Skip to main content

Topic: [not my release] foo_dynamic_range (Read 45185 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • romor
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
This seems almost month old, and without announcement here. I'm quoting help file:

About
Dynamic Range Meter is a foobar2000 component designed to give the same information as the Dynamic Range Offline Meter. This component can process all audio formats foobar2000 can handle (a.o. flac, ape and wavpack) and also supports higher samplerates and bitdepth. Using the Open Audio CD option it can also directly read audio CDs and calculate the Dynamic Range values without the need of ripping the CD to disk. Log information with extended statistics is automatically copied to the clipboard and can be pasted back in any text editor.

Usage
After installation an extra option Dynamic Range Meter will be available in the context menu of a foobar2000 playlist. If you want to run the Dynamic Range Meter you will first have to create a playlist with the audio files you wish to process. If you want to scan an audio CD, select File -> Open Audio CD from the foobar2000. This will create a playlist with all the tracks from the CD. Select the track(s) you wish to scan and right-click with the mouse to bring up the context menu. Selecting Dynamic Range Meter from this menu will start processing and display the results. The results will also be copied to the clipboard suitable for pasting in any text editor.

Note that if you have selected multiple tracks the DR value will be computed differently depending on the maximum peak difference of the tracks. If the maximum peak difference between tracks is less than 0.3 dB then the DR value is computed with all tracks processed as a single file (Album Mode). Otherwise the DR value is computed as the rounded value of the average of all single tracks (Song Mode).



Note
Expiration and updates
This version has an expiration date set to 31 August 2011. Around this date an update is planned for the Dynamic Range Meters and this foobar2000 component. These releases will have an updated algorithm for the DR metering. The latest information and updates will be available from the Pleasurize Music Foundation website: www.pleasurizemusic.com.

Dialog is modal, so while processing foobar2000 is inaccessible


Download

http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/de/free-downloads
  • Last Edit: 30 April, 2011, 03:04:14 AM by romor

  • Northpack
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #1
Hmm, this plugin gives very different result compared to the DR Offline meter - is measures the DR value usually 2-4 units lower. RMS figures are differing even more. Here's an example:
Code: [Select]
dr offline meter results:
************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Analyzed folder: .\1976 - Songs from the Wood\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 DR    Peak   RMS   Filename
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DR12   over -19.16 dB 01. Songs from the Wood.mp3
 DR13   -0.00 dB -19.45 dB 02. Jack-in-the-Green.mp3
 DR12   over -18.77 dB 03. Cup of Wonder.mp3
 DR10   over -17.04 dB 04. Hunting Girl.mp3
 DR12   over -18.73 dB 05. Ring Out Solstice Bells.mp3
 DR13   over -19.67 dB 06. Velvet Green.mp3
 DR12   -0.00 dB -18.66 dB 07. The Whistler.mp3
 DR10   over -13.47 dB 08. Pibroch (Cap in Hand).mp3
 DR12   -0.00 dB -19.38 dB 09. Fire at Midnight.mp3
 DR11   -0.00 dB -17.94 dB 10. Beltane.mp3
 DR15   -0.22 dB -22.95 dB 11. Velvet Green (Live).mp3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Number of files: 11
 Official DR value:  DR12

==============================================================================================

foobar200 results:
*****************
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Jethro Tull / Songs from the Wood
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR9 0.00 dB  -10.93 dB  4:55 01-Songs from the Wood
DR10   0.00 dB  -13.06 dB  2:31 02-Jack-in-the-Green
DR10   0.00 dB  -12.15 dB  4:33 03-Cup of Wonder
DR9 0.00 dB  -10.89 dB  5:12 04-Hunting Girl
DR10   0.00 dB  -11.93 dB  3:47 05-Ring Out Solstice Bells
DR10   0.00 dB  -12.53 dB  6:04 06-Velvet Green
DR10   0.00 dB  -11.35 dB  3:31 07-The Whistler
DR10   0.00 dB  -12.50 dB  8:35 08-Pibroch (Cap in Hand)
DR10   0.00 dB  -12.74 dB  2:33 09-Fire at Midnight
DR9 0.00 dB  -11.21 dB  5:19 10-Beltane
DR13   -0.22 dB  -15.92 dB  5:54 11-Velvet Green (live)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks: 11
Maximum peak difference (0.00 dB - -0.22 dB): 0.22 dB
Album Totals:

