29 Jul
2013
29 Jul
'13
3:27 p.m.
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:13:16 +0000
Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:45:01AM +0200, Philipp
Überbacher wrote:
Thanks Fons,
while the paper
(http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/
AES128-Loudness-Normalization-Portable-Media-Players.pdf)
is interesting, it's not what I was looking for. What needs testing is
whether the loudness adjustment of RG2 compared to RG1 is perceived as
'closer to equal loudness'. When some sort of actual listening test
shows that RG2 performs significantly better, good, otherwise I don't
see the point.
I do find their recommended conversion equation questionable, they came
up with it based on their sample set plus thumb measure. There's no
telling what the results will be, but I don't expect them to be any
good.
Regards,
Philipp
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 09:25:31 +0000 Fons
Adriaensen
<fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
See the Dolby paper referenced in the second link.
Ciao,
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ReplayGain_1.0_specification
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ReplayGain_2.0_specification
The proposed RG2 spec uses the same algorithm as R-128.
One of the first things I thought when I saw the R-128 talk was"
Could this be used for a better replaygain?". Very nice to see that
such an effort is underway.
Now the obvious question is: Will this work better than the old
replay gain, and by how much? Has anyone done tests?