IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
ReplayGain storage
jukkap
post Aug 11 2011, 22:31
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 14-July 11
Member No.: 92296



I am currently building new Musepack plug-ins and I am wondering which is the preferred method of storing ReplayGain information to Musepack files ?

Store to Musepack format ?

or

Store to APE tag ?



Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Antonski
post Aug 11 2011, 23:36
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 204
Joined: 8-October 01
Member No.: 250



According to specification, RG info must be stored in the file header. Every Musepack capable player that I've tried reads and writes RG in this way.
~~
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jukkap
post Aug 12 2011, 06:45
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 14-July 11
Member No.: 92296



Thanks for pointing the Musepack wiki. I don't know why I did not see it earlier but it is lots of help. I will do both SV7 and SV8 and they both seem to have ReplayGain in the header.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Notat
post Aug 12 2011, 15:10
Post #4





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



The ReplayGain specification suggests APEv2. Do we need to update/correct this?

This post has been edited by Notat: Aug 12 2011, 15:10
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MostlyHarmless
post Aug 13 2011, 01:37
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 23-September 09
Member No.: 73405



Musepack was the first (and only?) format with native ReplyGain support. Storing of ReplayGain info in tags seems to me as a workaround for older formats without native support.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Aug 13 2011, 02:29
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 5147
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (Notat @ Aug 12 2011, 10:10) *
The ReplayGain specification suggests APEv2. Do we need to update/correct this?


It should probably be updated to mention that replaygain tags are used with ASF tags (in the Extended Content Description Object) with the VorbisGain method (basically just a text comment field that says "replaygain_track_gain", ...).

See for example:

http://svn.rockbox.org/viewvc.cgi?diff_for...;revision=15340
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Notat
post Aug 13 2011, 22:14
Post #7





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



Appreciated but that's not very accessible information so can't just be C-P'd into the RG spec. If you can suggest some replacement text for the RG spec, we can get this corrected more quickly.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Aug 14 2011, 21:04
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 5147
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



I added that it uses the Extended Content Description Object with a ascii value key pair like Vorbis comments. Might make sense to have Peter comment on it though, since AFAIK he came up with the standard. We just looked at ASF files tagged with foobar2000 and copied it's convention.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lear
post Aug 14 2011, 22:02
Post #9


VorbisGain developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 140
Joined: 10-January 02
Member No.: 973



QUOTE (saratoga @ Aug 13 2011, 02:29) *

He, I'd forgotten I did that... wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Antonski
post Aug 24 2011, 01:32
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 204
Joined: 8-October 01
Member No.: 250



QUOTE (jukkap @ Aug 12 2011, 00:31) *
I am currently building new Musepack plug-ins ...


May I ask you what player(s) are they targeted?
As you can see in specification, there might be different RG values for every chapter.
~~
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 18th December 2014 - 15:45