Left   Right

Peak Value:   0.00 dB  ---   0.00 dB 
Avg RMS:   -12.44 dB  --- -11.81 dB 
DR channel:   9.69 dB  ---   9.19 dB 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Official DR value (Album Mode): 9
================================================================================
  • Last Edit: 07 September, 2011, 04:31:46 AM by db1989

  • romor
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #2
Seems you are right. I don't have DRM standalone, but RMS values aren't same as those reported by SoX. Peak values seems OK

So, other that it's pretty useless as modal dialog and it blocks whole player, does not have option to write analyzed data, it fails to calculate correct values.
I'd like to suggest to mod/admin to close and bin this thread as useless and deficient

Thanks
  • Last Edit: 04 June, 2011, 10:09:26 PM by romor

  • Yegor
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #3
Please note your own note before asking to close the thread.

  • romor
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #4
Why?

  • Northpack
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #5
So, other that it's pretty useless as modal dialog and it blocks whole player, does not have option to write analyzed data, it fails to calculate correct values.
I'd like to suggest to mod/admin to close and bin this thread as useless and deficient
It doesn't write to disk but it puts a log into the clipboard. That's where the log I've posted comes from.

Maybe someone here is registered at the 96kHz forums and can post my report there? I tried to register there several times but the forum software seems to be buggy as registering doesn't work...

  • Northpack
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #6
This seems almost month old, and without announcement here. I'm quoting help file:
Note that if you have selected multiple tracks the DR value will be computed differently depending on the maximum peak difference of the tracks. If the maximum peak difference between tracks is less than 0.3 dB then the DR value is computed with all tracks processed as a single file (Album Mode). Otherwise the DR value is
Seems like a completely nonsensical behavoir to me!? As if an album could be identified by similiar peak values of it's tracks...  The result is that some albums get scanned in album mode and some in track mode without any possibility to switch between both modes.

However, the differences to the offline meter are not due to that album/track mode lottery. Here's another example where the album gets scanned in track mode. Same album, but a different master:

Code: [Select]
dr offline meter results:
************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Analyzed folder: .\1976 - Songs From the Wood (previous master)\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 DR    Peak   RMS   Filename
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DR15   -0.45 dB -22.92 dB 01. Songs From the Wood.mp3
 DR13   -0.94 dB -20.40 dB 02. Jack-in-the-Green.mp3
 DR14   -0.62 dB -19.20 dB 03. Cup of Wonder.mp3
 DR11   -0.64 dB -16.37 dB 04. Hunting Girl.mp3
 DR11   -1.98 dB -17.08 dB 05. Ring Out, Solstice Bells.mp3
 DR14   -0.66 dB -18.19 dB 06. Velvet Green.mp3
 DR13   -0.80 dB -19.25 dB 07. The Whistler.mp3
 DR14   -0.70 dB -18.06 dB 08. Pibroch (Cap in Hand).mp3
 DR12   -0.62 dB -16.40 dB 09. Fire at Midnight.mp3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Number of files: 9
 Official DR value:  DR13

==============================================================================================

foobar200 results:
******************
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Jethro Tull / Songs From the Wood (previous master)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR12   -0.44 dB  -15.13 dB  4:55 01-Songs From the Wood
DR13   -0.94 dB  -17.35 dB  2:31 02-Jack-in-the-Green
DR13   -0.62 dB  -16.77 dB  4:34 03-Cup of Wonder
DR11   -0.64 dB  -14.10 dB  5:13 04-Hunting Girl
DR11   -1.98 dB  -15.17 dB  3:46 05-Ring Out, Solstice Bells
DR13   -0.66 dB  -17.21 dB  6:04 06-Velvet Green
DR12   -0.80 dB  -15.36 dB  3:31 07-The Whistler
DR14   -0.70 dB  -18.11 dB  8:37 08-Pibroch (Cap in Hand)
DR12   -0.62 dB  -16.51 dB  2:27 09-Fire at Midnight
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks: 9
Maximum peak difference (-0.44 dB - -1.98 dB): 1.54 dB

Official DR value (Song Mode): DR12
================================================================================
  • Last Edit: 07 September, 2011, 04:32:11 AM by db1989

  • Yegor
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #7
Quote
Why?
It may change:
Quote
These releases will have an updated algorithm for the DR metering.

