can sound dull and flat, this adds some excitement to the music without sounding too bloated if done right.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Sounds similar to the BBE stuff.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

thehatedguy said:


> Sounds similar to the BBE stuff.


Agreed... 

Kelvin


----------



## P_4SPL (Nov 7, 2009)

Using hardware would mean changing the effects for every song, using software for the track ensures it sounds good when played back on equipment.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

it's a tweaker's tweak, to go into your music library and dirty up the recordings with some judicious use of software, I don't have the time or luxury, or inclination to spend hours debating on whether or not the music I own could use a little dynamics touch-up, or if it's got the sparkle of BBE enhanced phase shift, and then go about making a copy of music that I've already got taking up space...


well, I guess if you really like your music, and have listened to it hundreds of times, who am I to tell you that it's a waste of time to dither around with it, and try and improve on the experience as set up by the mastering engineers?

now, about this option of a hardware based solution that you can simply click in, click out, that's something to think about but I have found that music that I say, could use dynamics retrieval, is music that I already am aware of, and like in it's present form enough to have an opinion about it.


that's probably good music, and better left alone.

sometimes I think we push the envelope a little too far, I mean you'll get more use out of an RTA/EQ/DSP solution in your player software suite, than some processing based on a need that is fabricated on a tweaker's need to tweak, more than enjoy what is already there.


People could spend days in a studio re-mastering the classics (and do, and have, and will continue) but if you have the standard to compare to, the remaster is always somehow "not right" as your audible memory circuits will tell you. You'll say "that is great" but deep down you know somebody just put their finger in the cake frosting, and then covered it up.


messing around with recordings is a dangerous game.


if you say you like it better with more dynamics, you're basically saying "I can do better than the artist, the engineer, and the producers of this audio work, and since I bought a copy of it, I should be able to diddle it until I'm satisfied" and that's a sharp edge to ride your nutsack on....


----------



## P_4SPL (Nov 7, 2009)

I use software because some older music needs the extra ambiance to sound good> I also don't usually buy music...Or I'd owe $1000's in money spent on mp3 titles> it's not worth a dime IMO> being a music enthusiest I don't mind taking the time to make it sound cool...

...of course yes...there are instances where you could go back to a track and re-do it...after learning the software and training your ears to cut back on pushing the envelope> you can create tracks that sound good most of the time and do them only once.

Most music nowadays is Clipped and run HOT...mp3 is Mastered to sound good on tiny speakers, when the music signal is run hot it IMO behaves like a sine wave> mp3 has no freq's above 16Khz, clipping the signal / running it hot creates harmonics in the speaker itself that mimics high freq fidelity that is interpreted by your ears as better high freq interpretaion> playing it back on more sensitive audio components will mostly damage your speakers, mostly your tweeters.

Music needs to have dynamics, peaks and dips, music that is run hot doesn't have these peaks and dips, music Mastered before 2000 had more fidelity because of the peaks and dips...peaks and dips help your speakers come to a complete stop / rest before the next peak occurs, it IMO helps them stay cool and linear> when the signal is hot your speaker never comes to a rest and its constantly pushing itself, excursive'ly, thus introducing distortion.

*In all I also reduce the amplitude -1 to -3 from 0db, to prevent clipping, seems what Apple is asking Engineers working on Tracks for Mastered for itunes


----------

