Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: cutestudio's DeClip (Read 11078 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

cutestudio's DeClip

Anyone tried this, with ABX of before/after?  There's a thread about it on 'Uploads' much not much in the way of testimonials.

http://www.cutestudio.net/data/products/au...eclip/index.php

and I'm a little suspicious of some of the sales pitch ,e.g, on the page about CD clipping


http://www.cutestudio.net/data/products/au...pping/index.php

Quote
This is one reason why analog can sound better, and why pro-audio generally runs at 48kHz, 96kHz and above, the waveforms are a much more accurate approximation to the music and much easier to build filters for.



much more accurate?  Really?

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #1 –
I have tried it and bought the pro version about two weeks ago (since it is cheap).

It appears to do quite nice job, given that it has to quess what to do.  The pro version easly adds 6-8 dB to peaks in some modern stuff and result sounds better and softer to me.  I haven't done any real abx test, at least not yet.

One test I did was to generate full amplitude sine wave, amplify by 1dB to make it clip and declip it.  The result looks visually almost like a sine wave.  The spectrum analysis shows the same spectrum as the clipped one, slightly more smudged.  It clearly attempts to keep it sound the same.

If you want I can declip a sample for you to test.
Teemu

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #2 –
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote
This is one reason why analog can sound better, and why pro-audio generally runs at 48kHz, 96kHz and above, the waveforms are a much more accurate approximation to the music and much easier to build filters for.
much more accurate?  Really?
Well, not in the audible frequency range (<20kHz). I can imagine two possible explanations for their statement:
- extended bandwidth of >44.1kHz sampling rate formats can theoretically result in a more accurate representation of the analog original, especially if it contains significant energy in the >20kHz range.
- waveform graphics on most computer based audio applications (DAW's) use simple interpolation to connect the sample values. At higher sampling rates, the displayed waveform might give the impression of being (much) more accurate. The DAC's analog output however will be very similar.

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #3 –
Quote from: Kees de Visser on
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote
This is one reason why analog can sound better, and why pro-audio generally runs at 48kHz, 96kHz and above, the waveforms are a much more accurate approximation to the music and much easier to build filters for.
much more accurate?  Really?
Well, not in the audible frequency range (<20kHz).



Yup, that's why my eyebrows were raised.  Were he to qualify that sentence, it would ring less of hype.
I have no problem if he were to claim more accurate rendering of frequencies that are at Redbook's Nyquist limit, and I have no problem with the claim about filters.  But as written it implies that output of the common audible range is made intrinsically 'much more accurate'.

Quote
I can imagine two possible explanations for their statement:
- extended bandwidth of >44.1kHz sampling rate formats can theoretically result in a more accurate representation of the analog original, especially if it contains significant energy in the >20kHz range.
- waveform graphics on most computer based audio applications (DAW's) use simple interpolation to connect the sample values. At higher sampling rates, the displayed waveform might give the impression of being (much) more accurate. The DAC's analog output however will be very similar.


I guess I should try comparing the waveform reconstructions of Audition of the same material recorded at  different sample rates.

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #4 –
has anyone else gotten this software?  it looks a little suspicious, but im curious to hear what others think....

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #5 –
Quote from: mattdm11 on
has anyone else gotten this software?  it looks a little suspicious, but im curious to hear what others think....



I bought SeeDeClip Duo about 2 weeks ago, and ihmo, it is worth every penny.  I'm in the process of running all my music through it, finding the best settings for each CD, etc.  It has really done a fantastic job repairing alot of the compressed garbage they squeeze on to CDs nowadays.  I love it!!!



NOTE: Some music is just so badly mastered, that I have not been able to repair it to my satisfaction.. for example: the album Get Rich Or Die Tryin by 50 Cent.  A few tracks sound much improved, but for the most part, this CD is awful.  The kick drum is so distorted, it really isn't funny that anyone put his/her seal of approval on it for commercial release.  .... then again, anyone who actually listens to that cRAP-music deserves to hear crap.  lol    rock > rap

Feel free to contact me if you r looking for pointers on settings I use!  I have very picky ears. 

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #6 –
Bad remastered records are definitely destroyed. I am actually happy that many band fans are starting to complain about how the records are being put out. Metallica for example, put out an extremely overcompressed record wich is being criticized by many people while praised by the band. The software can masquerade some of the distortion by adding more distortion but they can never repair bad mastering job.

The more the world complain, the more changes in the future we will have. But not yet, not yet...

Quote
50 Cent


I wouldn't expect or take anything serious from that branch of music style.

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #7 –
Quote from: lfgWCpst on
Quote from: mattdm11 on

has anyone else gotten this software?  it looks a little suspicious, but im curious to hear what others think....



I bought SeeDeClip Duo about 2 weeks ago, and ihmo, it is worth every penny.  I'm in the process of running all my music through it, finding the best settings for each CD, etc.  It has really done a fantastic job repairing alot of the compressed garbage they squeeze on to CDs nowadays.  I love it!!!



NOTE: Some music is just so badly mastered, that I have not been able to repair it to my satisfaction.. for example: the album Get Rich Or Die Tryin by 50 Cent.  A few tracks sound much improved, but for the most part, this CD is awful.  The kick drum is so distorted, it really isn't funny that anyone put his/her seal of approval on it for commercial release.  .... then again, anyone who actually listens to that cRAP-music deserves to hear crap.  lol    rock > rap

Feel free to contact me if you r looking for pointers on settings I use!  I have very picky ears. 


I'd love to be able to send you one track that I feel is heavily compressed and see if it can truly make a difference before I buy it.....I assume once you alter the file, it stays that way?  Or is it sort of a "tag" on the MP3 file?

cutestudio's DeClip

Reply #8 –
Quote from: mattdm11 on
I'd love to be able to send you one track that I feel is heavily compressed and see if it can truly make a difference before I buy it.....I assume once you alter the file, it stays that way?  Or is it sort of a "tag" on the MP3 file?


SeeDeClip Duo deals with wave files, nothing else... it attempts to repair AUDIO compression (not file compression.. such as MP3s, AACs, etc) .. so, it only makes sense to run LOSSLESS (in wave formatt) files thru it.

As you can see in the screenshot below, the kick drum (and other sounds) in that song was recorded way too loud, and ran out of room (bottom track), so instead of a nice, natural curvy-wave-shape, it is "clipped" off at the peaks.  SeeDeClip Duo reduces the overall volume of the track, then basically tries to figure out what information got clipped off, and adds it... as shown on the top track.  I personally think the sound of the repaired track is a huge improvement... which again, is why I'm in the process of running just about my entire music library thru this program.

Program in this screenshot is GoldWave.  (another excellent audio program I recommend!)




As far as the actual operation of the SeeDeClip Duo:  You choose an input file (.wav), adjust the misc. settings, choose a directory and name for the output file, and click the Execute button.  It doesn't alter the original file in any way, and it gives u a new "DeClipped" version.