Hi, Gary and David,
I have pretty much given up normalizing access copies for clients
(unless they are "heroic efforts" of digging something out of mud).
For the projects I wish to adjust output level, I've been using the
iZotope RX (6, now 7) Loudness standard. I've been using ATSC A/85, but
that is only 1 dB lower than the EBU128 in the default iZotope settings.
The default adjustments are: True Peak -2.0 dB and
Integrated loudness -24.0 LKFS
This setting provides a good match between different tape programs. If
you wish to try some old cylinder recordings, I could apply it to a
couple for you to see if it works well for you.
I do like the concept of adjusting to a perception standard rather than
an electrical/waveform standard.
As an aside, iZotope RX offers Normalize and Leveler as related
functions to Loudness. However, if I'm doing more serious mastering
work, I do like some of the gain riding tools in iZotope Ozone.
Cheers,
Richard
On 2018-09-21 2:06 PM, Gary A. Galo wrote:
> RMS normalization in Sound Forge also causes clipping. I always do peak normalization. I do find that using the Statistics function under Tools, and checking RMS level, can be very helpful in matching apparent loudness from one track to the next.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mickey Clark
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 1:40 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Normalization Question
>
> Hello-I found that RMS in Nero would create clipping - setting to maximum
> is preferred-Mickey
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Seubert
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 9:39 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Normalization Question
>
> UCSB is digitizing Edison Diamond Discs from the teens and 1920s and
> putting them online in DAHR. We are normalizing access files using EBU
> R-128 to -16 LUFS. When we do this manually in Wavelab it sounds great.
> When we batch process using ffmpeg (double pass), files with certain noise
> profiles come out sounding terrible, full of volume pumping. RMS
> normalization in ffmpeg works fine. Questions are, does EBU R-128 not work
> well with noisy content? Why does the normalizer in Wavelab work so much
> better than ffmpeg? And finally, is there any reason not to just use RMS
> normalization? Our workflow is automated, so using Wavelab isn't an option.
>
>
> I can probably share files if anybody want to hear.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> David Seubert
>
> UCSB
>
--
Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada 647 479 2800
http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
|