[[email protected]]

Don't ASSume, Luxey.

[[email protected]]

Mike R:

No compression/equalization/noise reduction/echo/reverb/flange/whatever is imparted by replay-gain software.

I checked waveforms of original vs RG'd song files, and they vary only in amplitude.

[Ralph Barone[_2_]]

Ron Capik wrote:
On 12/11/2012 5:45 PM, None wrote:
li'l krissie wrote in message
...
Mike Rivers: "Whose problem is this? Does the listener need to hear every
song at the same volume? How boring. "

The problem is how people listen to music today. Most no longer
listen to whole album sides, where the levels are all relatively
matched. I don't recall a single album, on cassette, vinyl, or CD
where I had to get up and adjust the volume after every couple songs.

Today it's a Fleetwood Mac from '77 followed by Adele from last year
followed by Poison from 15 years ago and then a 5 year old track by
Usher. Very likely a playlist like that will vary greatly in rms
values, let alone dynamic ranges, as opposed to songs engineered to
flow together on an album. See the difference now?

Replay gain "yanks" all those various vintages to within 1dB rms of a
predetermined level(either by default or as user specified). Now,
those same songs I listed above for example all sound roughly the same
volume, regardless of dynamic range. RG applies no processing(eq,
compression) to those tracks, it just tags them all a specified
playback level.

No more having to pardon yourself from a conversation at your dinner
party every 5 min to tweak the go____mned volume control!

So it's a way of reducing dynamic range over the
long term. Gee, isn't that pretty much the same
thing you've been throwing tantrums over? Are
you yelling at yourself, telling yourself you should
get off your own lawn?

One wonders if there will ever be an algorithm that can
interpolate and then effectively "level" random tracks of
everything from doo wop to death metal. Could an algorithm
ever interpret the context of a sequence of tracks and apply
relevant leveling? Can that then be extended to apply to
totally random tracks and generas?
Fixed average noise levels ...maybe. Context relevant
levels ...I don't think so.
[YMMV]
==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

It isn't anywhere near perfect, but it does make the segue from Louis
Jordan to Maroon 5 slightly less jarring.

[Luxey]

�реда, 12. децембар 2012. 04.23.15 UTC+1, је напи�ао/ла:
Don't ASSume, Luxey.

ASS u?! Who, me?! I will not ass you. Asses are never on my "to do" list.
Oh, got it now. You're used as assing toy 'round a familly. Keep it there.
Public generaly dissaproves that ****.

[[email protected]]

Luxe: Welcome to Amerika, Komrade.

You *assumed* I was operating on Mac. I do not.

Here in USA we have expression: "When you assume
you make ASS out of U and ME!"

Got it now?

[Mike Rivers]

On 12/12/2012 1:19 AM, Ralph Barone wrote:

It isn't anywhere near perfect, but it does make the segue from Louis
Jordan to Maroon 5 slightly less jarring.

What's really needed here is something that prevents
transitions like that in a "random" playing sequence. But I
know that having said that, there will be several responses
saying "I love playlists like that."

Please restrain yourselves.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[[email protected]]

Mike R: "What's really needed here is something that
prevents transitions like that in a "random" playing sequence.
But I know that having said that, there will be several
responses "

Uhh, what have I been describing on here in my last 4 or so replies?

I believe it was called something like "replay gain". Ring a bell?

[Nil]

On 12 Dec 2012, wrote in rec.audio.pro:

Mike R: "What's really needed here is something that
prevents transitions like that in a "random" playing sequence.
But I know that having said that, there will be several
responses "

Uhh, what have I been describing on here in my last 4 or so replies?

Uhh, no it isn't.

I believe it was called something like "replay gain". Ring a bell?

You're on the wrong track.

[[email protected]]

Nil:

I'm looking out of my conductor's cab and it appears to me that YOUR train is about to hit the end-stop in Grand Central.

I have been using mp3Gain replay software for nearly three years and since then have never had the "jarring transitions from random play sequences" Mike Rivers described.

I'm replying to the CD Rips Clipping thread. I don't know what thread you intended to reply to.

[Luxey]

Never crossed my mind. That's why I gave such an unrelated response.

[[email protected]]

No problem at all Lux! Got more Americanisms for
you if u like.

"Put things back where you found 'em!"

"If it ain't broke don't fix it", etc...

[Luxey]

Are you serious? No way.
Already told you, re random playlist, pull your head out of assumed americanism, they switched to pseudo random couple posts ago, but that message's lost in cyberspace. Should it appear asomewhere ...

