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.
Recent Posts
15
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: lossyWAV 1.4.2 Development (was 1.5.0)
Last post by Porcus -
Block size 512 can be set with

flac -b 512
wavpack --blocksize=512
Takc.exe -fsl512

Not much use trying ALAC as it doesn't support wasted bits, but if you want to experiment with block size: CUETools.ALACEnc.exe -b 512 (remember the whitespace). Also Monkey's doesn't support wasted bits.
16
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_truepeak True Peak Scanner
Last post by Defender -
Quote from: Case on
Quote from: Defender on
Because scanning with 0.6.8 seemed a lot slower than scanning with 0.6.7 and I was wondering if that was because of the extra LUFS-M/S scanning
[...]
Does this make any sense to you?
LUFS-M / LUFS-S scanning seems to be the reason. I use the libebur128 library for LRA scanning and also for LUFS-M/S. Seems that the extra work required to split the incoming data at precise 100 ms chunks to be fed to the library also hurts LRA scanning speed.
Can confirm that 0.6.8 with only RG+DR+POS enabled performs on the same level as 0.6.7 with RG+DR+POS+LRA.

Is your routine for calculating LUFS-S/M pretty much optimized already or do you expect to be able to implement some speedgains in the feature?

And second question: Would it be possible to use in 0.6.8+ the LRA method that was in use in 0.6.7 when scanning LUFS-S/M is not enabled?
17
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: lossyWAV 1.4.2 Development (was 1.5.0)
Last post by 2012 -
@Hakan Abbas

Nick meant passing -b 512 to flac encoder, which you didn't:

Code: [Select]
13,749,585 '01 Riot (Feat. Damian Jr. Gong Marley).lossy.flac'
11,713,235 '01 Riot (Feat. Damian Jr. Gong Marley).lossy.b512.flac'
15,951,686 '02 Entertainment 2.0 (Feat. Juicy J, 2 Chainz & Nicki Minaj).lossy.flac'
13,103,138 '02 Entertainment 2.0 (Feat. Juicy J, 2 Chainz & Nicki Minaj).lossy.b512.flac'
18
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Dynamic Range plugin
Last post by omasciarotte -
Quote from: foobrik on
Someone needs a simples dynamic range meter, with the ability to record a log file. + truepeak does not show rms and peak

Our DROffline and DROffline MkII are the two successors to the original TT-DR Offline from way back when. DROffline, now in version 2.2.2, is a modern version of the original. DROffline MkII includes all the original functionality plus BS.1770, PSR and the ability to handle FLAC and ALAC. You can find more info on the MAAT.digital website.

The original TT-DR Meter could not measure DRi, it could only estimate. DRMeter MkII can measure.
19
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_truepeak True Peak Scanner
Last post by Case -
Quote from: Defender on
Because scanning with 0.6.8 seemed a lot slower than scanning with 0.6.7 and I was wondering if that was because of the extra LUFS-M/S scanning
[...]
Does this make any sense to you?
LUFS-M / LUFS-S scanning seems to be the reason. I use the libebur128 library for LRA scanning and also for LUFS-M/S. Seems that the extra work required to split the incoming data at precise 100 ms chunks to be fed to the library also hurts LRA scanning speed.
20
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_truepeak True Peak Scanner
Last post by Case -
Quote from: Defender on
After googling a lot it seems that for LUFS-I positive values and negative values are both used to talk about the same thing.
That would be wrong, they are very much different things.

Quote from: Defender on
It seems as if %truepeak_scanner_track_lufs_i% only has negative values.
Is it correct to assume Truepeak Scanner never publishes positive values?
For very loud tracks the LUFS-I will be positive. When ReplayGain gain shows -18.00 dB LUFS-I will be exactly 0 LUFS. For louder tracks the LUFS-I will be positive.

Quote from: Defender on
I'd like to be able to calculate PLR even as %replaygain_track_peak_db% is not available. So I would need something like %truepeak_scanner_track_peak_db% or a way to calculate this value based on the already available truepeak tags.

Is there a way to calculate this peak_db value from available truepeak tags?
I'm certain there are some titleformat monstrosities posted on these forums that estimate dB value from floating point numbers from the old days. In theory the component could expose a global titleformat string that calculates and exposes this, but I'm not liking the idea at all. It's better to tag things in RG tags and leave hacks out.