onkel_enno wrote:Album Leveling means that the whole Album is leveled by the loudest track of that album, right?
Err, I don't think so Onkel. I would describe it as levelling albums rather than tracks.
For example, the result of corrent volume leveling implementation may look like this:
Album A:
track 1: -4.3
track 2: +0.9
track 3: -0.6
Album B:
track 1: +2.1
track 2: +1.3
track 3: - 5.4
This means that the difference in volume level between tracks on a given album is affected. And, as the topic starter rightly points out, this should not be desired since most albums have been professionally mastered.
In the above result, Album A may, after volume leveling, still "sound" at a higher or lower volume than Album B, simply because the original was mastered at a different overall volume.
Album Leveling such as Sarkos proposes would be very sensible and very welcome. It's result would look more like something like this:
Album A:
track 1: -2.1
track 2: -2.1
track 3: -2.1
Average bit volume on Album A: 60dB (or highest: 87dB)
Album B:
track 1: +0.3
track 2: +0.3
track 3: +0.3
Average bit volume on Album A: 60dB (or highest: 87dB)
The numbers given have no mathematical meaning but just serve as an example to indicate the difference between the two sorts of volume leveling.
With Album Leveling all albums would sound as if they had been recorded/mastered at the same level, while the dynamics between the tracks would be preserved. Current volume leveling kills dynamic range of an album.
Sjettepet
[quote="onkel_enno"]Album Leveling means that the whole Album is leveled by the loudest track of that album, right?
[/quote]
Err, I don't think so Onkel. I would describe it as levelling albums rather than tracks.
For example, the result of corrent volume leveling implementation may look like this:
Album A:
track 1: -4.3
track 2: +0.9
track 3: -0.6
Album B:
track 1: +2.1
track 2: +1.3
track 3: - 5.4
This means that the difference in volume level between tracks on a given album is affected. And, as the topic starter rightly points out, this should not be desired since most albums have been professionally mastered.
In the above result, Album A may, after volume leveling, still "sound" at a higher or lower volume than Album B, simply because the original was mastered at a different overall volume.
Album Leveling such as Sarkos proposes would be very sensible and very welcome. It's result would look more like something like this:
Album A:
track 1: -2.1
track 2: -2.1
track 3: -2.1
Average bit volume on Album A: 60dB (or highest: 87dB)
Album B:
track 1: +0.3
track 2: +0.3
track 3: +0.3
Average bit volume on Album A: 60dB (or highest: 87dB)
The numbers given have no mathematical meaning but just serve as an example to indicate the difference between the two sorts of volume leveling.
With Album Leveling all albums would sound as if they had been recorded/mastered at the same level, while the dynamics between the tracks would be preserved. Current volume leveling kills dynamic range of an album.
Sjettepet