[sdiy] VU meter algorithms

Ben Bradley ben.pi.bradley at gmail.com
Mon Mar 18 20:11:55 CET 2019


Practically speaking, it's rare if ever that a musical signal has a
20kHz frequency as its biggest signal. 40kHz sampling of the direct
audio should be plenty.

Having hardware to do the rectification and filtering would certainly
work (look up "precision rectifier" circuits where one or more diodes
are in an op-amp's feedback loop), but again, I don't see them as
necessary. Digitizing audio at sufficient sample rate and resolution
is pretty cheap thesedays. The problem is then back to the OP's
question, finding good algorithms for level indication.

For peak, use a "hold time" of perhaps 1/2 or 1/5 second. When a peak
is detected, set the bargraph level to it, and set a timeout of the
hold time. When the timeout occurs, set the peak level to zero. If
there's still a signal, it will immediately set the currently held
peak to the new peak value. But wait, there's more: Have the peak
detection code continue to run during this timeout time, If there's a
new higher peak, save it as the current peak AND reset the timeout to
the hold time, so it stays at this new level.

For the "instantaneous level" value, get the AVERAGE over a shorter
time, maybe 1/10th to 1/20th of a second. Rectify the samples, add
them up over the period of time, and you get a number proportional to
the average level that you can scale as appropriate, such as dividing
by the number of samples in the time period.


On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 PM Scott Gravenhorst <music.maker at gte.net> wrote:
>
>
> Reading this, (and in my naivete) I wonder if part of this could be mitigated by doing
> some analog processing before the digital sampling.  Something like a full wave
> rectifier of the signal with a low pass filter that has a leak resistor?  Then I think
> the sample rate could be much lower than 40 kHz?  As I said - naivete...
>
> Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> >Well, quite.
> >
> >The short answer is “far higher than any reasonable LED update rate”.
> >
> >If we assume 20KHz as the highest input frequency, then obviously
> >my 40KHz sample rate is inadequate because we might sample at the
> >zero crossings each time. Updating the LEDs at 100Hz would be
> >more than enough (flicker at that speed is already perceived as
> >“variable brightness”) but such a rate is hopeless as a
> >sample rate.
> >
> >But it’s worth pointing out that we’re trying to imitate
> >something that was originally done with moving coil meters and
> >which had quite considerable lag (300msecs attack and decay from
> >what I can find out). So how hard can it be?!
> >
> >
> >> On 18 Mar 2019, at 15:38, rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk wrote:
> >>
> >> Ahhh, but how high a sample rate do you need to use to be sure
> >that you take a sample at the peak of a waveform!?!?!? ;-) > >
> >-Richie, > > > > On 2019-03-18 15:25, Tom Wiltshire wrote: >> Hi
> >all, >> Does anyone know of any good resources on bargraph VU
> >meter >> algorithms, and specifically implementing a “Peak
> >hold” feature? >> I’m trying to write one - well, I *have*
> >written one - but I’m not >> overly impressed with its
> >performance. The “VU meter” portion of the >> code is pretty
> >good: I sample the audio at 40KHz, then rectify it, >> take the
> >highest sample in a block of 16, and then apply an IIR >>
> >smoothing filter with a time constant of about 200msecs. That
> >part >> seems pretty good, although it “under reads”
> >significantly. >> I’m having worse problems with the Peak Hold
> >dot. This has an attack >> of zero (so it never misses a peak)
> >but uses a longer decay time of >> 400msecs or so. But a typical
> >input signal tends to make it jump >> about, so instead of
> >clearly lighting a single LED, it instead lights >> two or three
> >intermittently. This makes the display rather confusing >> to
> >look at. >> I’d thought to just get stuck in and see how it
> >went (and it went ok) >> but I think now might be a good time for
> >a bit of research. This is a >> solved problem, so someone must
> >have dealt with these issues before >> me. >> Thanks, >> Tom >>
> >_______________________________________________ >> Synth-diy
> >mailing list >> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org >>
> >http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Synth-diy mailing list
> >Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> >http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >?
>
> -- ScottG
> ________________________________________________________________________
> -- Scott Gravenhorst
> -- http://scott.joviansynth.com/
> -- When the going gets tough, the tough use the command line.
> -- Matt 21:22
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



More information about the Synth-diy mailing list