IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

R128 versus ReplayGain, The cage match begins here.
Canar
post Jan 26 2011, 19:35
Post #1





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3352
Joined: 26-July 02
From: princegeorge.ca
Member No.: 2796



Now that kode54 has released his lovely scanner for foobar2000, I've been playing around with the two, trying to come up with some subjective characteristics that RG and R128 handle differently.

The first big thing is sub-bass! RG routinely rates sub-bass-heavy music as quieter than R128. This makes sense, given that RG is driven by equal-loudness contours. I wonder about the validity in the context of the electronic dance music scene, however. Though the equal loudness contours are probably accurate for pure audibility, the reality is that sub-bass is perceptible in more ways than just listening!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz_IVmxKKdw -- This track, one of my favourites of 2010, has nearly 4dB difference between R128 and RG. I'm pretty confident it's due to the difference in the way the two algorithms perceive bass. The track is driven by a deep sub-bass melody with minimal high-frequency content.

I know that this is a quick and dirty "analysis", but I wanted to open the floor for people doing comparisons between the two. I'm quite excited to see some competition in this field.

In general, the two algorithms seem to be very strongly correlated. Differences of <1dB are pretty much routine on the music I've tested so far.

This post has been edited by Canar: Jan 26 2011, 19:39


--------------------
You cannot ABX the rustling of jimmies.
No mouse? No problem.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Notat
post Feb 5 2011, 17:06
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 581
Joined: 17-August 09
Member No.: 72373



Has anyone listened to these tracks to try and determine which normalization value better matches subjective loudness?

For very sparse recordings, I can see where RG might be fooled. If less than 5% of the program is at "foreground" level, RG's histogram behavior will cause it to normalize to the background level. The gate behavior in R128 will cause it to normalize to the foreground level regardless of how sparse it is.

As for the doom genre, both RG and R128 use a high pass filter in their weighting. R128 listens to more of the bass than RG. RG will normalize bass-heavy material like this to higher levels than R128.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
romor
post Feb 5 2011, 17:54
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 670
Joined: 16-January 09
Member No.: 65630



I uploaded 30s FLAC for Ryoji Ikeda and unfortunatelly Noto's only in MP3 copy here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=86598

They are both made with tone genearator
Kerne: http://www.raster-noton.net/noton/new/kerne.html
Matrix: http://www.ryojiikeda.com/project/matrix

I could upload any track from above lists on request

QUOTE (Notat @ Feb 5 2011, 17:06) *
Has anyone listened to these tracks to try and determine which normalization value better matches subjective loudness?

I prefer ReplayGain for both problematic genres, R128 is way too attenuated to my ears

This post has been edited by romor: Feb 5 2011, 18:04


--------------------
scripts: http://goo.gl/M1qVLQ
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Notat
post Feb 7 2011, 06:09
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 581
Joined: 17-August 09
Member No.: 72373



QUOTE (romor @ Feb 5 2011, 09:54) *
I prefer ReplayGain for both problematic genres, R128 is way too attenuated to my ears

Louder sounds better. That's the basic psychoacoustic fact that got us here.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Canar   R128 versus ReplayGain   Jan 26 2011, 19:35
- - benski   I recently did a large analysis on a 45,000 track ...   Jan 26 2011, 19:44
- - lvqcl   My test: (2124 tracks/175 albums) Nanowar of St...   Jan 26 2011, 20:01
|- - GLiBERN   QUOTE (lvqcl @ Jan 26 2011, 21:01) My tes...   Jun 18 2011, 18:31
- - Canar   I'm not sure I'd use the word "concer...   Jan 26 2011, 20:01
- - lvqcl   From my collection of problem samples: xdrums: R1...   Jan 27 2011, 01:12
- - 2Bdecided   The couple of studies posted in the other thread s...   Jan 27 2011, 11:28
- - romor   Here are some selected releases comparison results...   Feb 3 2011, 17:09
- - Fandango   I currently have no evidence nor did I do any comp...   Feb 4 2011, 00:25
- - romor   Today I noticed an older release from Alva Noto an...   Feb 5 2011, 16:17
- - markanini   Hmm, 21.17 dB...sounds like a record.   Feb 5 2011, 16:28
- - Notat   Has anyone listened to these tracks to try and det...   Feb 5 2011, 17:06
|- - romor   I uploaded 30s FLAC for Ryoji Ikeda and unfortunat...   Feb 5 2011, 17:54
|- - Case   QUOTE (romor @ Feb 5 2011, 18:54) I uploa...   Feb 6 2011, 10:19
|- - Notat   QUOTE (romor @ Feb 5 2011, 09:54) I prefe...   Feb 7 2011, 06:09
|- - jangk   QUOTE (romor @ Feb 5 2011, 17:54) R128 is...   Feb 7 2011, 07:27
- - SamDeRe81   Interesting! So a new audio analysis utility i...   Feb 5 2011, 17:10
|- - Soap   QUOTE (SamDeRe81 @ Feb 5 2011, 11:10) Int...   Feb 5 2011, 17:28
- - romor   QUOTE (romor @ Feb 5 2011, 17:54) R128 is...   Feb 6 2011, 16:38
- - SamDeRe81   This is great, I'm definitely going to be usin...   Feb 7 2011, 03:42
- - carpman   I doubt romor is comparing 2 versions of the same ...   Feb 7 2011, 06:26
|- - Notat   QUOTE (carpman @ Feb 6 2011, 22:26) I dou...   Feb 7 2011, 17:05
|- - carpman   QUOTE (Notat @ Feb 7 2011, 16:05) You swi...   Feb 8 2011, 00:50
- - Notat   I've listened to your samples. Thanks for post...   Feb 7 2011, 16:56
- - Gecko   I rescanned my lossless collection. EBU R128 data ...   Jul 4 2011, 20:03


Reply to this 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: 20th August 2014 - 15:11