On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:37:05 -0500, Lord Hasenpfeffer wrote:


This is why I normalize before I encode. If you're just talking about
boosting amplitude for subsequent playback of the WAV from CD, fine.
There is no advantage to that

Hey, you've finally seen the light?

It's about ****ing time that you've finally realized that I understand
this

You certainly demonstrated that you absolutely did not believe this
earlier. You claimed your normalised DSOTM was better than the
original. Of course, what you did wasn't just normalisation...

and that CD-audio quality after normalization has nothing at all to
do with my hypothesis.

Previously...

Message-ID:

It amazes me that I can rip a WAV directly from an older commercial CD,
"normalize" it to 2dB beyond zero (i.e. -10dBFS) and then encode from it
an MP3 that sounds dramatically better than its own CD source.

Which means, if this is true:

If you're just talking about
boosting amplitude for subsequent playback of the WAV from CD, fine.
There is no advantage to that

meaning that this is the equivalent up twiddling the knob, then you're
saying, given the exact same source, but at different levels, you can
make two dramatically different mp3s!! This is just pure nonsense.

I suggest you restate exactly what you think you are doing and why,
because your story has changed several times over the last few days.