  • db1989
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #8
Not till August! A bit far off to fix what is quite an issue according to the above reports.

  • romor
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #9
Quote
Why?
It may change:
Quote
These releases will have an updated algorithm for the DR metering.


RMS values aren't same as those reported by SoX. Peak values seems OK


It's faulty - do you get it? Updated DRM algo has nothing to do with incorrect RMS measuring.

@Northpack: I know that it overwrites clipboard - naive solution in lack of better

  • umbilical
  • [*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #10
different results from the offline, so bad 

please release it for mac! Is a waste of time convert to .wav just for use with normal offline
  • Last Edit: 06 September, 2011, 02:33:07 AM by umbilical

  • Sandrine
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #11
Please note that Pleasureizemusic is not the author of the component and now wants to charge a member fee to let you download from their site. This is the address of the component, with updates available:

http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/

  • Northpack
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #12
Please note that Pleasureizemusic is not the author of the component and now wants to charge a member fee to let you download from their site.

That's their policy for quite a while now. I really support their objectives, but I think they couldn't have decided better to be self-defeating. If you look at the updates on their website in the last months or even years, you know that project is dead. They excluded the community and tried to make big business out of it and failed consequently.

Quote
http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/

Thanks for that link. I didn't know about this updated version. Seems like "Pleasurize Music" didn't even manage to link to an updated version for the last 4 months...
  • Last Edit: 06 September, 2011, 06:00:19 PM by Northpack

  • SHMsucks
  • [*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #13
Please note that Pleasureizemusic is not the author of the component and now wants to charge a member fee to let you download from their site.

That's their policy for quite a while now. I really support their objectives, but I think they couldn't have decided better to be self-defeating. If you look at the updates on their website in the last months or even years, you know that project is dead. They excluded the community and tried to make big business out of it and failed consequently.



Never really about "the cause", it was only 'bout money with them. They wrongly figured all the id10t's at Hoffland would be foolish enough to pay.
  • Last Edit: 10 September, 2011, 12:01:04 AM by SHMsucks

  • Hancoque
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #14
Please note that Pleasureizemusic is not the author of the component and now wants to charge a member fee to let you download from their site.

The foobar2000 component download is not in the restricted area. Everybody can download it without having to pay or even become member.

I agree that it's annoying that the PMF rarely ever meets its own deadlines. They promise something and when the time comes it's not finished and there isn't even a notice about that. But you can't accuse them of trying to make money with it. The problem simply is that the PMF doesn't have any software developers or researchers. Maintaining the website and developing new software or new algorithms always involves third parties that have to be paid for it, which means thousands of dollars/euros have to be spent. Yes, it could also be done by community members like Soerin Jokhan for free but they choose to do it the official way: hiring professionals with professional payments. That really slows things down and is the bottleneck here.

  • Northpack
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #15
...they choose to do it the official way: hiring professionals with professional payments. That really slows things down and is the bottleneck here.

I don't see anything professional about all of this. They don't update their website, forgetting their own announcements as you've said. They don't properly document the algorithm used by the Dynamic Range Meter - but if you actually figure it out, you'll notice that it's pretty coarse and far less apt to match subjective perception than those developed by the EBU or by David Robinson. Than there is the strange case that the foobar plugin still gives DR values hughely different from those reported by the offline DR meter (and that noone seems to care about this fundamental flaw, even 3 months after it has been reported).

