Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Linear Phase Subwoofer
Last post by hatrix -
New update is great. Definitely the best plugin for subwoofer management. Delay is working fantastic.
2
General Audio / Parametric EQ and Crossfeed for Android?
Last post by lélé -
Hello,

I use my Android smartphone and IEM to listen to music from streaming platforms (Qobuz, Spotify and I may give a try to Tidal soon).

I am looking for Android application with:
  • Parametric EQ
  • Crossfeed
that I could use while listening from the streaming platforms mentioned above.

May you have suggestions?

Merci !

Fred
3
Vinyl / Re: >20kHz content found in vinyl?
Last post by scannercf -
Looking at rips fo DVD-A, SACDs, BluRay relases of old analog recordings, where the tapes were transferred to digital at >16/44, I quite often see a straight line (or rarely, two)  in ultrasonic regions of spectral views, representing inaudible hum/buzz from video monitors in the recording/mixing/mastering studio.  That's 'original' but it's noise rather than signal...original noise, I guess we can call it.

I've found this line present in a 24/96 copy I've made of the 2009 release of Nirvana's Nevermind (it shows all across the record, both sides). The record was mastered by Bernie Grundman from the original analog master tapes ... do you think this is one of those cases or maybe the "line" may also be present in the master tapes?

4
Opus / Re: opusgain scanner implementation status
Last post by dutch109 -
* loudness-scanner supports scanning opus files and adding REPLAYGAIN tags to them.
Well it only writes RG tags, which the RFC strongly discourages for Opus files.

I couldn't say why opusgain was not implemented along with the other tools. I imagine that it is considered a relatively niche (audiophile?) feature, although considerable effort was put into the design of the codec so that gains would be applied automatically by even the dumbest of decoders so it would have made sense to have a tool to make such files.
I don't think it's a niche feature, and certainly not audiophile.
All I want is the volume of my tracks to be consistent when I'm playing them in my car or doing sport. That seem like a pretty common and mainstream need.
Even Apple has their RG/R128 equivalent with Sound Check.

Just what is it you want to achieve? Switching from Vorbis to Opus because of one audible artefact seems excessive. You have no guarantee that Opus will not have an audible artefact at some point in some track. In fact I can almost guarantee it, given that there are known killer audio samples that Opus really struggles with. However, if you just want smaller files at an overall similar (or better) quality, then Opus would give you that.
Your last sentence sums up what I want: "smaller files at an overall similar (or better) quality".
Of course I know no lossy codec can always be transparent, especially at such bitrates, and I should have given more context about the artifact.
I was playing a track (encoded by Vorbis) for the first time, so I has no knowledge of what the original track sounded like. I was in a noisy environment, with average quality in-ear earbuds. Despite that I noticed something was weird in the drum part (cymbal) of one part of the track. Back home I did an ABX test to compare with original lossless file and confirmed it was an audible encoding artifact.
Although I have done my fair share of ABX tests and I am somewhat trained to spot artifacts, I don't have exceptionally good ears, and I often fail to ABX most tracks during public listening tests.
I can accept that my portable collection has artifacts, but I can not accept that I am distracted by a "damn, was that not an encoding artifact?" feeling while listening to music.

Given the limitations of your Android decoder, do you want an actual compliant opusgain tool that will write tags that are useless to you? Or just something that will slam a gain into the header field? Or a tool that will write the traditional REPLAYGAIN tags into an Opus file? All these things are quite achievable, either based on vorbisgain (probably a clone rather than adding features into vorbisgain itself) or making opusgain work (since it seems to have everything in place, just not hooked up very well). I would add Deadbeef to the list of possible tools - I think at present it writes gain info into the old REPLAYGAIN tags although you might need the native Opus plugin rather than the ffmpeg version.
I am using foobar 2000 mobile for now, which is not perfect, but properly handles the R128_TRACK_GAIN tags.
I have reported the issue to the GMMP author, and he acknowledged it, and will fix it in the future, just not anytime soon because he is busy with a new major version and a R128 gain bug is not high on his priority list.
When he will fix it, I will switch back to GMMP (which I paid for).

To add the tags I am currently experimenting with small scripts with use FFmpeg ebur128 filter to calculate loudness, and Python Mutagen library to add tags.


Though in fact (and it's not matter of a point of view) Opus is not simply overall better than Vorbis/any other lossy coder at 96 kbps (and OP talks about this bitrate) but also  handles better difficult samples.  http://listening-test.coresv.net/s/scores_by_tracks_closeup_en.png
Look at scores (and amount of difficult samples ) where Opus and Vorbis struggle on difficult samples.
Also it's worth to mention that  the test  was very extensive  with 40 samples.
Interesting.
I though Opus, while still evolving, was already considered unconditionally superior to Vorbis at all bitrates.
Maybe I should just bump the Vorbis bitrate I am encoding with then.

EDIT: Sorry misread your message. Then one more reason to find/make an opusgain implementation and encode my collection to Opus.
5
My own samples in the complete folder are now DPI aware for text/tooltips etc.

https://github.com/19379/foo-jscript-panel/releases
6
@DVDdoug
That is definitely true.

I get hung-up on the issue that players have playback issues at all. "Is it the burn speed? The type of CD-R? A combination of both?"

When I send burned audio discs to others and get a report of problem with playback I'm thinking more of how I could do something different.

I have suggested to people with playback issues to try another player or use their computer. For me, the questions remain. I've tried 4x as well. At one point I thought certain players would not like burned CD-R's over "pressed" ones... right until those same finicky players did recognize burned CD-R's instead of giving a tray load error.
7
Opus / Re: opusgain scanner implementation status
Last post by IgorC -
Switching from Vorbis to Opus because of one audible artefact seems excessive. You have no guarantee that Opus will not have an audible artefact at some point in some track. In fact I can almost guarantee it, given that there are known killer audio samples that Opus really struggles with. However, if you just want smaller files at an overall similar (or better) quality, then Opus would give you that.
I agree that one single issue isn't an excuse to move to another codec.

Though in fact (and it's not matter of a point of view) Opus is not simply overall better than Vorbis/any other lossy coder at 96 kbps (and OP talks about this bitrate) but also  handles better difficult samples.  http://listening-test.coresv.net/s/scores_by_tracks_closeup_en.png
Look at scores (and amount of difficult samples ) where Opus and Vorbis struggle on difficult samples.
Also it's worth to mention that  the test  was very extensive  with 40 samples.
8
All righty, I'll take this as a bad idea.

A mod can bin this if they want.
9
Audio Hardware / Re: Headphone fit
Last post by Roseval -
Have a look at IEMs (In Ear Monitor) like Etymotic ER4P
You don’t have any pressure on your ears.
Having them inserted can be another type of discomfort :)

Beside pressure, weight can be a burden too.
One of the reasons I like the Sennheiser HD800 is because of its wearing comfort.
Light pressure, light weight, over the ear, good cushions.

Have a look at battery powered Bluetooth receivers. They turn any headphone into a wireless one.
10
No. Then people would have to be referred back to the "we've been here before" thread.