[Scott Dorsey]

Mike Rivers wrote:

It may or may not reduce the dynamic range. I don't know how
it actually works (and probably nobody else here really
does, either). It would be easy to peak limit and normalize
based on a single "how hard to work" number embedded in the
file metadata. But since this gain is determined by the
source file and not by the player, it probably doesn't shoot
for a specific peak/average ratio and do what it needs to do
in order to achieve it.

It doesn't reduce the dynamic range. It just provides a reference level
telling the mp3 player to play it back with the gain turned up this far.

And, like all such things, it's being badly abused by people setting it too
high.... but the end user can turn it down too.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

Scott D: "It doesn't reduce the dynamic range"

Nobody said it does! Man does this thread have multiple personality disorder or what??

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
Nil:

I'm looking out of my conductor's cab and it appears to me that YOUR train is about to hit the end-stop in Grand Central.

I have been using mp3Gain replay software for nearly three years and since then have never had the "jarring transitions from random play sequences" Mike Rivers described.


Let me tell you, if you play the second Brandenburg concerto and then you
play Anarchy in the UK afterward, you will have a jarring transition no
matter how the gains are set.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

Lux:

Read back to where I first described replay gain.

I succinctly provided an example where songs from the '70s, '90s, and now, varying genres, and different artists, were played in a row.

That can happen both intentionally, as in a playlist, or randomly,
as when the iPod is set to "shuffle".

If that ain't random playback then I'm on the wrong planet!

[[email protected]]

Scott D:

I never implied that RG was perfect. All I can say is that it has reduced my need to constantly adjust volume, in my living room, my car, or via headphones, from every other song to almost NEVER.

Sure, I still have to adjust the volume - incoming phone calls, someone with hard hearing, etc, usually external influences, but RARELY due to the playback of my collection.

Y
M
M
V

Words to live by.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:07:36 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

Lux:

Read back to where I first described replay gain.

I succinctly provided an example where songs from the '70s, '90s, and now, varying genres, and different artists, were played in a row.

That can happen both intentionally, as in a playlist, or randomly,
as when the iPod is set to "shuffle".

If that ain't random playback then I'm on the wrong planet!

You are on the wrong planet. iPod shuffle is not random. When they
first designed it, it was - and users complained that tunes kept
repeating. So they had to de-randomize it to make it appear more
random.

d

[Mike Rivers]

On 12/12/2012 8:41 AM, wrote:
Mike R: "What's really needed here is something that
prevents transitions like that in a "random" playing sequence.

I believe it was called something like "replay gain". Ring a bell?


Nope, I wasn't talking about volume, I was talking about
content, or genre, or whatever you want to call it. This is
why I much prefer listening to CAREFULLY SELECTED NOT TOP 40
radio stations. There's a real human being whose musical
sensitivities mesh with mine, deciding what would be a good
next song to play. It's not a random selection from a disk
drive with 10,000 songs on it. And maybe that human being
will be paying attention to the monitors in the control room
and will adjust the volume appropriately to make the
transition that he wants to make.

Replay gain has nothing to do with any of this.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 12/12/2012 9:08 AM, wrote:

I have been using mp3Gain replay software for nearly
three years and since then have never had the "jarring
transitions from random play sequences" Mike Rivers
described.

No, YOU described this as a jarring transition because of
perceived loudness differences. I would find it jarring
going between two radically different kinds of music, one
that I like and one that I don't like. The volume change
only makes it worse. I want to avoid it entirely. That takes
more smarts than Replay Gain has.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[[email protected]]

Ok now I get you Mike. You prefer to listen to
songs that have some commonality: the genre,
the artist themself, etc.

See I'd go nuts that way, lol! I can't listen to 3
or more songs of the same genre or artist in a
row. I need to switch it up a bit. To each their
own.

You mentioned radio. As far as content, there's
nothing like listening to an hour of Carol Miller(former
WNEW) on Q104 fm in New York. She knows how
to flow. And no need to worry about levels there - it's
all limited to hell anyhow.

[Nil]

On 12 Dec 2012, wrote in rec.audio.pro:

I never implied that RG was perfect. All I can say is that it has
reduced my need to constantly adjust volume, in my living room, my
car, or via headphones, from every other song to almost NEVER.

Whooossshhhh!

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:07:36 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

Lux:

Read back to where I first described replay gain.

I succinctly provided an example where songs from the '70s, '90s, and now, varying genres, and different artists, were played in a row.

That can happen both intentionally, as in a playlist, or randomly,
as when the iPod is set to "shuffle".

If that ain't random playback then I'm on the wrong planet!

You are on the wrong planet. iPod shuffle is not random. When they
first designed it, it was - and users complained that tunes kept
repeating. So they had to de-randomize it to make it appear more
random.

d


Ow. My brain hurts now.

