• QuadraphonicQuad welcomes you and encourages your participation! Treat all members with respect. Please keep all discussions civil, even when you have a strong opinion on a particular topic.

    Do not request or offer for sale or trade copies or files of copyrighted material - no matter how rare or unavailable to the public they might be. We do not condone the illegal sharing of music. There are many places on the internet where you can participate in such transactions, but QuadraphonicQuad is not one of them. We are here to encourage and support new multichannel releases from those companies that still provide them and as such the distribution of illegal copies of recordings is counter-productive to that effort. Any posts of this sort will be deleted without notification.

    Please try to avoid discussions that pit one format against another. Hint for new users: make liberal use of the search facilities here at QuadraphonicQuad. Our message base is an incredibly rich resource of detailed information on virtually all topics pertaining to surround-sound. You will be surprised at what you can find with a little digging!

kempfand's Adobe Audition 3.0 SQ and QS Scripts

Bob Romano

Surroundaholic Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 26, 2002
Messages
4,621
Likes
50
Location
Naperville IL
#21
Regarding the rear-channel out-of-phase condition, I tried an experiment last night. I took the Ls and Rs channels and pasted them into a new stereo WAV, then used the Invert command to turn them 180 degrees. This seemed to result in a much more robust stereo image in the back pair, and a new DTS disc burning using these inverted channels sounds fuller too, so I think Arconada's thoughts on this are correct.
Could I just invert each mono wave by 180 degrees? Or do you have to do it as a stereo wav?
 

ClarkNovak

900 Club - QQ All Star
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
950
Likes
28
Location
San Diego
#22
Dunno, Bob. I don't even know if I did it right, since the spectral phase view didn't show much change afterward. I'm hoping Arconada or maybe Neil Wilkes will chime in here with some definitive instructions.
 

puck

New Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
2
Likes
0
#23
Sorry in advance for this probably noobie question, but in reading the whole thread at "PC Based SQ DECODING - ALMOST DONE," I noticed that in the early testing of this decoding process, people were doing it manually. And one of those testers recommended that an initial attenuation of -6dB be used because "during the sum-difference process with only -3dB I went offscale frequently, even if the final result was perfectly into the -3dB range." I infer that this meant that clipping occurred during some of the intermediate steps even though the final waveforms were below 0dB (not good!).

After this, a script was introduced, and then many testers (but not all) used the scripts instead of the manual approach. And I notice that the instructions for the newer scripts all seem to call for a -3dB attenuation of the SQ-encoded wave before running the script, rather than -6dB attenuation. Therefore, I wonder if clipping is potentially occurring in the intermediate steps but not being noticed when the scripts are used.

What ever happened to the -6dB recommendation? Was it deemed unecessary? Or was it decided that processing everything at 32-bit in AA avoided clipping anyway? Or was it ignored because only one person ever noticed the "offscale" problem? Or what?

Could one of the experienced users please clarify? Thanks for your patience with a newcomer.

p.s. - I think it was "winopener" who noticed this issue and recommended -6 dB.
 

jfinch

New Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
7
Likes
0
#24
I agree with Puck, you need a -6db Attenuation with this SQ script. When I used that, I noticed I had peaks as high as -2db during portions of the audio processing.

I have tried 3 of of the SQ scripts, so far this script is the only one to have Rear Center in phase, the other 3 I've tried had Rear Center at 180 degrees out of phase in the Rear Channels.
 

RLief

Junior Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
11
Likes
0
#25
Andreas - I just purchased a copy of Audition 1.5 on eBay - will your scripts work with 1.5 or only 3.0? I've never tried decoding SQ or QS with software but I consider myself tech savvy so what would be my next steps?
Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Bob
 

sjcorne

400 Club - QQ All Star
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
969
Likes
2,135
Location
Southern NY
#26
I just downloaded the SQ script for AA3 and decoded the channel positions section of the Project 3 popular science SQ test record...all channels decode with great seperation EXCEPT the right rear doesn't seem to decode at all...it is in both fronts at equal volume to right rear. Is there a flaw in the script? or is there a new script I need? aa3 pic.jpg
 

sjcorne

400 Club - QQ All Star
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
969
Likes
2,135
Location
Southern NY
#27
update: I just did the opening of the "Chase" SQ LP and the right rear suppression in the fronts is better than the project 3 LP but still not as suppressed as left rear. I'm wondering if my cartridge caused some sort of phasing error while recording but the script still seems a bit off

chase_aadecode.jpg

Can anyone point me to the latest AA3 script?
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2017
Messages
1
Likes
0
#29
Great stuff, thanks!

