Em qui., 10 de mar. de 2022 às 20:52, Reindl Harald
escreveu:
>
> volume normalization is easy to understand:
>
>
hi Reindl,
I'm doing a critical inspection here and testing the audio capture
microphones to see why these differences in some
audios. The ones I work with, until they are few, the p
Am 10.03.22 um 22:41 schrieb CMG DiGiTaL:
it adjusts the *general volume* of a track
it's thes ame as touch the volume vontrol
typically it *lowers* the volume of every file
ok Reindl,
It could be that these files were already peaking high and I just realized
now that I'm
paying more att
>
> it adjusts the *general volume* of a track
> it's thes ame as touch the volume vontrol
> typically it *lowers* the volume of every file
>
ok Reindl,
It could be that these files were already peaking high and I just realized
now that I'm
paying more attention to my audio volumes.
thanks
>
>
> Yeah, this place seems kind of strange. Attacking people is ok, but don't
> you dare top post! Heh.
>
I fully agree with you!
>
> I understand what Clayton said about the volume on the amplifier, but
>
>
Thank you Clayton,
Got what I meant! ... as I have some very very low FLAC's,
Am 10.03.22 um 17:17 schrieb CMG DiGiTaL:
mp3gain, not what I want, even with its controls, I ended up needing to
control some peaks of the music after using it
nosense!
it adjusts the *general volume* of a track
it's thes ame as touch the volume vontrol
typically it *lowers* the volume o
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 8:17 AM CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
> Ok boys each one has its truth and the sum of them, makes us reach
> excellence!... but in the end,
> we must be faithful to what seems most correct to us.
>
>
Yeah, this place seems kind of strange. Attacking people is ok, but don't
you
Ok boys each one has its truth and the sum of them, makes us reach
excellence!... but in the end,
we must be faithful to what seems most correct to us.
Before starting this topic, I had done a lot of testing with software and
plugins related to LUFS normalization:
- The plugin I specified h
Am 10.03.22 um 10:17 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:10 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
Am 10.03.22 um 09:54 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:46 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
your "FFmpeg is right tool for this jobs. You just do not
know how to use it" comes from the
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:10 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
>
>
> Am 10.03.22 um 09:54 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:46 AM Reindl Harald
> > wrote:
> >> your "FFmpeg is right tool for this jobs. You just do not
> >> know how to use it" comes from the viewpoint that you don't know
Am 10.03.22 um 09:54 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:46 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
your "FFmpeg is right tool for this jobs. You just do not
know how to use it" comes from the viewpoint that you don't know
anything else than ffmpeg - period
Pathethic, I could say same thing a
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:46 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
>
>
> Am 10.03.22 um 09:42 schrieb Reindl Harald:
> > Am 10.03.22 um 09:41 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:38 AM Reindl Harald
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Am 10.03.22 um 09:36 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
> > we have 2022 an
Am 10.03.22 um 09:42 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 10.03.22 um 09:41 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:38 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
Am 10.03.22 um 09:36 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
we have 2022 and volume normalization is done via anlazye and
meta-tags
where tools exists FOR R128 norm
Am 10.03.22 um 09:41 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:38 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
Am 10.03.22 um 09:36 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
we have 2022 and volume normalization is done via anlazye and meta-tags
where tools exists FOR R128 normalization
FFmpeg can do r128 scanning just
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:38 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
>
>
> Am 10.03.22 um 09:36 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
> >> we have 2022 and volume normalization is done via anlazye and meta-tags
> >> where tools exists FOR R128 normalization
> >>
> >
> > FFmpeg can do r128 scanning just fine
>
> if you only know
Am 10.03.22 um 09:36 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
we have 2022 and volume normalization is done via anlazye and meta-tags
where tools exists FOR R128 normalization
FFmpeg can do r128 scanning just fine
if you only know how to use a hammer you probably will use the hammer to
open your beer - it
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:26 AM Reindl Harald
wrote:
>
>
> Am 10.03.22 um 08:54 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
>
> >> Perhaps you need a different tool. If you're actually just dealing with
> >> music files you should snag foobar2000 and use it for this job
> instead. It
> >> uses the same R128 algorith
Am 10.03.22 um 08:54 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
Perhaps you need a different tool. If you're actually just dealing with
music files you should snag foobar2000 and use it for this job instead. It
uses the same R128 algorithm. It is made for dealing with music, being a
music player. And you can
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 8:14 AM Clayton Macleod
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:26 PM CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
>
> >
> > OK mark, very nice to hear about your audio experience!...I love it, it
> > makes me feel free and alive!