OK, they gave that tool a neat design and made up a coherent CI. Maybe that's the real defition of beeing professional: to enshrine technically deficient products within a big marketing bubble, made out of fancy terms and labels. Some people would certainly agree

  • Sandrine
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #16
I just want to state that I have nothing against PM. In fact, I think they've done a terrific job and raised awareness of recent recordings being too compressed or, having too low a dynamic range. This raised awareness is their campaign and their mission and the fact that people, including me, got angry that the updated software was not readily available prooves that the fact has started to penetrate a wider range of users. They are first and foremost musicians as I understand it, and creative types usually don't care much about technical things.

That said, we as Nerds AND music lovers of course always want the latest and greatest, hence me providing the direct access to the programmer's page.

  • tedM
  • [*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #17
Than there is the strange case that the foobar plugin still gives DR values hughely different from those reported by the offline DR meter (and that noone seems to care about this fundamental flaw, even 3 months after it has been reported).


I have the Jethro Tull CD and have scanned the extracted WAV files with both the official DR Meter and the foobar2000 plugin. Results were identical between the official DR Meter and the plugin and also match the values shown in the foobar2000 log of Northpack. I did some further testing and assumed the differences were probably related to MP3 files. I found differences when the source file was MP3 encoded with embedded art. When the embedded art is stripped from the MP3 file the official DR Meter gives the same results as the foobar2000 plugin. So it's clearly a bug in the official DR Meter. It looks like the MP3 decoder of the official DR Meter is reading the embedded art and falsely interprets it as audio data. It might also have problems with other MP3 tags but I haven't done further testing.
Maybe Northpack can verify this with his Jethro Tull files (assuming they have embedded art) and test with stripped MP3 files and see if the results are still different.

  • Northpack
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #18
Revealing observation, thank you!

However, my files don't have embedded album art - they are ripped from the original disc with EAC straight to LAME 3.98r -V2, using EAC's tagging capabilities. Afterwars, only Replaygain tags were added with foobar.

It's not the embedded album art, it's the ID3v2 tag itself. If I strip the ID3v2 tags from the files, only keeping the ID3v1, the output of the DR Offline Meter 1.4a is exactly identical to that of foo_dynamic_range 1.1.0b4. So it is really the "official" DR Meter to blame here - my apologies to the creator of the foobar component.

That only adds to what I said above concerning the PMF. They implemented some faulty MP3 support for the DR Meter which not only can't handle ID3v2 tags but much worse: it can't handle them in a deceptive way that leads to totally overrated DR values. The reason for the usefulness of the DR Meter despite of its flaws had always been that large DR value database, mostly filled by enthusiasts while the DR Meter was still freely avaiable - now because of that bug all the thousands of records scanned from lossy sources are basically rubbish.

They really seem to take every possible measure to be self-defeating, don't they?
  • Last Edit: 12 September, 2011, 04:50:15 PM by db1989

[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #19
Interesting component...
I just measured the dynamic range of the album venerology by merzbow...
That was funny.... A DR of 0.

  • jccc323
  • [*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #20
Tagging DR values - Is it possible to have dynamic range values added to tags after scanning with this meter? If not, is there some other method to do this (other than scanning and then manually editing each song's tag)? Thanks.

  • tpijag
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #21
From browsing the documentation provided by the links included in this thread, I would say no to writing to tags. you could check the docs - maybe I missed something.

  • Rollin
  • [*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #22
Tagging DR values - Is it possible to have dynamic range values added to tags after scanning with this meter?


It is possible with last version (1.1.1) http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/index.htm
Settings are in: Advanced-->Tools-->Dynamic Range Meter-->Write DR meta data tags

  • jesus2099
  • [*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #23
ADMIN OR AUTHOR SHOULD UPDATE THE FIRST POST.
The last version is version 1.1.1 and it comes first hand from http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/ (not pleasurise something).
You can update the picture too :
  • Last Edit: 27 August, 2012, 08:06:40 AM by jesus2099

  • Anakunda
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
[not my release] foo_dynamic_range
Reply #24
This plugin has one annoying bug, in grouping mode it doesnot regard album artist. This leading to treat each single track on more artists albums as separate album. Causing race conditions on r/w operations (especially multitrack albums). Should enable a custom grouping pattern similar like replaygain scanner uses.
  • Last Edit: 01 December, 2012, 09:58:34 AM by Anakunda