Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: "YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo (Read 2409 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

"YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo

Is it just me who's thinks they hail Normalization as the be-all-end-all solution?
Listen to the music, not the media it's on.
União e reconstrução

"YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo

Reply #1 –
Just to note, it's playback-only volume normalization, the original audio files aren't touched.

The reason they and others have thought it's a good is because when Youtube, which they claim to be the largest source of music discovery for young people (it's probably up there), is making all music the same loudness it's no longer a loudness race with mastering and opens the potential for future releases to consider making being better masters.

The normalization itself isn't the good thing per se for listening, but a hope that it may influence the sources to be better going forward.

"YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo

Reply #2 –
Definitely a solution for youtab (and a lot more) imho, it will make over-compressed stuff sound like "goulage with dried mashrooms and greek yoghurt", so mastering-geniuses will have to adapt on the long term (Surprised they took a decade+ to realize this simple truth ..., my local/intranet video.mp4 server is using replaygain for at least a decade now).

offtopic: how long have youtab have the "auto advance" thingy? (have that a decade as well in my javascript section...), Iam so cool
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung

"YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo

Reply #3 –
I haven't checked what Youtube is doing myself.

As it says in the second article, -13 LUFS is still loud.

Approximate equivalents:

(-5dB) = 94dB ReplayGain target = -13 LUFS << reported YouTube standard
(-2dB) = 91db ReplayGain target = -16 LUFS << reported iTunes radio standard
(+0dB) = 89dB ReplayGain target = -18 LUFS << current ReplayGain standard
(+5dB) = 84dB ReplayGain target = -23 LUFs << current EBU R128 standard
(+6dB) = 83dB ReplayGain target = -24 LUFS << original ReplayGain standard (rarely used, even back then)

e.g. if you take a file that's been normalised to one of the targets on the right, and run it through a ReplayGain scanner, it will suggest the ReplayGain in brackets on the left. Approximately. On average.

Please don't read those equals signs as equals signs. They mean "approximately equivalent to".

Cheers,
David.

"YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo

Reply #4 –
Quote from: 2Bdecided on
As it says in the second article, -13 LUFS is still loud.

OK, but it doesn't matter much (adjust volume slider) at least the tracks/videos will be about the same volume.

Quote
(+6dB) = 83dB ReplayGain target = -24 LUFS << original ReplayGain standard (rarely used, even back then)

David.

Wasn't that a cinema standard (where they need headroom for big explosions and gunshots)?
It made music really quiet, the 89dB was agreed upon as the best "compromise".
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
 

"YouTube just put the final nail in the Loudness War’s coffin&quo

Reply #5 –
Quote from: GeSomeone on
Quote from: 2Bdecided on
As it says in the second article, -13 LUFS is still loud.

OK, but it doesn't matter much (adjust volume slider) at least the tracks/videos will be about the same volume.
I wonder if it's clever enough that, if you turn the volume control down, it increases the headroom, so improving the loudness matching to cover more dynamic tracks?


Quote from: GeSomeone on
Wasn't that a cinema standard (where they need headroom for big explosions and gunshots)?
It made music really quiet, the 89dB was agreed upon as the best "compromise".
It was SMPTE RP 200, yes, a cinema standard. Interesting that EBU R128, with a default of -23LUFS, is basically the same though, and many countries have adopted it for TV.

The Dolby dialnorm baseline (which every DVD player enforces, even on the analogue stereo line outputs) is even quieter. From memory, it makes typical cinema mixes about 4dB quieter, to leave room for super-dynamic virtually never used mixes, but applies compression by default, meaning a typical DVD player's output is a) "very quiet", and b) rarely approaches 0dB FS.

The fact that some people think even "89dB" (in ReplayGain terms) is quiet shows how far things have come. There are a few bits of classical music that are too dynamic for 83dB, and a pretty average piece of music, recorded with absolutely no compression, will sometimes clip if you target 89dB.

Cheers,
David.