Mark T. Wieczorek wrote:

etc. Should be easy to create in any audio program.

Definitely easier. Thanks.

I tried attenuating the segments with Audacity this time and got
dramtically different (i.e. noticeably worse) results with each
post-encode reamplification. There was a big difference especially
between what I believe (from memory) were the -20dB and -25dB segments.
I then listened back to just the first and last segments and could
tell a definite difference in the clarity of the vocals - but this is
not a time during which I can really pump it up for better detection of
artifacts or whatever. I'll have to continue later.

Interesting to see how Audacity's concept of a -5dB is so much more
severe than Normalize's. I guarantee you I was getting virtually
identical results everytime when I was attenuating with Normalize and
reamplifying with Audacity. But with Audacity alone, things were
noticeably different at each step along the way.

This Normalize seems to have some rather odd properties about it. I'm
starting to get the impression that what equates to -10dBFS RMS to me
using Normalize ain't nothing like what -10dBFS RMS means to you guys
using CoolEdit Pro or whatever.

I sure am wishing there was another Normalize user in here with whom I
could compare results because I'm *really* at a loss now to explain the
differences I have now witnessed.

Myke

--

-================================-
Windows...It's rebootylicious!!!
-================================-