Skip to main content

Notice

If you are using a Hotmail or Outlook email address, please change it now, as Microsoft is rejecting all email from our service outright.
Topic: wvgain (Read 1285 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: wvgain

Reply #25
The bitrate on the long version sounds reasonable, but the bitrate on the shorter version is suspiciously low, which is why it's so small.

I can think of three possible reasons. One is that while the file is stereo, it might actually be identical (or almost identical) in the two channels. You should be able to tell if you listen in headphones. Do the two tracks sound pretty similar?

Another possibility is that the level is significantly lower in the shorter sample. This should be easy to see by looking at the replaygain values.

Finally, the shorter file may have LSB redundancy. This means that a lot of bits are zero that shouldn't be and so the file is much more compressible. I don't know why that would be, but it's possible, and it could sound the same (there's a clever program called lossyWAV that takes advantage of this).

I suppose that the larger one could have something making it harder to compress like high-frequency noise, but that's less likely.

If you're really curious you could make the files available to me (maybe just the shorter one) and I could tell you exacly.

Re: wvgain

Reply #26
i guess i would be interested in knowing.  i am not sure i would be a good judge at how similar the channels are.

the only way i know how to send a file, is to attach it in an email

i tried to do a copy and paste here on this forum, but nothing showed up

Re: wvgain

Reply #27
hi david,

i did a search on the net for your email, and it did give me one.  so i sent you an email, titled "my boyfriend's back"

if you dont get it, you can let me know.  i did not think it was appropriate to mention your email on the forum, without your permission.

most of the songs do seem to be closer to the 15-20mb.  almost none of them are as small as 8-9.

Re: wvgain

Reply #28
I got the file, thanks! And you're probably right that many people wouldn't like their e-mail plastered in a forum because web crawlers will find them, although the wavpack e-mail is pretty much public at this point.

And you're not supposed to post any audio file longer than 30 seconds, so that might be why you couldn't.

Anyway, the single version is actually almost perfect mono, which is why it compresses so good. The single version sounds like everything is coming right from the middle, but the full length version has stuff panned hard left and right. If you listen for that it should be pretty obvious.

Re: wvgain

Reply #29
okay, i see.  that makes sense, as well.

the single version was made shorter to get lots of airplay on the radio

so no reason to make it stereophonic

Re: wvgain

Reply #30
it got me wondering - just when did stereo become popular.  research says that it became somewhat widely available for homes in 1958.  but i guess that would be for records and record players.  not too many radios were stereophonic.

and they were still learning.  i recall the first beatle stereo lps would have all the singing come out of 1 channel and all the music come out of the other channel.  i am sure that sounds ridiculous, today.  i thought it was ridiculous back then.  my ears cant stand that.  i would much rather hear straight mono.  on my stereo receiver back then, there was a knob in which you could listen to the source in mono - probably for that exact reason - when a stereo mix just wasnt any good !!

i think my ears are fairly common.  because i do not like to hear unbalanced singing.  and most recordings seem to keep the singing fairly equal between the channels, so that it sounds like it is coming right from the middle of your head.

i think the main advantage to stereo is it is easier to pick up on all the various instruments, if they balance it so that each instrument seems to come from a slightly different location

it is not uncommon for me to listen to a song in stereo, and hear something for the first time - an instrument that probably gets drowned out in a fully mono recording.

i dont notice these things nearly as much as you might, because by far and away, my biggest love of music is the melody.  my brain zeroes in on that, and puts most everything else a bit on the back burner.

i also know that there has been a lot of tinkering around with old recordings, when they started putting them on cds.  they made good stereo outputs of the beatles, as well as a lot of other older recordings.

Re: wvgain

Reply #31
-w "Artist=%artist%" -w "Title=%title%"   -w "Album=%albumtitle%" -w "Year=%year%" -w "Track=%tracknr%/%numtracks%" -w "Album Artist=%albumartist%"  -w "Disc=%cdnumber%/%totalcds%" -w "Genre=%genre%" -w "Composer=%composer%" -w "Performer=%albuminterpret%"  %hascover%--write-binary-tag "Cover Art (Front)=@%coverfile%"%hascover% --allow-huge-tags  -hh %source% %dest%

i dont remember most of it - LOL

Hi, I have been trying to get CDs with large album art to work. I am using EAC 1.5 and WavPack 5.3 and my player is foobar2000. I tried using the command line you have posted above but that does not work. The error I get is:
Unable to open item for playback (Unsupported format or corrupted file):
"G:\wav\Bach, Brahms, Tschaikowsky, Beethoven; David Oistrach\Bach, Brahms, Tschaikowsky- Violinkonzerte , Beethoven- Violinromanzen Disc 1\10 Romanze für Violine und Orchester no. 1 in G-Dur, op. 40.wv"

Currently I am unable to get either foobar (or VUPlayer or VLC Player) to play my .WV files if they have large album art. My original command line in EAC (for WavPack) was -h -w "Artist=%artist%" -w "Title=%title%" -w "Album=%albumtitle%" -w "Year=%year%" -w "Track=%tracknr%" -w "Genre=%genre%" %source% %dest%

I tried adding --allow-huge-tags to this command line but that does not help either.

Can you help?  Sorry for the interruption but I am a little frustrated.

Re: wvgain

Reply #32
I think this has all been resolved in this thread, but if not let me know.

The short answer for someone else coming here that the Add ID3 checkbox in EAC should never be checked when creating WavPack files.

Re: wvgain

Reply #33
I think this has all been resolved in this thread, but if not let me know.

Thank you Bryant. Yes Korth was kind enough to solve this. Yesterday was a frustrating day. I will start ripping as per Korth's advice tomorrow. Sorry for the interruption. You guys do a great job.

I understand now that the ID3 box should ONLY be ticked for creating MP3 files. Nothing else.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020