1.
I found the script under the Adobe "File" menu, not "Options".

2.
And on my system I had to put your script into a my user directory under "My Documents>Adobe>Audition>3.0>Scripts, which is perhaps a preference somewhere.

3.
I modified your script to use another drive letter.

Thanks again. Great work.


I have updated the SQ and QS scripts to run with Audition 3.

Have also adjusted the small guides / walk-through I created before.

Enjoy,

Andreas
 

ade42

Junior Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
16
Likes
0
Location
Brisbane
#31
OK, we have THIS script, Lucanu's script and OD's script...
NONE of which actually achieve TOTAL separation,,,,
WHICH ONE is the most "EFFICIENT"????
I come here once a year to check out all the 'Script' threads for the same answer!
I know there are a few Scripts that work terribly well but the people that have them keep them to themselves, and fair enough if they have had a hand in tinkering.
I used to have a couple of scripts that are not here anymore and were kind of recent, They were GREAT much better than the ones you find here now, But I had a HDD failure and lost em, which saddened me more than anything else i lost on that failed drive!
Im only 3 hrs into my yearly seach of the threads Hopefully ill come up with something. \
What I know about the SQ ones, I ran hours of tests on the ones on here and a older one sounded much more 'open' and the back channels were great, then some there was this one that everyone lauded but it cut the top end away and made horrible artifacting in the rears, yes it had more separation but at the loss of much quality. Ive not had another go at SQ yet so don't know which one is better, Im re-going though my QS first.

It would be nice if there was a thread combining all the publicly available scripts and we could argue the effectiveness of each, Might be fun! Hell I might just do that, we could also share our methods sopmeone might be doing something in the process and someone might be doing something else and we could combine say all our 'methods' and come up with some kind of standard (which could always change when someone elses 'thing' comes along and is proved to be gold), so when new people come on here it could be the one stop script thread rather than read miles and miles of outdated information.
 

bigbillquad

800 Club - QQ All Star
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
986
Likes
509
Location
New Zealand . Waitakere
#32
I come here once a year to check out all the 'Script' threads for the same answer!
I know there are a few Scripts that work terribly well but the people that have them keep them to themselves, and fair enough if they have had a hand in tinkering.
I used to have a couple of scripts that are not here anymore and were kind of recent, They were GREAT much better than the ones you find here now, But I had a HDD failure and lost em, which saddened me more than anything else i lost on that failed drive!
Im only 3 hrs into my yearly seach of the threads Hopefully ill come up with something. \
What I know about the SQ ones, I ran hours of tests on the ones on here and a older one sounded much more 'open' and the back channels were great, then some there was this one that everyone lauded but it cut the top end away and made horrible artifacting in the rears, yes it had more separation but at the loss of much quality. Ive not had another go at SQ yet so don't know which one is better, Im re-going though my QS first.

It would be nice if there was a thread combining all the publicly available scripts and we could argue the effectiveness of each, Might be fun! Hell I might just do that, we could also share our methods sopmeone might be doing something in the process and someone might be doing something else and we could combine say all our 'methods' and come up with some kind of standard (which could always change when someone elses 'thing' comes along and is proved to be gold), so when new people come on here it could be the one stop script thread rather than read miles and miles of outdated information.
Hi. ade42

I totally agree with you we need someone like your self and others to put the most up to date scripts together here in one place and any advancements that have been done and can be done & A TO B tutorial for newcomers that can follow and do for themselves.
I have been wanted to get into scripts to decode SQ & QS but I am not that great with computers.
Bill....
 
Top