[Oliver :)]

I just fired up iVolume and it asked me whether I wanted to update to 2.0! Weeee! Of course I do. It's a paid update, present owners of a iVolume license get a discount via Kagi. From what I understand, the mechanism is totally changed. iVolume still employs the replay-gain algorythm, but is now even more tied into iTunes. Instead of moving the volume slider it will modify the tag iTunes itself writes to with its mediocre volume adaption. This means: iVolume will now work with iPods & you will be able to burn adjusted CDs.

I'm really happy, I've been waiting for this update for over a year.

Actually it's all too good to be true

so I can't wait to receive my serial for the update to I can finally rub my eyes & realize that I am not dreaming.

You can find iVolume here:
http://www.mani.de/en/software/macosx/ivolume/

Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Manfred Schwind, I get nothing for praising iVolume as the best add-on to iTunes on Mac OS X since sliced bread. It's just a great piece of software that solves serveral hard issues in a totally elegant and convenient matter.

 

[Oliver :)]

"Analyzing Track 14 of 7468" - This may take a while

Anyway, Kagi got me my new serial within minutes of purchase. Nice.

25 of 7468... this thing is a good bit faster now!

 

[ReDVsion]

Neat. Now if iTunes will just get gapless playback I might actually buy a Mac.

 

[dknightd]

Oliver

I'm curious what you think about iVolume 2.0.
Is it really much better than "sound check"?
How long did it end up taking to do your collection?
Do you do album mode, or, single track mode?
What db number do you normalize to?

I like the idea of it using the sound check tag instead
of adjusting the volume slider - this way you can turn
it on and off just by turning sound check on and off.

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd Oliver I'm curious what you think about iVolume 2.0. Is it really much better than "sound check"? How long did it end up taking to do your collection? Do you do album mode, or, single track mode? What db number do you normalize to?

Well, Version 1.0 was

iTunes uses a different method. Said method used to reduce soundquality enoumously, especially noticable when using the iPod or when burning Audio-CDs. Killed dynamics, made everything sound mushy. Just check the archives for Soundcheck or "wet sponge", you'll find I am not alone with that issue.
As I am writing this, there are still some 500 tracks to analyze, so the Mac manages to get the whole thing done in about 24h. Notice that I did not let it sit alone all day, I used it while iVolume worked in the background, so it did not have all the ressource it could have had. It highly depends upon your processor & size of collection. If you're still on a G3, just fire it up & forget about it for a couple of days.

I use album mode and 97.1dB.

 

[dknightd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver I use album mode and 97.1dB.

Thanks for the feedback.
97.1 seems to be pretty high.

I played with the demo version a little last night. I used the default 92 db.
The adjustments it made at this level were about what the stock itunes
soundcheck feature used. Some louder, some softer. But the difference was not huge. I also tried some other values - 97db increased the volume on nearly every song I tried. I'm surprised you do not have clipping problems at 97. The samples I tried at that level seemed OK, but I imagine it could be a problem. I've never had a problem with soundcheck making the music mushy or lacking in dynamics.

If I understand it correctly, all iVolume 2 does is calculate a different value for the iTunNORM tag, which apparently more effectively normalizes the percieved volume of a song.

I need to spend more time with ivolume to see if the normalization really is better. Soundcheck does a pretty decent job, although not perfect. I need to find some samples where it does not work well, and see if ivolume does better.

I have about 45000 songs in my library. Even on a dual cpu G5 this will take some time to process. Then I'd have to back up the entire library again since ivolume will change every song (well at least the tags in every song).
I think I need to spend more time playing with ivolume before I let it loose on my entire library.

BTW, did you notice it also changes the comment tag?

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd I'm surprised you do not have clipping problems at 97.

Hardly. In fact I ended up with lot of tracks reduced in volume. Modern productions

Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd If I understand it correctly, all iVolume 2 does is calculate a different value for the iTunNORM tag, which apparently more effectively normalizes the percieved volume of a song.

It does nothing but change the volume. iTunes used to change the file and truly "normalize" frequency response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd I need to spend more time with ivolume to see if the normalization really is better. Soundcheck does a pretty decent job, although not perfect. I need to find some samples where it does not work well, and see if ivolume does better.

The good thing: Control. Don't want this album volume adapted? Use iVolume to put it back to normal. Want this track/album much more quiet / much louder? Use iVolume on just this one.


Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd I have about 45000 songs in my library. Even on a dual cpu G5 this will take some time to process.

I think I'd borrow a Quad G5 and boot my system on it for a weekend if I had such a job to do...


Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd Then I'd have to back up the entire library again since ivolume will change every song (well at least the tags in every song).

AFAIK it is totally non-destructive and reversible. Just check back with the author regarding any doubts in that regard. He's a nice guy.


Quote:

Originally Posted by dknightd BTW, did you notice it also changes the comment tag?

No, but thanks for pointing it out. That's a nice feature, if there's any perceived problem with a track you can check whether you missed out on it.