TurnipFarmer;334898 Wrote:
> Im just about to replaygain all my files using Foobar2000 however should
> I select all the files and select them all together and add replaygain
> tag data as albums.
> The reason why I am asking is that I thought about doing a few albums
> at a time and add replayg
Im just about to replaygain all my files using Foobar2000 however should
I select all the files and select them all together and add replaygain
tag data as albums.
The reason why I am asking is that I thought about doing a few albums
at a time and add replaygain tags to each album which I suppos
Mark Lanctot;332832 Wrote:
> Err, shouldn't that be 1 dB, not 0?
Well, I can't say with 100% certainty. You could be right. But I was
fairly sure the threshold of hearing is defined to be 0dB SPL.
Remember that 0dB doesn't mean "nothing" in an absolute sense. It's
just a reference point on a log
cliveb;332774 Wrote:
> 0dB SPL is defined as a pressure change of 20uPa (microPascals), and is
> generally accepted as the threshold of human hearing.
Err, shouldn't that be 1 dB, not 0?
--
Mark Lanctot
"Make it so it doesn't suck" is a good design target, but hard to
implement - Michael Her
liffy99;332642 Wrote:
> So 89db "SPL" is an absolute measure, not a relative one.
I failed to explain that "SPL" stands for "Sound Pressure Level". 0dB
SPL is defined as a pressure change of 20uPa (microPascals), and is
generally accepted as the threshold of human hearing. (For reference,
normal
Ahahhh - "I can see clearer now . . . . "
Thanks CliveB. So 89db "SPL" is an absolute measure, not a relative
one. I quite agree that if we all referred levels to the 0db full
output mark it would make a lot more sense.
And the 11db thing is just a complete red herring.
And as for "cranking the
liffy99;332171 Wrote:
> So, this will mean that when I listen to them with RG on, levels will be
> much the same for the average perceived music loudness but I'll have to
> crank the volume control round more to get back to the original volume
> levels of the tracks that have had gain reductions.
liffy99;332522 Wrote:
> Then this arbitrary level of 89db is touted around, but db is a relative
> scale, so 89db compared to what ? It surely can't be 89db below full
> output ! Or is it 89db above the -96db that might equate to the lower
> threshold of Red Book resolution (which, presunably, co
liffy99;332522 Wrote:
> Thanks Nonreality
>
> I think I do understand the Loudness Wars and the problem with dynamic
> range (and that brush strokes probably would not start out at 89db - a
> rather extreme example I'm sorry). What I struggle with is the
> different scales being used.
>
> One m
Thanks Nonreality
I think I do understand the Loudness Wars and the problem with dynamic
range (and that brush strokes probably would not start out at 89db - a
rather extreme example I'm sorry). What I struggle with is the
different scales being used.
One moment I am told that 0db equates to ful
liffy99;331916 Wrote:
> [2] Note that there is currently an outstanding bug concerning the
> Squeezebox's handling of positive ReplayGain settings. See here for the
> gory details: http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=5119
>
> Is this fixed yet ? Now that I've found a number of albums (mo
liffy99;332205 Wrote:
> 11db ? So peak volume =100db (which is the same as Odb ?) ?
>
> How does that then relate to the dynamic range of the CD medium at 96db
> ?
>
> And 11db isn't much when looking at peaks at all (about 12 times
> louder). Think of the contrast in a drum kit - one moment th
liffy99 wrote:
> Wow - 2db ? So virtually all of my rock recordings will have been
> clipped during mastering ?
Clipped during mastering is such an ugly concept.
But virtually all rock recordings are compressed past death as part of
the Loudness Wars.
_
11db ? So peak volume =100db (which is the same as Odb ?) ?
How does that then relate to the dynamic range of the CD medium at 96db
?
And 11db isn't much when looking at peaks at all (about 12 times
louder). Think of the contrast in a drum kit - one moment the snare is
being tickled with brushes
liffy99;332184 Wrote:
> Wow - 2db ? So virtually all of my rock recordings will have been
> clipped during mastering ?
>
> Ho hum
>
> Ok, I'll stick with defaults.