> >
> > With this internet audio standardization movement, I'm paying mor
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:26 PM CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
>
> OK mark, very nice to hear about your audio experience!...I love it, it
> makes me feel free and alive!
>
> With this internet audio standardization movement, I'm paying more
> attention to this type of LUFS standardization
> because my commer
>
>
> Two decades ago I was heavily involved in a music restoration project of
> live concert performances
> (with the approval of the band). I used compression extensively. Most
> commercial recordings are
> compressed, meaning: the peaks are made uniform without clipping, so
> volume is made unif
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 12:13 PM CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
> ok Clayton,
>
> I understood everything you said... I mentioned the plugin, because I used
> it in some audio and it was really satisfactory,
> as it is an evaluation product, that is, it will lose its functions in a
> few days, I tried to mak
>
> Two decades ago I was heavily involved in a music restoration project of
> live concert performances
>
OK mark, very nice to hear about your audio experience!...I love it, it
makes me feel free and alive!
With this internet audio standardization movement, I'm paying more
attention to this typ
On 2022-03-09 15:12, CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
You cannot increase the volume of a file that is already near/at full scale
ok Clayton,
I understood everything you said... I mentioned the plugin, because I used
it in some audio and it was really satisfactory,
as it is an evaluation product, that
>
>
> You cannot increase the volume of a file that is already near/at full scale
>
ok Clayton,
I understood everything you said... I mentioned the plugin, because I used
it in some audio and it was really satisfactory,
as it is an evaluation product, that is, it will lose its functions in a
few
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 3:15 AM CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
> is
> it compromising the audio to achieve what
> I defined as a target?
>
You cannot increase the volume of a file that is already near/at full scale
without compromising it no matter what tool you are using. If adjusted
linearly it will
>
> Linear processing is multiplying whole file with single float number,
> volume/gain adjustment.
>
> Dynamic processing is changing dynamics of input audio.
>
hi Paul,
I understand what you said, but as I mentioned, I have some doubts related
to the test I did on the WLM Plus Stereo
plugin.
W
On 3/8/22, CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
> Yeah, this is what I suspected. You've got source files that are below
>>
>
> Okay Clayton, I get the concept!
>
> As I'm doing a batch for myself, if necessary, normalize the LUFS of my
> files, I was
> left with this doubt as to why I can't do it in linear mode a
Yeah, this is what I suspected. You've got source files that are below
>
Okay Clayton, I get the concept!
As I'm doing a batch for myself, if necessary, normalize the LUFS of my
files, I was
left with this doubt as to why I can't do it in linear mode and why I
couldn't reach the -10 LUFS target.
On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 7:15 PM CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
> Input Integrated:*-12.9* LUFS
> Input True Peak: *+0.1* dBTP
> ...
I want (*-10.0* LUFS and *-0.5* True peak) to normalize the file.
>
Yeah, this is what I suspected. You've got source files that are below
your desired target volume,
>
> Post measured values of your flac files and target values you set?
>
I use the dual-pass normalization process, loudnorm analyzes the input
audio and generates
the values that will enter pass 2.
First pass:
An observation:
In this pass, I still haven't entered the LUFS target value or the Tr
> I haven't looked at this in ffmpeg, but in other audio circles whenever
>
OK,Clayton
the way you explained the behavior of loudnorm makes sense, it tries to
preserve the audio quality without cuts and compressions!
thanks
___
ffmpeg-user mailing lis
On 3/7/22, CMG DiGiTaL wrote:
> hi,
>
> About loudnorm normalization: Normalization in Dual-pass mode.
>
> Rules for normalization to be linear:
>
> 1 - Values entry:
> LUFS_TARGET (user entry)
> LRA (get input file - Pass 1 loudnorm)
where is measured_tp ?
> TP_TARGET (use
I haven't looked at this in ffmpeg, but in other audio circles whenever
you're talking about normalizing you have to be aware of what needs to be
done in order to meet your goals. If you need to turn the volume up and
the source is already near clipping, and you need to turn it up such that
the au
hi,
About loudnorm normalization: Normalization in Dual-pass mode.
Rules for normalization to be linear:
1 - Values entry:
LUFS_TARGET (user entry)
LRA (get input file - Pass 1 loudnorm)
TP_TARGET (user entry)
THRESH (get input file - Pass 1 loudnorm)
OFFSET
34 matches
Mail list logo
