Spectral View Range

Under
Settings/Spectral/Spectral Plot Style
there are two choices. One is
Logarithmic Energy Plot
This has a Range parameter.

Can the Range be simply interpreted or is it one of those things unexpressible in English?
Does a value of 80 (as a particular instance) mean that the display shows all frequencies with an amplitude level from 0dB to -80dB, but nothing lower than -80dB?

The plot obviously can look rather different depending on the Windowing Function and the parameter values assigned therein, more on the parameter values than on the Windowing Function itself. Do changes in these three values change the proper interpretation of the Range parameter?

[Spectral Display]

Andy, I'm presuming you're in CE2000 or CEP1.2a.  I have neither available here but believe this is the same in CEP2.1, the settings for which fits your description.  The only difference between this and AA3, so far as controls go, is that there is no longer an option for Logarithmic vs. Linear, which is a good thing -- we hear logarithmically, and the Linear plot makes quiet details hard to see.  So first off is to recommend the Log plot for general use.

For the sake of those unfamiliar with these settings, here are quotes from the Help files, since this is fairly technical.  For that matter, I'm pretty familiar with this and the Help file review is a good thing!

Spectral Display
Windowing Function: This drop-down list lets you choose the method Cool Edit Pro uses to window the spectral data before it displays it. The windows are listed in order from the narrowest frequency band/most noise to the widest frequency band/least noise. Blackmann or Blackmann-Harris are good choices.

Resolution: This setting specifies the number of vertical bands to be used in drawing frequencies. Keep in mind that the larger this number is, the longer it will take for Cool Edit Pro to render the spectral display. Performance will vary based upon the speed of your computer.

Window Width: This is the width of the window (or frame size) used in plotting the spectral data, where 75% is a frame size of your FFT size. Window Width basically lets you increase time resolution at the expense of some frequency resolution. So the display will become more accurate along the timeline (left and right) and less accurate along the frequency scale (up and down) as the window width decreases.  The default setting is 100%, but you should lower the value (50 to 70 works best) if you want to increase the resolution horizontally, such as to find out exactly where a certain frequency starts. .

Plot Style
Logarithmic Energy Plot: In this mode, colors change with the decibel value of the energy at any particular time and frequency. More details in the very quiet ranges can be seen in this mode, especially if the Range is quite high (above 150dB).  Use the Range value to adjust the sensitivity in plotting frequencies.

Linear Energy Plot: If this option is selected, colors are chosen based on percentage of maximum amplitude instead of decibel amplitude. Linear Energy Plot can be useful for viewing the general overview of a signal without getting bogged down by detail at much quieter levels.  The Scaling factor can be adjusted to highlight audio of different intensities, and can be thought of as a sensitivity value.

So, your questions, Andy.  The range value is simply expressible in English exactly as you took it: 80 means an 80-decibel window, below which black will be displayed.  I use a much higher value so I can see the noise floor (either 144 or 160dB), and with today’s computers a resolution of 2K bands is not too slow, but I do reduce the Window Width for better time accuracy, down to 75% or even 50%.

You asked if “changes in these three values change the proper interpretation of the Range parameter?”  No, they don’t, but they appear to.  The range is still being interpreted exactly in the amount you specify!  However, changing the Window Width and bands of resolution will affect the overall “brightness,” if you will, of the display, which is one reason I use such a high range value.  So in actuality the Range value is the one that doesn’t directly have an interaction with the other settings, but the results vary as though it does.  This isn’t important.  The question is: are you able to see what you need to see?  If not, phenagle the settings until you have sufficient detail, it pleases your eye, and suits your editing style.

Thanks.

I am quite familiar with using higher values in the Range parameter. Most of the time I like the 120dB default, but 140dB or 160dB will sometimes make more elusive noises, heard in the headphones, show up on the screen. I was interested in the meaning of the parameter value as a means of getting at what might actually be significant in the finished product, when listening in the living room or some other real world venue.

Real world venue?  Who listens in those?   

Cool.

economically disadvantaged people

But as far as I can make out these days, most so-called 'real world' venues appear only to have headphone listeners in them - so they may as well be anywhere. So in that sense, the whole argument is moot. But if you want to know what the actual answer is, it's pretty much this; take the background level of your listening environment, and subtract 10dB from it. Anything below that level is irrelevant.

Unfortunately this means that because of noise-cancelling headphones, etc that you have to take account of the worst possible conditions - which happen in this instance to be the quietest, and that's what you process for. And if, because you haven't got the latest super wizz-bang tools to do this effectively and therefore can't get rid of all of the low-level artefacts you don't like then, hey, just add some noise to mask them instead... If anybody complains, just call it 'retro'!

I can only conclude that there must be some fundamental difference in human nature in your part of the world. My experience says that the majority of people who listen to music outside of their homes regard the world as their exclusive domain when it comes to playing whatever passes for entertainment to them.

Automobiles sound systems are the most numerous but portable boom boxes are also in plentiful supply to turn parks, beaches, backyards, and campgrounds into private concert venues, the hell with anyone else who thinks they might have some right to inhabit the same acoustical space.

Indoor public places are more often favored with cell phone and other personal type players having built-in or add on speakers, anything but earphones, to make sure everyone else knows what interests you you you. Audio quality is most often wrecked but what does that matter when there is an opportunity to assault local space and make sure everyone else is tuned to your channel.

My experience says that the majority of people who listen to music outside of their homes regard the world as their exclusive domain when it comes to playing whatever passes for entertainment to them.

Used to be like that, but things moved on quite a bit a couple of years ago. We get far less car-based stuff as well now too - which is something of a relief.

So we don't get much 'public' music from boom-boxes at all - since the iPod, it really has changed quite a bit. And this is very much the majority, believe me. It's a fashion thing, as much as anything. Don't worry - I'm sure that the US will catch up one day...

Oh, and we also have councils who now have some real power to deal with noise nuisances if they want to. But really, I don't think that this has made much difference at all, except to people who hold noisy all-night parties and get their noise-making equipment confiscated.

there are areas in US and I am sure sub sets of communities that still 'broadcast' musical taste but in a variety of mid to large cities (traversing a lot of neighborhoods) I have found things to be similar to Steve's assessment.  For much the same reason . . . fashion.  As I have tended to be on the road a lot I frequently 'work' out of public spaces . . . coffee houses, parks etc. and found the fashion of blue tooth ear piece (cell phone conversations tended to bother me considerably more then other peoples musical taste) and iPod reduced some of the background noise.  Though in most cities planes trains automobiles and misc. industrial processes still raise   background noise above the level I like for critical listening to anything.

but interpreting levels of 'rudeness' will always be individual and personal