Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Post Production > Post - Surround - Video

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-14-2006, 02:45 PM
B Stewart B Stewart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Lehi, UT, USA
Posts: 37
Default LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

I was pretty happy about the new LEQ meter with 7.2 but then realized it was not an LEQ(m). I do trailers from time to time for theatrical release and T.A.S.A. now requires a LEQm report and levels not exceeding 85db LEQm. I usually rent a Dolby 737 LEQm meter when doing these spots as they sell for about $2000 and rent for $30/day. Does anyone know how or if LEQa translates at at all to LEQm?
__________________
B Stewart @ The Stewdio, LLC
Pro Tools Ultimate HDX 2019.12 w/HD I/O's and HD Sync
24 Fader D-Command ES
Mac 3.5 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5
32 GB 1866 MHz DDR3 Memory
OS 10.14.6
Soundminer, Izotope RX7, NUGEN Loudness Bundle, Waves Platinum, Restoration, and Surround bundles
Source-Connect, ISDN, Pitch Doctor, Pitch N' Time, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-14-2006, 06:18 PM
soundthinker soundthinker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 76
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

Try this Dolby .PDF. And this.

From what I've gathered, Leq(m) is used to measure 'annoying' frequency content while Leq(a) measures 'dialog' frequency content.

Page 7 of the second .PDF shows the two weighting curves, I suppose you could put an EQ in front of the meter and try to fudge it. I've never tried and don't know how close the readings would be to an actual Leq(m) meter.

/jim
__________________
James Slanger
HD3 Accel PT9HD
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-16-2006, 06:46 AM
georgia georgia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: NY,NY
Posts: 1,859
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

http://homepage.mac.com/craigsmith/html/tooloud.html

Link to a great paper about Film levels. It discusses LEQm and LEQa



cheers
geo
__________________
georgia hilton CAS MPSE MPE

Hilton Media Management

Film Doctors http://www.filmdoctors.com
Me... http://georgiahilton.webs.com/
Stage 32 http://www.stage32.com/profile/6569/georgia-hilton
My Production Company http://www.hiltonmm.com

CREDITS (partial) http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0385255/resume
MEMBER: IATSE LOCAL 700
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-30-2007, 01:24 PM
3008 3008 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

Leq(m) is a measurement of perceived loudness over time and was designed for film trailers - not films and adopted by TASA. The Eq and normalization for (m) was created to correlate with the annoyance for really loud audio in the mid to higher freq range in the cinema - audio that is louder and usually has a smaller dynamic range - i.e. commercials.

Leq(A) was designed for measuring loudness in broadcast and created to focus on an Eq that corresponds to the dialog range.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-30-2007, 01:47 PM
TheHenchman TheHenchman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 544
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

I use the Phasescope plug-in as a guide.
I have found that the Dolby box registers 3db hotter, so keep that in mind and you shoudl be fine.
I just mixed a show yesterday, and when I ran it through the LM100, most of my overs were about .1 to .5 over.

I'll just keep a closer watch on my levels now. And I should be good.

Mark
__________________
www.markhensley.tv

IMDB Credits
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-30-2007, 05:19 PM
postprosound postprosound is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 198
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

Mark

I was hoping that you would talk about this a bit further... first off i realize that lm100 readings and the phasescope leq(a) readings are different. but that aside, mark you mention that you use the phasescope as a general guide... how so?
how do you have the phasescope set? You also mention that you find that the lm100 unit runs about ' 3 db's hotter'. so, lets say that you have to meet a -25 dialnorm, then you look for -28 on your phasescope?
also, what kind of results have you gotten, thus far? in general, has this system worked?
thanks... i'd like to see some real world use of this!!
__________________
We, in post sound, are illusionists, not magicians.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-30-2007, 06:14 PM
rhumphries rhumphries is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 435
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

Quote:
I use the Phasescope plug-in as a guide.
I have found that the Dolby box registers 3db hotter, so keep that in mind and you shoudl be fine.
I just mixed a show yesterday, and when I ran it through the LM100, most of my overs were about .1 to .5 over.

I'll just keep a closer watch on my levels now. And I should be good.

Mark
I'm not doubting your abilities, but I have never had any luck correlating phase-scope and the LM100, especially when using the LM100's "Dialogue Intelligence". Are you referring to long term or short term? I'm assuming short term since you reffered to tenths of a dB, which you would really only know from charting the short term.

Long term seems nearly impossible get the two meters to match since "Dialogue Intelligence" basically puts the LM100 in pause when there is no dialogue. Phasescope doesn't do this, so it's basing it's measurement on different material. Even if you only run Phasescope on the DX stem, when there is no dialogue, the average level as measured by Phasescope drops rather than than hold steady as is the case with the LM100.

Having said that, I do agree that if your room is calibrated, it's not hard to mix it in the pocket without watching the LM100 every moment. But I wouldn't bet a job on it.

If it works for you then more power to you, but my advice to anyone would be that if your client asks for an LM100 in their spec, then shell out the bucks. It's much cheaper than losing a client.

FWIW, I am not a Dolby fan boy by any stretch of the imagination. I'm furious that this box became a standard to begin with, but I've ground my teeth over it enough and now just see it as a cost of doing business.

-Richard

P.S. If anyone doesn't want to shell out the bucks for it, I'll run a .wav of your mix through my LM100 and print you out a chart of the result-- for my regular rate, of course. You can contact me off list at Richard at TakomaMedia (you know the rest).
__________________
•HD Native, 192, AJA Kona LHi PCIe, 2x2.4GhzQuadcore Intel(5,1), 32GB Ram, OSX 10.12.6, PT 2019.6
•HD Native, 192, AJA Kona LHi PCIe, 2x2.4GhzQuadcore Intel(5,1), 32GB Ram, OSX 10.12.6 PT 2019.6
•HD Native, Omni, AJA Kona LHi PCIe, 2x2.4GhzQuadcore Intel(5,1), 32GB Ram, OSX 10.13.? PT 2019.6
•HD Native, Focusrite, BlackMagic Intensity, i9 9900, 32GB Ram, Windows 10 pro PT 2020.5
•HD Native, Omni, BlackMagic Intensity, i7 8600, 32GB Ram, Windows 10 pro PT 2019.6

[COLOR=SeaGreen][B][FONT=Trebuchet MS]www.TakomaMedia.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-30-2007, 06:56 PM
postprosound postprosound is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 198
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

How does AudioLeak fit in
?
__________________
We, in post sound, are illusionists, not magicians.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-30-2007, 07:23 PM
3008 3008 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

Mark,
If you don't mind me asking-
What is the dialnorm that you are mixing to for broadcast and theatrical?
And what level are you printing to tape?

Thanks
Talk soon
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-30-2007, 07:41 PM
TheHenchman TheHenchman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 544
Default Re: LEQ(a) vs. LEQ(m)

Yes, if the spec calls for-25 then I hit -28 to -31.
I set the phasescope for the 2sec reading.
I also avoid over compressing/limiting the elements/stems.
I'll see how the next few shows go, being more diligent at hitting the -28 max level, and report back. I have a couple coming up in the next few weeks.

Mark
__________________
www.markhensley.tv

IMDB Credits
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:37 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com