On 02/29/2016 08:05 AM, ermina wrote:
> Great news!

 I wouldn't go that far.

> About it being a production function : ideally, yes, every content 
> should be compliant before being ingested. But then, well, peak 
> normalization is integrated in the rdimport process, and it is no less a 
> production matter.

 Agreed. Low priority, also with some in-fighting, but it's there.

> There are use cases where auto-adjusting levels on import is useful.

 Useful, yes. Essential, no. Proper, depends on your point of view.

> (Especially with music cuts, i don't see why i would open each and every 
> music file just to do something a program will do more accurately and 
> hundred times faster.)

 Especially with music cuts, this old dog with 40+ years background
 in "show biz" doesn't see how anyone in their right mind could ever
 even harbor a possibility that each and every cut would NOT be listened
 to, massaged, and polished to perfection BEFORE being added to the
 final "ON THE AIR" play-out, whatever that is.
 To do anything less is negligent.
 Further, a machine can only do it "more accurately" in an almost
 criminally negligent sense. ( "almost" because a machine has no
 perception, no soul, and so can not be criminal, nor negligent )
 Yes, the machine will never do 1+1=3, but in the context of
 human perception, sometimes 1+1 DOES =3 and therefore a machine
 is completely incapable of any kind of "accuracy" when the result is
 an entirely artistic perception, and actual hard numbers, with
 exception of clip, are completely irrelevant.
 Even with clip, although *I* wouldn't, a producer may want that
 "sound" for a particular affect, so even clip may be irrelevant.

 For some things, machines are very well suited.
 A hammer does a much better job of pounding nails than does your
 bare hand, but a hammer is a poor choice for caressing a woman.

 Hammering nails is equivalent to play-out to air.
 Production is akin to the caress, but much less forgiving.

> Anyway, good to hear that is being there eventually.

 I said it made the wish-list, not the to-do list !
 There's a difference.
 That difference amounts to *if* someone writes the code in a way that
 doesn't break anything else now existing or planed, it will be considered
 for inclusion.
 Otherwise, don't hold your breath.
 The exception would be $$.
 There is nothing in the universe that can't be made to happen given
 enough time, money, or real estate. Pick any two.

-- 
Cowboy

cowboy.cwf1.com
_______________________________________________
Rivendell-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev

Reply via email to