Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!

- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.

- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.

- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

What is your stance on Replaygain support in Vorbis?
post May 15 2002, 21:30
Post #1


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1

Do you believe it's better to store the data in the actual Vorbis tags, where it's more practical, easier to implement, and more likely to gain widespread support?

Or do you believe that it's better to have each individual player handle replaygain itself because it's "The Right Thing", because having the data in the vorbis tags is too much of a kludge, and because it's not the responsibility or goal of Vorbis to deal with this?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Start new topic
post May 18 2002, 14:37
Post #2

Group: Members
Posts: 44
Joined: 24-February 02
Member No.: 1388

I'm late to this discussion, for I need to study first what ReplayGain is all about. I've never used it before, and now I know why--I listen mostly to classical music, and I've no use of RG.

But I've read through David's web site (to the best of my ability -- I'm a social science guy), and I've read the two recent threads about RG, which I ignored initially.

Still, I have some questions, and hopefully some of don't mind teaching a newbie a thing or two.

Question 1:

If the issue is about putting 4 tags in the user-definable Vorbis tags area, what exactly are you trying to get the Vorbis team to agree to?

Because classical music is my thing, I need quite a few extra tags on my ogg files. I need composers, opus no., original source (from piano rolls to 78 rpm to LP to CD), performers, orchestra, conductor... etc. I don't think I need any permission to create those tags, so if those RG tags are so important to you, why don't you just do it?

What does "official support" exactly mean in this context? You want the vorbis encoder (oggenc) to also do RG caculation and store the tags? Or you want the the libraries to provide functions to read/write the tags? Or you want the reference decoder to be RG-enabled? Or...?


IIRC, the decoder has been freezed since RC1, right? The promise was a properly-implemented decoder/player now will be able to decode all future v 1.x files without problem, even if they're encoded with newer version of encoders. If we want the vorbis team to change the requirement so that only a RG-enabled decoder is a compliant decoder, they would have to break the promise, don't they?

This doesn't entail that they should never do it. But I think if this is really the case, their reluctance is at least understandable. Because it's they who have to go explain to everybody why they have broken their promise.


Monty and Emmett never said this, so it could be just my imagination. But is it possible that there's a concern of loss of control? RG's development isn't under their control, and they might fear (legitimately, I think) that they'll have modify their specs again if something is changed on the RG front.


About the number of tags. I don't really get why tags other than the track gain tag are necessary. Yeah, I understand the concept of maintaining the relative loudness between tracks within an album. But if you're really listening through an album, isn't adjusting the volume knob once enough for the whole album?

I guess I probably misunderstood something there, but my impression is that with those album gains, album peak, etc. you can listen through several albums without having to adjust the volume? Assuming that's correct, it's cool. But is it that important? To have three tags per file just to avoid tuning the volume once per album?

I guess some ideas are just hard for a non-RG fan to comprehend. I adjust volume depending on more factors than the loudness of the recording itself. It has to depend on the environment, time of day, what I'm doing, whether I'm wearing a headset or not...etc. I certainly can't program all these into the tags.

I do see the benefit of the track gain setting (radio mode), when playing mixed songs. But very little beyond that.

I guess all my questions circle back to the first one: if there's really nothing for the vorbis team to do except giving you their blessing, then there should be no problem at all. You write your own tools to write the tags, and ask player plugins or decoders to use them. You don't really need the permission of the vorbis team.

If some things need to be done on their part for this to be useful, then could someone explain Q2 to Q4 to me, please?

Frankly, I quite sympathize Monty and his team (how many people are there?). They've been swamped by demands. Some people want written specs, NOW! Some people want v 1.0, NOW! Some peole want very low bitrate encoding, NOW. Some people want even better audio quality, at even lower bitrate. Some peole wonder why they don't send an army of promoters to hardware player developers and give them their fix point encoder for free. And now this.

