MrSinatra;379694 Wrote: > so, all i am saying, is that the value is more meaningful when it has to > account for less tracks, b/c as an avg (in this context) less data means > a more meaningful result (to volume level). > > take the three CD live springsteen set... what will deliver you the > best consistent listening level? one album RG value for all three > discs, or three differing RG values for each disc? > > if each disc has its own value, it will deal with the variances of > differences between the tracks on its own disc BETTER than if it is one > value for all three discs. > > its not a matter of thinking my way is better, its a matter of math, > and listening exp. i don't see how someone can argue otherwise, (other > than the subjective point of how much difference there needs to be > between discs to make the matter audibly discernable) When was the last time you went to a Springsteen show when there was a "consistent listening level"? (Sorry, the Pete Seeger tour doesn't count.) Of course it's supposed to have dynamic range. There's loud stuff and there's soft stuff, and if one disc is predominantly soft stuff it doesn't make sense to bump up the RG to make it as loud as the loud stuff on another disc.
As another example, take "In Your Honor" by Foo Fighters. Disc 1 is typical rocking-loud FF fare, with an album gain value of -10.34. Disc 2 is softer acoustic ballad-y stuff, with an album gain of -6.96. I can't believe this is an accident of the mastering process. Disc 1 is *supposed* to sound loud and disc 2 is *supposed* to sound softer. But if one applies the separate disc-based album gains they sound equally loud. If you apply the album-based album gain of -9.85, the dynamic range of the *album* is preserved. A similar example is Rust Never Sleeps. I only have it on LP, so I don't know what the RG values are, but side 1 (Neil playing solo on his 12-string) is supposed to be softer than side 2 which is Neil and Crazy Horse rocking out. It's one album, and I'll betcha if you rip and scan the single-disc CD you'll get album gain values that make sense, with the acoustic tracks sounding softer than the electric tracks. And that's how it sounded in concert, too. But if it were a 2 disc set you would apply different album gain tags and squash out all the dynamic range. A "matter of math"? I'd love to see your equations, including how less data give you a more meaningful average. You say you want to get a consistent listening level, and that would imply using track gain instead of album gain. Can't get much less data than n=1. But you (sensibly) disagree with that. Your "disc gain" concept is no-man's land, but hey, fine if it suits your purposes. -- aubuti Nothing high-end, but music anywhere I want it. MSI Wind desktop (Ubuntu 8.10) feeding: Basement: SB2 > JVC JA-S44 > ESS Tempest LS8; Kitchen/Dining: Duet > AudioSource Amp100 > 2 pairs Polk RC60i; Living room: SB3 > Technics SA-EX140 > Bose Acoustimass 3; Bedroom: Boom + SBC; Study: Duet > Klipsch ProMedia 2.0; Kid's bedroom: SB2 > Klipsch ProMedia 2.0 http://www.last.fm/user/aubuti/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57543 _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