--
Les Cargill

[geoff]

wrote in message
...
Luxe: Welcome to Amerika, Komrade.

You *assumed* I was operating on Mac. I do not.

Here in USA we have expression: "When you assume
you make ASS out of U and ME!"

Got it now?

The rest of the whold it is an ARSE. An ass is a type of donkey.

geoff

[geoff]

wrote in message
...
Nil:

I'm looking out of my conductor's cab and it appears to me that YOUR train
is about to hit the end-stop in Grand Central.

I have been using mp3Gain replay software for nearly three years and since
then have never had the "jarring transitions from random play sequences"
Mike Rivers described.

I'm replying to the CD Rips Clipping thread. I don't know what thread you
intended to reply to.

Um you are in the wrong newsgroup. Try rec.audio.toy.players


geoff

[geoff]

wrote in message
...
Scott D:

I never implied that RG was perfect. All I can say is that it has reduced
my need to constantly adjust volume, in my living room, my car, or via
headphones, from every other song to almost NEVER.

Sure, I still have to adjust the volume - incoming phone calls, someone
with hard hearing, etc, usually external influences, but RARELY due to the
playback of my collection.

Y
M
M
V

Words to live by.

You really are iln the wrong newsgroup.

geoff

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 3:31:49 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:



Words to live by.



You really are iln the wrong newsgroup.



geoff
_________________

Merriam-Webster definition of IGNORANCE:

Definition of IGNORANCE


: the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness


See ignorance defined for English-language learners »


See ignorance defined for kids »


Examples of IGNORANCE

His racist attitudes were born out of ignorance.
an appalling ignorance about other cultures


First Known Use of IGNORANCE

13th century


Related to IGNORANCE


Synonyms: benightedness, cluelessness, incognizance, innocence, nescience, obliviousness, unawareness, unfamiliarity

____________
And may I add: "Unwillingness to accept ideas and concepts differing from one's own. Willingness to outright deny what one doesn't understand".

As in replay-gain.


But I forgive you. Afterall, "ignorance is bliss!"

[Mike Rivers]

On 12/12/2012 3:30 PM, geoff wrote:

Um you are in the wrong newsgroup. Try rec.audio.toy.players

Ward, don't be so hard on the Beaver. After all, I learned
what Replay Gain was, something I'd heard of before but
never bothered to look up. When I get old and gray and deaf
and want to mix up death metal with string quartets while
driving across country, it might come in handy.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[None]

the li'l kbaby @gmail.com wrote in message
...
Ok now I get you Mike.

Not even close. Essential reading comprehension
is way beyond you. Try starting with a sandbox,
and try to work up to kindergarten.

[None]

li'l krissie gosucky @gmail.com wrote in message
...
"Willingness to outright deny what one doesn't understand".

Story of your life, crissfisser. And what you don't
understand is pretty much everything about audio,
and everything posted on this thread. Even your
own posts.

[hank alrich]

None wrote:

li'l krissie gosucky @gmail.com wrote in message
...
"Willingness to outright deny what one doesn't understand".

Story of your life, crissfisser. And what you don't
understand is pretty much everything about audio,
and everything posted on this thread. Even your
own posts.

It's a bot that types.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers wrote:

Ward, don't be so hard on the Beaver. After all, I learned
what Replay Gain was, something I'd heard of before but
never bothered to look up. When I get old and gray and deaf
and want to mix up death metal with string quartets while
driving across country, it might come in handy.

Death metal - it's all in the hood ornaments.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[geoff]

"None" wrote in message
...
the li'l kbaby @gmail.com wrote in message
...
Ok now I get you Mike.

Not even close. Essential reading comprehension
is way beyond you. Try starting with a sandbox,
and try to work up to kindergarten.

SG is the amount you have to fill the sandbox up so that it's up to the
brim.

geoff

[[email protected]]

Geoff: "None" isn't 1/10th the person you(or Dorsey or Mike Rivers) are. Do NOT engage him. He will follow you all over Usenet and mess with your mind!

*Most* of the RAP contibutors are better than that.

[None]

k man sucks @gmail.com wrote in message
...
Geoff: "None" isn't 1/10th the person you(or Dorsey or Mike Rivers)
are. Do NOT engage him. He will follow you all over Usenet and
mess with your mind!

*Most* of the RAP contibutors are better than that.

More netkopping from the little toddler who
thinks he's in charge here. Am I messing
with your poor tiny mind? Maybe you should
run home and tell your mommy. Or you could
just stop posting huge steaming manure
piles of off-topic ignorance, which seems
to be your chosen way of life.