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).
(http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/sites/default/files/dr_screenshot.png)
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 (http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/de/free-downloads)
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:
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
================================================================================
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
Please note your own note before asking to close the thread.
Why?
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...
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:
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
================================================================================
Why?
It may change:
These releases will have an updated algorithm for the DR metering.
Not till August! A bit far off to fix what is quite an issue according to the above reports.
Why?
It may change: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
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
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/ (http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/)
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.
http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/ (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...
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.
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.
...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
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.
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.
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 (http://www.dr.loudness-war.info), 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?
Interesting component...
I just measured the dynamic range of the album venerology by merzbow...
That was funny.... A DR of 0.
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.
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.
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 (http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/index.htm)
Settings are in: Advanced-->Tools-->Dynamic Range Meter-->Write DR meta data tags
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/ (http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/) (not pleasurise something).
You can update the picture too : (http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/screenshot.png) (http://www.jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange/screenshot.png)
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.
You can see one post above yours where your complaint should go. It's wasted here.
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.
Regarding this bug, it indeed confuses artists on albums with track artists.
But it does not try to simultaneously read multiple tracks of the CD?! Maybe you should update your foobar2000??
And also, I advise to uncheck the
Group playlist items in
Preferences (
CTRL+P) >
Advanced >
Tools >
Dynamic range meter.
Only this way, the log file for an album with multiple track artists will be complete.
And also, I advise to uncheck the Group playlist items in Preferences (CTRL+P) > Advanced > Tools > Dynamic range meter.
Only this way, the log file for an album with multiple track artists will be complete.
That's right, however the option of mass scanning is not available (I use always the latest foobar build anyway).
mass scanning is not available
You mean you can’t scan several albums at once?? Well maybe but I don’t know as I only scan one CD (scanning CD itself in CD drive) at a time.
And also, I advise to uncheck the Group playlist items in Preferences (CTRL+P) > Advanced > Tools > Dynamic range meter
Not a very smart suggestion. If you uncheck this and scan several albums at once, all albums will be assigned the average dynamic rating across all albums.
And also, I advise to uncheck the Group playlist items in Preferences (CTRL+P) > Advanced > Tools > Dynamic range meter
Not a very smart suggestion. If you uncheck this and scan several albums at once, all albums will be assigned the average dynamic rating across all albums.
You have doubts on my smartness but I said I scan CD per CD (CDDA, not FLAC, MP3, etc.). I have no such problem you describe.
Anyway I said it’s the only way and I think it’s still true. If you don’t do that a single album will be split in as many as you have distinct track artists.
it looks that wit no grouping it writes no logs
I use right-click show log as it cannot write any file on an Audio CD.
You can try that.
The author website is now down but you can still see it in webarchive (http://web.archive.org/web/jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange) and still download the foo_dynamic_range 1.1.1 plugin from this page I found. (https://www.metal-fi.com/measuring-dynamic-range/) (same foo_dynamic_range_1.1.1.zip file mirror, thanks !).
The author website is now down but you can still see it in webarchive (http://web.archive.org/web/jokhan.demon.nl/DynamicRange) and still download the foo_dynamic_range 1.1.1 plugin from this page I found. (https://www.metal-fi.com/measuring-dynamic-range/) (same foo_dynamic_range_1.1.1.zip file mirror, thanks !).
It's also hosted at http://dr.loudness-war.info/downloads/foo_...range_1.1.1.zip (http://dr.loudness-war.info/downloads/foo_dynamic_range_1.1.1.zip)
Would this tool give sensible results if used on a 6-channel track? How does it calculate a DR?
I'm curious - I was reading that the DR values can come out different depending on how the files have been encoded. Is it still worthwhile using this tool to determine the DR of an mp3 album, especially if it has a low bitrate? I get the idea that the DR values of the actual CD would be more accurately reflected in a lossless rip, but I could be wrong.
convert a lossless album to low bitrate mp3 and compare the values??
convert a lossless album to low bitrate mp3 and compare the values??
Now why didn't I think of that before? Thanks!
I am pretty much a fanatical audiophile and my foobar2000 setup has this Dynamic Range plugin installed.....and I hardly ever use it! In my opinion the stats produced by this plugin are not much of a big deal at all for the purpose of judging the sound quality of an album and comparing to other releases.
