27 Jul
2013
27 Jul
'13
11:17 a.m.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:35:02PM -0400, Martin Cracauer wrote:
ebur128 --lufs:
Integrated loudness: -4.9 LUFS
Loudness range: 5.5 LU
Integrated threshold: -13.0 LUFS
Range threshold: -25.0 LUFS
Range min: -8.6 LUFS
Range max: -3.1 LUFS
Momentary max: -1.2 LUFS
Short term max: -2.4 LUFS
This seems to be in the 'braindead' category...
I don't see that any of the value correspond with
what lame needed to
not clip over a collection of different loudness clips. (means: some
clips that needed less --scale have higher numbers here and others
have lower)
You can't expect that. Lame's limit are specific for the algorithm
it uses. That would be the case for any lossy encoding system.
I assume the ebumeter output is more for making things
sound even
(between different pieces) and not directly a tool to max out
anything, is that right?
That is absolutely right. Systems such as EBU-R128 exist because
it makes perfect sense to make things sound even (avoiding your
listeners having to adjust the volume all the time), while 'maxing
out' serves no useful purpose at all - it just destroys the sound
if taken too far. In other words, such systems exist to *stop* you
'maxing out' everything.
Lame's 'replaygain' meausurement has the same purpose. Note the
value for the file in your original post: -9.1 dB. That means
that an intelligent mp3 player will *reduce* the level of this
file by 9.1 dB when playing it - it is already much too loud.
Ciao,
--
FA
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)