Support and General Use > Audio Playback, Database and Playlists
Would it be better for Replay Gain to be off by default?
Julian67:
--- Quote from: saratoga on October 05, 2012, 05:28:43 PM ---I should say almost never. I've never seen this on music I use, but its certainly possible. If you want, submit a patch.
--- End quote ---
Yes but your "almost never" is based entirely on "music I use" which is an unknown quantity (except to you) and is essentially unquantifiable. There is zero data, only an assertion or opinion.
What I tried to demonstrate is:
In a collection of modern, amplified music (rock, pop, indie, contemporary African, Cuban etc etc) then positive replay gain values are indeed seen "almost never".
In a collection containing lots of unamplified music or lots of non-orchestral "classical" music then high positive album gain values are definitely encountered and are not even unusual, they are far more usual than the negative gain values found in amplified music. You might even call them normal or unremarkable.
I've then demonstrated that with the default Rockbox config an album gain value of 5.57 dB being applied can induce severe distortion even at low output levels. That value of 5.57 dB is not an extreme value likely to be encountered "almost never". 63% of my classical collection has a positive album gain value and of those 97 albums have an album gain value above 4 dB, which is more than 11% of my classical collection.
A default setting in a playback app or firmware that demonstrably induces obvious audible artefacts and even severe clipping might not be a great default. The fact that it's a reasonable setting for people whose collection is entirely or almost entirely composed of amplified music where a positive gain value is almost never seen doesn't mean that it's a reasonable global default.
I'm sorry to labour the point but it's quite difficult to engage with short assertions that seem more like obstacles than exchanges, so I just try to explain it again as clearly as I know how.
I'm unsure why you suggest to submit a patch. What exactly would be patched? After looking at a default .rockbox and at a source tree I'm still unsure where or how Rockbox initial default config is defined or why a patch from a user is required to do something that requires zero new code and which is transparently easy for any Rockbox developer but may be problematic for an end user. I'm suggesting that the default config has a problem which Rockbox release manager/team/whoever might like to consider and modify if they agree. I've identified a problem and tried to provide both information, reasoning and a practical demonstration to illustrate this beyond any doubt. If raising the issue in the forum is not the right approach then wouldn't "file a bug report" is the next step, not "submit a patch"?
To conclude, I'll just refer back to my reply to AlexP in my previous post and apologise for disturbing you.
saratoga:
I mean that I don't mind if someone else wants to change it.
Julian67:
Ah ok..... ;D
If anyone prefers I submit a bug report please say so. If a patch is preferred please give me a start by pointing out which file in the source tree is relevant and I will submit a badly formatted patch fully ready for rejection (hint: it's better if someone familiar with the source and the style does it).
AlexP:
I don't think anyone would mind turning on clipping prevention by default. I don't think a bug report is appropriate as a it isn't a bug per se, more a change in behaviour.
I'll have a fiddle.
Edit: It is a one word change on one line, so easy peasy. If none of the other devs object (can't see why they would) I'll change it soon.
Julian67:
Thanks for your time and consideration. I hope the change will mean nobody who tries Rockbox will have sound quality issues at default settings, and hopefully there will be fewer odd "my music doesn't sound right" threads/posts/complaints.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version