Having said that, this plugin is helpful when you are trying to calculate a peak gain value to be applied with sound processing software (e.g. Saracon,) for the purpose of preventing clipping and maximizing volume when doing conversion jobs such as SACD DSD audio to PCM WAV.
foo_dynamic_range.dll is not the only way of reporting dynamic range and peak info; it can also be reported using the command line tool
r128gain.exeFYI, an actual comparison of the reports generated by those two tools on the same target album on my computer:
foo_dynamic_range.dll (@foobar2000 -> items in playlist -> context menu: Dynamic Range Meter)
Track1 Range: 15 Peak: -5.50 dB RMS: -25.87 dB
Track2 Range: 18 Peak: -9.13 dB RMS: -33.75 dB
Track3 Range: 16 Peak: -10.57 dB RMS: -32.24 dB
Track4 Range: 15 Peak: -14.48 dB RMS: -36.47 dB
Track5 Range: 14 Peak: -5.20 dB RMS: -25.45 dB
r128gain.exe (@CommandPrompt -> r128gain.exe --r128 --db --progress=on "C:\<TargetFolder>")
Track1 Range: 19.9 db Peak: -5.5 dbFS RMS: -24.6 dbFS
Track2 Range: 19.2 db Peak: -9.1 dbFS RMS: -32.6 dbFS
Track3 Range: 18.6 db Peak: -10.6 dbFS RMS: -31.4 dbFS
Track4 Range: 18.3 db Peak: -14.5 dbFS RMS: -35.5 dbFS
Track5 Range: 21.0 db Peak: -5.2 dbFS RMS: -23.8 dbFS
As you can see, the tools do not report the exact same values for all calculations, but they do report accurate enough peak information to be used for applying 'clip-free gain' in further processing tasks. You use the lowest absolute peak number as 'reference value', which in this case is
-5.20 and subtract one-hundredth to give some headroom, giving us
-5.19.
So, the number to use as gain value in Saracon for the above case will be +5.19 , which will create output files having maximum volume with clip-free gain.
If the lowest absolute peak number 'reference value' is over 6dB , we insert +6dB (i.e. it is the ceiling value, no higher value to be used).
----
@marc2003,
Is there any chance you could create a WSH Panel mod script to run and display the
r128gain dynamic range report ....that would be really cool!!!
It also gives people the option of NOT having to install this
foo_dynamic_range plugin to view this type of information.
Thanks.
I tried converting a FLAC album to MP3 V4 (I deliberately chose a poorer bitrate, typical of what might be the rare lowest-quality audio I'd find in my library) and then ran the dynamic range plugin on the converted album. Here's the results:
FLAC:
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR15 -0.16 dB -20.86 dB 15:16 06-Les Préludes
DR16 -1.62 dB -24.56 dB 15:36 01-Symphonie fantastique: I. Rêveries - Passions
DR14 -5.44 dB -24.86 dB 6:23 02-Symphonie fantastique: II. Un bal
DR19 -0.04 dB -28.23 dB 16:15 03-Symphonie fantastique: III. Scène aux champs
DR13 0.00 dB -18.15 dB 4:55 04-Symphonie fantastique: IV. Marche au supplice
DR14 0.00 dB -20.32 dB 10:35 05-Symphonie fantastique: V. Songe d'une nuit du sabbat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MP3 V4:
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR15 -0.36 dB -20.86 dB 15:16 06-Les Préludes
DR16 -1.31 dB -24.56 dB 15:36 01-Symphonie fantastique: I. Rêveries - Passions
DR14 -5.37 dB -24.86 dB 6:23 02-Symphonie fantastique: II. Un bal
DR19 -0.05 dB -28.23 dB 16:15 03-Symphonie fantastique: III. Scène aux champs
DR14 0.00 dB -18.15 dB 4:55 04-Symphonie fantastique: IV. Marche au supplice
DR14 0.00 dB -20.32 dB 10:35 05-Symphonie fantastique: V. Songe d'une nuit du sabbat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are only slight differences in the calculated peaks.
It also gives people the option of NOT having to install this foo_dynamic_range plugin to view this type of information.
instead they have to install WSH panel mod, add a panel to their layout, download and extract my files into their profile folder, turn off safe mode and then import the script. much easier....
if you really want to, my existing
simple text reader script can display text files. by default it will load the first txt/log file it finds in the current playing track's folder but you can customise the folder path/filename with any titleformatting you like.
Vinyls are reported as having higher DR than CD using the same master, so it might not be accurate for comparing lossy encoded files either.
It would be nice it was updated to include R128 peak-to-loudness-ratio metric that's used by a few pro audio tools.
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this but I'm attempting to figure out if this component can insert the DR values for each track and the entire album into my FLAC tags? If not does anyone know an easy way to do this.
I suppose I could parse the foo_dr.txt and use metaflac to insert these but it would require a custom script and some time. Has anyone done this before?
Also, Does anyone know how to get in touch with the developer? It seems like it should be easy to update the component to write tags.
Well, it does add those tags in files (as well as in CDDA tracks thanks to cddb) when you check that advanced > tools > Dynamic Range Meter setting called Write DR meta data tags.
Reading markanini's post (https://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=88373&view=findpost&p=877736), all the things with this foobar plugin seems very confusing. I'm not a technician.
markanini
Will you so kind, as to inform us about the source? FLAC or MP3, with or without tags?
any other technician
In your opinion, may we believe foo_dynamic_range's result, or no? Do the plugin or the EXE tool work wrong?