>
> The thing I find confusing is the apparent use of different scales.
> i.e. we talk about 0db as being the "peak" and then 89db
Wow - 2db ? So virtually all of my rock recordings will have been
clipped during mastering ?
Ho hum
Ok, I'll stick with defaults.
The thing I find confusing is the apparent use of different scales.
i.e. we talk about 0db as being the "peak" and then 89db as a level
below this that allows some h
liffy99;332171 Wrote:
> Well, gradually going through the whole collection with Foobar 2000 and
> adding replay gain (question : why doesn't Foobar show the RG details
> in the RG column ? They appear if I look at Track Properties and if I
> try to add RG again it tells me they are already there)
Well, gradually going through the whole collection with Foobar 2000 and
adding replay gain (question : why doesn't Foobar show the RG details
in the RG column ? They appear if I look at Track Properties and if I
try to add RG again it tells me they are already there).
Most albums end up with a su
snoogly;332079 Wrote:
> Hmmm. I used to use replay gain, but read somewhere (here or in the
> documentation somewhere) that it's best not to use it. I may have
> imagined it, but I am pretty sure I must have had a good reason for
> disabling it in SC settings.
>
> Am I mad, or is there a referen
Hmmm. I used to use replay gain, but read somewhere (here or in the
documentation somewhere) that it's best not to use it. I may have
imagined it, but I am pretty sure I must have had a good reason for
disabling it in SC settings.
Am I mad, or is there a reference somewhere that it's best not to
liffy99;331916 Wrote:
> [2] Note that there is currently an outstanding bug concerning the
> Squeezebox's handling of positive ReplayGain settings. See here for the
> gory details: http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=5119
>
> Is this fixed yet ? Now that I've found a number of albums (mo
[2] Note that there is currently an outstanding bug concerning the
Squeezebox's handling of positive ReplayGain settings. See here for the
gory details: http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=5119
Is this fixed yet ? Now that I've found a number of albums (mostly
classical) that do have posi
mark95841;331336 Wrote:
> If dbpoweramp was free I would not cringe every time you have
> recommended dbpoweramp, which you have done in at least 10 different
> responses I have seen so far but you really come off like you are
> getting commission from these guys for your constant recommendation.
liffy99;331420 Wrote:
> Think I follow that CliveB, but take the following;
> 1 track is recorded with peaks at full volume. 0db (there may be
> clipping that was introduced in the mastering process which we are
> powerless to correct).
> 2nd track peaks at -4db.
> So whu can't track 2 be amplifi
schiegl;331322 Wrote:
> This piece of code from ReplayGain.pm is responsible for smartgain (and
> similar applies to smart-crossfade)
>
> >
Code:
> >
> if (defined $album->replay_gain() && ($class->trackAlbumMatch($client, -1)
|| $class->trackAlbumMatch($client, 1))
mark95841;331336 Wrote:
> If dbpoweramp was free I would not cringe every time you have
> recommended dbpoweramp, which you have done in at least 10 different
> responses I have seen so far but you really come off like you are
> getting commission from these guys for your constant recommendation.
liffy99;331420 Wrote:
> Think I follow that CliveB, but take the following;
> 1 track is recorded with peaks at full volume. 0db (there may be
> clipping that was introduced in the mastering process which we are
> powerless to correct).
> 2nd track peaks at -4db.
> So whu can't track 2 be amplifi
mark95841;331336 Wrote:
> If dbpoweramp was free I would not cringe every time you have
> recommended dbpoweramp, which you have done in at least 10 different
> responses I have seen so far but you really come off like you are
> getting commission from these guys for your constant recommendation.
Think I follow that CliveB, but take the following;
1 track is recorded with peaks at full volume. 0db (there may be
clipping that was introduced in the mastering process which we are
powerless to correct).
2nd track peaks at -4db.
So whu can't track 2 be amplified (normalised ?) to reach 0db peak
liffy99;331234 Wrote:
> So still not sure why record levels are being reduced, though I see the
> lure of trying to get albums to sound equally loud at their loudest
> points - why not raise the quieter ones to the same level as RHCP (any
> compression in the mastering will still be unalterable).
mark95841;331336 Wrote:
> If dbpoweramp was free I would not cringe every time you have
> recommended dbpoweramp, which you have done in at least 10 different
> responses I have seen so far but you really come off like you are
> getting commission from these guys for your constant recommendation.
