ReplayGain AlbumGain - is mean average the wrong way? 2019-06-06 20:02:26 I did search for previous threads, but discussion didn't seem to be going in this direction. If there is another thread discussing my point, I sincerely apologise.We have ReplayGain (R128 algorithm) which is just fine for tracks. It's an integrated LUFS scan, with an adjustment to make any track meet a I-loudness of -18 LUFS. That's fine by me.What I am questioning is the current implementation of Album Gain.Currently, all tracks in an album (either by tag or by "scan as single album") are scanned for I-LUFS and the mean average is taken (add all RG_track values together and divide by number of tracks).I think a better solution would be to take the track with the greatest level of reduction and use that for the Album Gain value.My reasoning is that I am listening to a collection of tracks picked from albums and the levels seems a bit skewed. I do not like RG track gain mode as it doesn't attempt to preserve the intent of each track. A thick mix rock track shouldn't be adjusted to the same I-LUFS as a soft acoustic guitar and female voice in my opinion.I took it upon myself to copy out the meta tags and set the entire album gain to that of the 'loudest' track (the one with the greatest -ve RG track value) and things work a lot better. The listening experience is much smoother.What are people's thoughts on this?If anything, a switch would be nice to allow a choice of either mean average of loudest track as the album gain value.Thanks.