UP
Nobody has an opinion? :(
Sorry to resurrect an old thread (again).
@incifinci, I'm not a technician, and I'm not sure if this is what you are asking, but just in case:
AFAIK, the popular explanation for inflated DR scores from vinyl sources is that vinyl's inherent surface noise (pops, clicks, static, groove noise, etc.) can artificially inflate the DR value, leaving vinyl rips with higher DR scores than their digital counterparts, even if they are from the same master. So DR meter scores for vinyl sources should be taken with a grain of salt, but this only applies to vinyl - it has no effect on DR scores from digital sources (lossy or lossless), so those results can be views as accurate.
Yes, it is. Thank you!
Now I am looking for foo_dynamic_range vs. r128gain...
Well, it does add those tags in files (as well as in CDDA tracks thanks to cddb) when you check that advanced > tools > Dynamic Range Meter setting called Write DR meta data tags.
Hi.
It does indeed write the values to flac files, individually. But I work with CUE files, and set Foobar to deliberately ignore the FLACs. Also, most of the time my albums don't consist in FLAC files for each track but one big FLAC file for the whole album, and this plugin doesn't seem to know how to write into the CUE.
Any suggestions?
People need to understand what they're talking about before they post some of the things they post.
DR RMS value doesn't match another software's value. Answer: most software engineers don't know anything about music and use the RMS calculations presented in their college textbooks. Meanwhile, the Audio Engineering Society has released standards regarding measurements specifically relating to recorded music. Pro-audio-based titles follow the AES guidelines, which are about 3 dB different than the electrical engineering measure. (The reason is the AES standard considers only the musical content where the EE standard will include factors that skew readings for music.)
The Pleasurize Site isn't professional. - Yes, it's defunct, but that group was originally funded out of one engineer's pocket. It was never a company. Donations funded the coding.
MAAT Digital now codes and owns the DR-meter. Although I do not believe there is any Foobar2000 support, which is regrettable, but understandable.
Off Line DR and Online don't match - let me know when you get a good answer for this, because they should be very close. I can see why that would drive people up a wall. There were some issues between the offline and online versions of that software, so it's likely those gremlins made their way to the Foobar2000 versions, too.
Yes, I've been saying this for years. I wrote a little article on how to get FB2K setup with LUFS Integrated and True Peak for every track in the playlist, without the need for any buggy, unsupported components.
http://hermetechmastering.com/FB2k.html
It would be cool to integrate/update the foo EBU R218 meter:
- https://github.com/stengerh/foo_r128meter
Some - maybe inspiring - resources:
- https://github.com/magicgoose/simple_dr_meter
- https://github.com/dakeryas/deadbeef-dr-meter
- https://github.com/melchiorrecaruso/audiometer
- https://github.com/rtsurik/audacious-dr-meter-plugin
- https://github.com/csteinmetz1/pyloudnorm (metering part, of course)
- http://dr14tmeter.sourceforge.net/
Hope that some dev will consider...
It already has EBU analysis built in, see my post above. Doesn't give a real time readout though.
Off Line DR and Online don't match - let me know when you get a good answer for this, because they should be very close. I can see why that would drive people up a wall. There were some issues between the offline and online versions of that software, so it's likely those gremlins made their way to the Foobar2000 versions, too.
No one on this thread was reporting an Offline vs Online mismatch. Reported here was a mismatch between the foobar plugin and the Pleasurize Offline TT Meter (so, both 'offline'). And the reason turned out to be that the Offline TTMeter had a bug : it was being thrown off by embedded tags or art. When those were removed, the reading generated by the foobar plugin and the TTMeter were the same. See page 1 of this thread.
I don't know if the online TTMeter (long gone) had that bug, and I haven't checked if the MAAT DR meter still has that bug.
One thing that has been noted elsewhere (https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/the-dr-meter-multichannel-files.34495) is that the foobar plugin (including v1.1.1, final version) accepts multichannel files as input-- which it shouldn't, because such files often have channels that have intermittent or low level content or are simply empty, causing absurd readings.
The offline MAAT DR meter only accepts 2 channel files. I don't recall if the old TTMeter was the same, though I expect it was.
In Preferences/advanced/tools/DRM/threads priority set up 4 cores, but scanning so long an it loads CPU only 30%, all track lie on ssd. Why CPU does not loaded 100%?
In Preferences/advanced/tools/DRM/threads priority set up 4 cores, but scanning so long an it loads CPU only 30%, all track lie on ssd. Why CPU does not loaded 100%?
This option has nothing to do with threads count or/and cores quantity. Thread priority is thread priority, not threads count. You can set maximal value - 7. This way it will be slightly faster.