ReplayGain

[steve]

For me, I think I may have created a monster...
We have a lot of records, CD's etc of various ages loaded to the computer and are in the habit of periodically mixing tracks in "this weeks" playlist. I now have to either go back and reconvert all the tracks I have modified (and there are lots) or continue adjusting the loudness of the entire library.

Thanks very much for the feedback Fredsone.

The Effect is really just an attempt at producing an "Equal Loudness Normalization" plug-in and the current version of the effect is based on the ReplayGain algorithm. This is not the only Equal Loudness algorithm, and arguably not the best. There may be a future version of this plug-in that uses a different (superior) algorithm, and the default "loudness reference" may well be different. The "Adjust Normalized output:" basically adjust the reference level.

[Fredsone]

The Effect is really just an attempt at producing an "Equal Loudness Normalization" plug-in...

I think it is a good plug-in, it certainly does what I need.
I just got into bother by testing it on a file of mixed source, age and genera tracks and, in spite of our library being sourced from older recordings, for some reason I chose to normalise my test tracks and subsequent folders to the loudest, new recordings level.
Not the smartest thing to do, a little thought and I could have saved myself a lot of work

[steve]

Not the smartest thing to do, a little thought and I could have saved myself a lot of work

Oops.

[dennus]

I am used to changing my MP3 files with MP3GAIN to 95dB.
Which level should I enter on the slider of this PLUGIN?

[steve]

I am used to changing my MP3 files with MP3GAIN to 95dB.
Which level should I enter on the slider of this PLUGIN?

Don't confuse this plug-in with the usual implementations of ReplayGain. This plug-in does not add ReplayGain Metadata. See the first few post of this topic for an explanation of what this plug-in does.

[SirDrexl]

I just got into bother by testing it on a file of mixed source, age and genera tracks and, in spite of our library being sourced from older recordings, for some reason I chose to normalise my test tracks and subsequent folders to the loudest, new recordings level.
Not the smartest thing to do, a little thought and I could have saved myself a lot of work

I know this is a late response, but I do NOT recommend doing this.

The reason why modern masterings sound so loud is not because their peak levels are high; it's because the dynamic range has been heavily compressed. The way I understand it, this plugin simply amplifies (or de-amplifies, often) the files by a certain amount of dB based on how far it is from the reference level. If you take an older, quiet mastering and simply amplify it by several dB to reach a "loudness war" level, you will introduce a lot of clipping into the audio. If you really want them to sound that loud, you should do more than just amplify it; you should compress the dynamic range as well with the Compressor plugin or the like.

The only time I've had to do that was for a custom soundtrack for a video game, in which the output level was very low. Even then, I used -8 dB as the ReplayGain target rather than something ridiculous like -10 or more. In the end, it's better to just work with a low RG level, either 0, or maybe 2 or 3 dB louder. That way you don't have to compromise good masterings and you add little to no clipping.

BTW, I have a question for the author, if he's around. When you set it to a different level, does it perform 2 different operations to get there? Say you have something with a RG value of -8 dB. Normally it would de-amplify the file by 8 dB to reach 0. But when you have it set to adjust it by +2 dB, does it just de-amplify the file by 6 dB, or does it perform 2 operations, the first being to get to 0 dB, then amplify the result by 2 dB? It seems like one operation would be better, but I'm not sure if it does that or not.

[steve]

does it just de-amplify the file by 6 dB, or does it perform 2 operations, the first being to get to 0 dB, then amplify the result by 2 dB? It seems like one operation would be better, but I'm not sure if it does that or not.

I've not checked to see what I wrote in the code, but as I remember it, the effect calculates what it thinks is the "perceived loudness", then amplifies it to a "target loudness" (one operation).

[[email protected]]

Hi! Just another quick post to say thanks for this plugin!

I'm one of the admins over at LibriVox.org, and we almost always have issues with new folks' volumes. Most readers use Audacity, so this plugin will work wonders for us!

I think I'll recommend the "old" version, however; that way the reader won't have the plugin cause clipping if they've got some spikes. So please don't get rid of the "old" version.

[Uli Nobbe]

Hello Steve, hello board,

I'm new to this board, but I'm active in the german board.

The ReplayGain plugin is quite interesting for me and it works fine, but there is one thing I don't understand.

Probably the easiest way to achieve a target level is to apply the effect to each track (one track at a time) with the slider set to zero (default).

Is there any advantage working this way ("one track at a time") compared to mark all tracks and to gain all at one time?
Will all tracks be gained by the same amount or an average gain level of all tracks? Or does the system gain each track individually even when all tracks are selected?

I tried to figure it out by voice recordings for a longer documentation (each part a new track) but could not find a remarkable difference.
What kind of workflow do you recommend?

There is still another question: Since there are two versions available, is it possible to install both of them parallel?

Regards, Uli

[steve]

Hi Uli,

Is there any advantage working this way ("one track at a time") compared to mark all tracks and to gain all at one time?

If all of the tracks are the same duration, then you can select them all together, but that will rarely be the case.

Nyquist plug-ins see no difference between "white space" (no waveform) and "silence" (flat line waveform). If the selection extends beyond the en of the track audio, then Nyquist will see the extra "white space" selection as "silence" and that can throw out the calculations or even cause the plug-in to fail completely.

ReplayGain uses the highest 5% of sample values, so in some cases the result of adding a little white space in the selection will be negligible or even no difference at all, but this is very unreliable and in some cases the difference can be huge, or as previously mentioned may cause the effect to fail (and produce an error message).

There is still another question: Since there are two versions available, is it possible to install both of them parallel?

The new version includes the same analysis as the old version, so to use the old version you don't need to install it, just select "Analyze" in the plug-in option.