LinuxMusicians

I think guitarix needs a banjo preset. Anything less is cultural prejudice.

j_e_f_f_g wrote:I think guitarix needs a banjo preset. Anything less is cultural prejudice.

Maybe better to fork it at make a banjix project?

wolftune wrote:

j_e_f_f_g wrote:I think guitarix needs a banjo preset. Anything less is cultural prejudice.

Maybe better to fork it at make a banjix project?

Indeed, it surely will be to hard to integrate a banjo preset at a acceptable db level.

tramp wrote:banjo preset at a acceptable db level

I think an acceptable level for banjo is 0 dB, although anything below sea level is fine.

I'm definitely with wolftune on this. The first time I tried Guitarix I feared I blasted my speakers and I thought the software was crap, then I learned to tweak it and appreciate it.
And, by the way, giving a low analog gain to a signal and then apply ridiculous amounts of DIGITAL gain is just bad practice: SNR down the toilet!

emarsk wrote:And, by the way, giving a low analog gain to a signal and then apply ridiculous amounts of DIGITAL gain is just bad practice: SNR down the toilet!

I didn't talk about lower the input signal, I mean lower the output (amplification) gain of your soundcard, that is what gives you the headroom!
Mine is almost set to around 50%

j_e_f_f_g wrote:

tramp wrote:banjo preset at a acceptable db level

I think an acceptable level for banjo is 0 dB, although anything below sea level is fine.

Nothing beats the mute button when it comes to processing banjo tracks.

ssj71 wrote:

j_e_f_f_g wrote:

tramp wrote:banjo preset at a acceptable db level

I think an acceptable level for banjo is 0 dB, although anything below sea level is fine.

Nothing beats the mute button when it comes to processing banjo tracks.

Hmmm, the 'delete' key trumps the mute button, I learned that practicing on DX7 tracks...

wolftune wrote:I understand *some* gain, but:

The two zettberlin factory presets differ by nearly 30dB in their output with the same signal! .

Since I am the evildoer here I think I have to step in

The presets are made with very early versions of Guitarix, especially the tube-emulations have changed dramatically since that(for the very better). Still its quite simple to correct the indeed quite unsound difference: the Kristallik preset should have the master-volume set to 14o'clock, the fatbrett would then still be louder but thats intentional and it would not deliver insanely more gain.

To be frank I did not think, that anyone would adjust the hardware or even a mixer-software to get a signal from a software at a desired sound pressure. I use to do *all* settings like this in the software itself. As in Guitarix I use the Master-Parameter and the tiny fader in the main output-visualisation. I never ever touch the knobs on my Mackie let alone the gain-controlls on my monitors... Its all set to the loudness I can bear and any signal-sources are balanced *before* they reach the hardware...

Thanks for the clarity there! So, zettberlin, perhaps you could submit simple patches that would fix the levels? I'm honestly super busy and won't get to it soon. Incidentally, I think a couple others have similar issues besides your bank… and indeed *some* amount of gain difference is to be expected / desired within reason.

I am the guy who made the "Wild Metal" preset. AFAIR some other guy then dialed it in on the guitarix forum based on my screenshot. I haven't used it for along time (too dry for me) but I will check the levels.

So here's my 2 cents:

While you're reorganizing the presets anyway, drop the weird usernames in the Bank list. It is just confusing. Why not make different banks for Clean, Blues, Rock, Metal, Metal-Rhythm, Metal-Lead, Jazz, Pop, ... etc. Genre is the first thing by what you classify a guitar tone I would say.

Presets could also have a "made by" field internally so you can send an email to the guy who dialed it in.

zettberlin wrote:The presets are made with very early versions of Guitarix, especially the tube-emulations have changed dramatically since that(for the very better).

Last change in the tube emulation was 2012-07-23, and only reflect changes in faust, tube processing was really changed in 2011-09-21 last time.

apathity wrote:Presets could also have a "made by" field internally so you can send an email to the guy who dialed it in.

No, that will introduce a incompatibility with existing user presets. We almost try to avoid that, even if we can't guaranty that, unfortunatly.

apathity wrote:While you're reorganizing the presets anyway, drop the weird usernames in the Bank list. It is just confusing. Why not make different banks for Clean, Blues, Rock, Metal, Metal-Rhythm, Metal-Lead, Jazz, Pop, ... etc. Genre is the first thing by what you classify a guitar tone I would say.

I'm willing to push all the changes to our repository, seems like a good idea to order the presets in Genres, as it as well could be a indicator for the resulting loudness. But still, here are the guitarix users requested to fill it up.

tramp wrote: No, that will introduce a incompatibility with existing user presets. We almost try to avoid that, even if we can't guaranty that, unfortunatly.

Could there be a migration option that lets anyone move a preset they were using to be a user preset so they still have it? If you are saying that changing factory presets will affect the user preset section, that I don't understand.

It seems only speculative that anyone actually is relying on the factory presets. I'd suspect it likely that 100% of users who actually saved anything or regular use the factory presets may have already made user versions of them. It's also possible nobody is actually using the set factory ones at all.

What if there were a way to do an "update" of factory presets, so any new install has the update automatically but existing installs need to manually accept the factory preset updates (possibly with a way to revert)?

There's got to be a good solution here.

wolftune wrote:Thanks for the clarity there! So, zettberlin, perhaps you could submit simple patches that would fix the levels? I'm honestly super busy and won't get to it soon. Incidentally, I think a couple others have similar issues besides your bank… and indeed *some* amount of gain difference is to be expected / desired within reason.

I could send you a corrected patch and some more, new ones as a tar.gz would that be OK?

wolftune wrote:

tramp wrote: No, that will introduce a incompatibility with existing user presets. We almost try to avoid that, even if we can't guaranty that, unfortunatly.

Could there be a migration option that lets anyone move a preset they were using to be a user preset so they still have it? If you are saying that changing factory presets will affect the user preset section, that I don't understand.

It seems only speculative that anyone actually is relying on the factory presets. I'd suspect it likely that 100% of users who actually saved anything or regular use the factory presets may have already made user versions of them. It's also possible nobody is actually using the set factory ones at all.

What if there were a way to do an "update" of factory presets, so any new install has the update automatically but existing installs need to manually accept the factory preset updates (possibly with a way to revert)?

There's got to be a good solution here.

Oh, you get me wrong here, my answer was to

apathity wrote:Presets could also have a "made by" field internally so you can send an email to the guy who dialed it in.

special to "Presets could also have a "made by" field", that will change the preset format, which leads to incompatibility.
Changing/removing factory presets wouldn't harm any user, I guess, as you've said, most likely is that users would have made a "own version" of a factory preset anyway

zettberlin wrote:I could send you a corrected patch and some more, new ones as a tar.gz would that be OK?

.
Please send as well to me, so I could push it to git right now.
We just needs to agree if factory presets in future should ordered by genre, or by users.
regards
hermann