On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 9:56 AM, jonetsu <jonetsu@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > From: "Robin Gareus" <robin@email-addr-hidden>
> > Date: 04/12/16 09:12
>
> > It is equivalent to the guy who listens to the music turning the volume
> > dial on the amp. It does not affect the mix at all.
>
> > If you export too soft, s/he will have to turn up the amp.
>
> Although the whole idea is to load commercial songs, by genre, to compare
> with. That adjustment would be done by hand, as part of 'mastering', as
> well as any other final adjustments. The resulting CD (or individual
> pieces along the way) being played in various places and again compared to
> same genre commercial products.
>
> > One positive side effect of normalization is that you get the best
> > signal/noise ratio for the exported target (usually 16bit). If the
> > loudest peak is at 0dBFS the whole [16bit] range is available for
> > dynamic range. If the digital peak is at -6dBFS you get one less bit
> > dynamic range (with integer encoding).
>
> So far I tend to see it as part of the craft of doing the final
> adjustments, be them about loudness, compression, EQ, etc..
> It might be part of learning.
>
Imagine you just obtained a finished, commercially produced and mastered
song.
You play it on your music system with the volume set at 5.0. It sounds a
bit too quiet, so you turn it up to 7.0.
Did you change the mix? Did you change any aspect of the production process?
Hopefully it is clear that you did not.
Normalization is *EXACTLY* equivalent to this process.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Tue Apr 12 20:15:01 2016
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 12 2016 - 20:15:01 EEST