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: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format (Read 2707 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

I have been using the dynamic range meter for years with FLAC and mp3 files without issues. Recently I started switching to WAV files and have been having all kinds of issues with the dynamic range meter. Often it will not display DR values in foobar or create a 'foo_dr.txt' file in the album directory. Other times it will freeze and I have to restart foobar to get it to work again.

I also noticed that while its scanning a WAV file the DR numbers appear to fade from one to the next instead of an instant change like it does with FLAC & mp3.

Any help or suggestions on how to fix? Any better dynamic range alternatives for foobar2000?

Thanks.

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #1 –
It's known to be very buggy, and besides, DR is a terrible and not widely adopted measures of perceived loudness. You have ReplayGain with LUFS Integrated normalisation and True Peak readings built into FB2K, far better to go with that these days, I think.

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #2 –
Thanks for the reply darkflame. I agree, too much emphasis is placed on DR numbers, but I like to see those specs for an album.

I am not familiar with ReplayGain with LUFS Integrated normalisation and True Peak readings. Where can I find more information about those?

Quote from: darkflame23 on
It's known to be very buggy, and besides, DR is a terrible and not widely adopted measures of perceived loudness. You have ReplayGain with LUFS Integrated normalisation and True Peak readings built into FB2K, far better to go with that these days, I think.

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #3 –
Quote from: GMann on
Thanks for the reply darkflame. I agree, too much emphasis is placed on DR numbers, but I like to see those specs for an album.

I am not familiar with ReplayGain with LUFS Integrated normalisation and True Peak readings. Where can I find more information about those?

The only people who take any notice of so called "DR" figures are online audiophiles. As I said, it's a pretty poor measure of perceived loudness. Meanwhile, the rest of the professional audio and broadcast worlds moved over to LUFS Integrated about a decade ago. It's not perfect but it's the best we currently have.

ReplayGain is built into FB2K. It's been a while since I set it up, but I'll include screenshots of all my settings so hopefully it will help you out.

The string to derive the LUFS Integrated figure is pretty complex, it's this:

$if(%replaygain_track_gain%,$puts(l,$sub(-1800,$replace(%replaygain_track_gain%,.,)))$div($get(l),100).$right($get(l),2) dB,)

But it returns results that are identical to the other LUFS meters I use daily in my mastering work (RME Digicheck, Youlean Loudness Meter, iZotope RX7 Advanced etc.)

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #4 –
Pic 1 shows the LUFS Integrated and True Peak readings in the main track list display. As you can see, the Bjork album was hammered... ;)

Pics 2-4 show the ReplayGain settings I have in the Preferences.

Pic 5 shows how you can scan a track or album from the track list with the Right Click menu. You can also do it (or whole folders) from the Library view with Right Click.

Pic 6 shows the Title Formatting References to derive the information I choose to display in the track list columns. I have no idea how the LUFS Integrated string works, another kind FB2K user provided it for me a while ago. It would be nice if we could get this as a more sensible string in a future FB2K update (or maybe it's already there?)

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #5 –
If there's anything missing, hopefully someone else will chime in, feel free to ask if you have any further questions.

I don't often use ReplayGain to actually change the level of tracks (unless I'm in party mode and queuing up a load of singles for the evening, when I'll turn "Track Gain" mode on), but I mainly use it to derive the True Peak and LUFS Integrated values. True Peak will tell you how likely something is to distort a crappy DAC if it has a plus figure, and LUFS Integrated can be used much like you are using DR now, to compare the overall perceived loudness of tracks. It can be fun to wack your whole collection into a playlist and then sort by loudness, quite telling... ;)

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #6 –
Don't be mislead by lower measured loudness in case the peaks don't reach zero, or just a few per album or track do (more likely with true peak activated). It is not uncommon to find 2 dB of headroom, occasionally more, when the track is compressed and then reduced in level to fit it along other tracks on a record, much like an activated ReplayGain would do, or to safeguard against potential intersample overs. The loudness measurement doesn't take into account the maximum peak, and the "range" between the two. You could subtract the peak from the loudness, but the accuracy would be worse than DR, with one peak able to skew the result. There is a loudness range (LRA) measurement, but that is not available in Foobar.

Maybe the plugin is be more stable in an older version of Foobar? In that case use that as a dedicated scanner tool. Although then you wouldn't be able to add the reading to the tags, as support for WAV tagging is recent.
 

Re: Dynamic range meter (foo_dynamic_range) errors with WAV format

Reply #7 –
Quote from: GMann on
Recently I started switching to WAV files
I'm curious, why switch from FLAC to WAV?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  ;~)