Nonreality;331126 Wrote:
> I would say that most modern albums (guessing 95% and up) need a
> negative replay gain. That means that the volume needs to be lowered
> to match up with other albums and not get into overiding peak values
> and causing clipping. Clipping is bad and can cause problem
bobkoure;331237 Wrote:
> Anyone know for sure how to turn RG-adjustment off for -sure- when
> listening album-by-album?
> I listen to MusicIP mixes a lot - and RG's a godsend for mixes. But,
> when I'm listening to an entire album, I'm oft-times listening
> critically and want any volume adjustme
bobkoure;331237 Wrote:
> Anyone know for sure how to turn RG-adjustment off for -sure- when
> listening album-by-album?
> I listen to MusicIP mixes a lot - and RG's a godsend for mixes. But,
> when I'm listening to an entire album, I'm oft-times listening
> critically and want any volume adjustme
Maybe it's time for the RIAA to get back to its original charter and do
for this what they did for vinyl.
Not that I'm holding my breath.
Meanwhile, it'd be great for places like allmusic to start adding the
RG album peak/gain numbers for each album - along with a link to
something that explains
liffy99;331234 Wrote:
> One thing that still has me a little baffled is this concept of
> clipping. If I look at the waveform of a recording (say for that Red
> Hot Chilli peppers stuff) I assume that the peak levels will still
> remain at or below 0db. So it can't "clip" can it ?
Well it can go
Anyone know for sure how to turn RG-adjustment off for -sure- when
listening album-by-album?
I listen to MusicIP mixes a lot - and RG's a godsend for mixes. But,
when I'm listening to an entire album, I'm oft-times listening
critically and want any volume adjustment -off-.
It seems like this is wh
H - very interesting.
One thing that still has me a little baffled is this concept of
clipping. If I look at the waveform of a recording (say for that Red
Hot Chilli peppers stuff) I assume that the peak levels will still
remain at or below 0db. So it can't "clip" can it ?
The only clipping I
liffy99;331117 Wrote:
> Can I do this with files that are now stored in FLAC format ? What
> software would I need ? Any other tips ?
All you need is the metaflac tool that comes with the normal FLAC
software. I wrote a simple shell script to go through all my album
dirs and add the tags if non
liffy99;331154 Wrote:
> I've used Foobar 2000 to add replay gain (as single album option) to a
> Keb Mo recordimg - overall level reduction of 9.04 db (yikes).
Try a Red Hot Chili Peppers album...-12 dB across the board.
> I'll listen later but assume that the level of this album will now be
>
I'm not necessarily a fan of Wikipedia, but this is worth a read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
--
Skittler
Dave.
SB3 --> Cyrus 8vs --> PMC FB1
Duet --> AudioEngine A2
Skittler's Profile: http://forums.slim
liffy99;331154 Wrote:
> I remember the good old days when the source was the source and we all
> spent many happy hours tweaking and changing equipment to get the best
> out of it. Now not only do the manufacturers keep changing the
> platforms but seems they also mess up the source itself.
>
>
Thanks Nonreality - very clear explanation.
I've used Foobar 2000 to add replay gain (as single album option) to a
Keb Mo recordimg - overall level reduction of 9.04 db (yikes). I'll
listen later but assume that the level of this album will now be 9db
below many others so I just need to wind the
liffy99;331117 Wrote:
> Ok - now that I've recorded loads of music, I notice even more than
> before the huge volume differnces between albums. Looking at some
> tracks on Audacity I can see that some have been "maxed" to the nines
> during the production process - all high level with little dyn
Ok - now that I've recorded loads of music, I notice even more than
before the huge volume differnces between albums. Looking at some
tracks on Audacity I can see that some have been "maxed" to the nines
during the production process - all high level with little dynamic
range (e.g. Keb Mo's "Suit
45 matches
Mail list logo