I don't know Monty, or Emmett, and I don't know how exactly they feel, but I certainly don't envy their jobs.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Dibrom   What is your stance on Replaygain support in Vorbis?   May 15 2002, 21:30
- - rc55   I'd say vote for the Vorbis tag solution. If anyth...   May 15 2002, 22:05
- - JohnV   [01:36] <Paradox> There is a fundamental dif...   May 15 2002, 23:45
- - rjamorim   QUOTE Originally posted by JohnV Paradox is the C...   May 15 2002, 23:51
- - john33   Seems to me that this guy is a true 'anal retentiv...   May 16 2002, 00:50
- - Emmett_v2   Let me make a few things clear. First off, I've r...   May 16 2002, 00:59
- - MaTTeR   Well considering he is backing up the opinion of h...   May 16 2002, 01:07
- - Case   The values could be stored in header in similar wa...   May 16 2002, 01:14
- - JohnV   Ok people, please give proper reasons why rg shoul...   May 16 2002, 01:19
- - Dibrom   The biggest problem I see here with this situation...   May 16 2002, 02:06
- - rjamorim   QUOTE Originally posted by Dibrom some core peopl...   May 16 2002, 02:16
- - Dibrom   Btw, to everyone in this thread, lets try to keep ...   May 16 2002, 02:18
- - Dibrom   QUOTE Originally posted by rjamorim Hummm... like...   May 16 2002, 02:48
- - rjamorim   Just to clarify (Sorry for keeping OT) I had offe...   May 16 2002, 02:53
- - Emmett_v2   Quoth Dibrom: "The biggest problem I see here wit...   May 16 2002, 02:56
- - Dibrom   QUOTE Originally posted by Emmettfish Well, remem...   May 16 2002, 03:29
- - krsna77   Ok, before I start in, please understand that I am...   May 16 2002, 06:56
- - Dibrom   Actually, this metadata type stuff was discussed v...   May 16 2002, 07:47
- - Lear   QUOTE Originally posted by Emmettfish Many moons...   May 16 2002, 08:03
- - damjang   I think that ReplayGain data should be implemented...   May 16 2002, 08:19
- - YinYang   QUOTE Originally posted by Dibrom Actually, this ...   May 16 2002, 09:24
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by Emmettfish On the oth...   May 16 2002, 19:00
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by Case The values could ...   May 16 2002, 19:01
- - Emanuel   Just an idea, wich I realize might take some time ...   May 16 2002, 19:04
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by Dibrom Actually, this ...   May 16 2002, 19:05
- - Garf   I see three problem areas right now: a) Store dat...   May 16 2002, 19:34
- - Randum   Really I'm not clear on what Emmett's definition o...   May 16 2002, 21:44
- - Emmett_v2   Quoth Randum: "Really I'm not clear on what Emmet...   May 17 2002, 02:40
- - Randum   QUOTE Originally posted by Emmettfish Quoth Randu...   May 17 2002, 03:13
- - 2Bdecided   I'm glad Radium picked up on this fine point! The...   May 17 2002, 10:59
- - 2Bdecided   I know it's been kindly said several times in the ...   May 17 2002, 14:13
- - tw101   I'm late to this discussion, for I need to study f...   May 18 2002, 14:37
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by tw101 Question 1: If...   May 18 2002, 16:49
- - Lear   QUOTE Originally posted by tw101 I don't think I ...   May 18 2002, 18:29
- - tw101   QUOTE Originally posted by Lear That's what we'...   May 19 2002, 15:11
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by tw101 What puzzled me...   May 19 2002, 15:33
- - tw101   QUOTE Originally posted by Garf There is no need ...   May 19 2002, 15:44
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by tw101 Ok, but how muc...   May 19 2002, 16:12
- - tw101   QUOTE Originally posted by Garf [b]This is the on...   May 20 2002, 09:27
- - 2Bdecided   I didn't think my opinion would interest anyone......   May 20 2002, 11:29
- - tw101   QUOTE Originally posted by 2Bdecided I didn't thi...   May 20 2002, 12:32
- - 2Bdecided   tw101, Don't worry - my sarcastic comment wasn't ...   May 20 2002, 13:18
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by tw101 <backing awa...   May 20 2002, 18:23
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by 2Bdecided But no one ...   May 20 2002, 18:24
- - Dibrom   QUOTE Originally posted by Garf You are right - ...   May 20 2002, 21:39
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by Dibrom To clarify, of...   May 21 2002, 19:13
- - JohnV   Well Garf, to tell you the truth I'd be very surpr...   May 21 2002, 21:42
- - Garf   QUOTE Originally posted by JohnV All in all, the...   May 22 2002, 19:33

Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st August 2015 - 23:29