• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Normalization methods for LP digitization

OP
Lttlwing16

Lttlwing16

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
201
Likes
113
Take a -17 LUFS track View attachment 190983
And apply -15 LUFS target with -1 dB peakView attachment 190984
Is easy to observe the "brickwalled" sound effect (many extra peaks) destroying the original good dynamic range.
Probably this could be a good option to listen music on portable gear or in the car, but no high fidelity in anyway.
Use only peak dB to assure original dynamic range (and noise compromise), loudness normalization is only good for streaming
Thanks for the input. I've been pre-recording each album, finding the peak dB for each album using the amplify tool in Audacity, then setting my gear to capture as close to this limit without clipping. No post processing normalization or gain adjustments after the final rip. Usually I can get very close to 0.0 dB target.
 

JP

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Messages
2,276
Likes
2,449
Location
Brookfield, CT
Take a -17 LUFS track View attachment 190983
And apply -15 LUFS target with -1 dB peakView attachment 190984
Is easy to observe the "brickwalled" sound effect (many extra peaks) destroying the original good dynamic range.
Probably this could be a good option to listen music on portable gear or in the car, but no high fidelity in anyway.
Use only peak dB to assure original dynamic range (and noise compromise), loudness normalization is only good for streaming

What tool(s) are you using to draw these conclusions?
 

Rock Rabbit

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
174
What tool(s) are you using to draw these conclusions?
iZotope RX 7 with BS1770 loudness but any editor with loudness plugin can do. Essentially the loudness model don't take care of dynamic range and use a gain factor (K) that decreases abruptly at low frequency (like our ear). So loudness computation has some frequency weight and then even the same track and source could meet a loudness target with different EQ, remember that the dynamic component is equal (same short and long transient behavior) at least for old records.
If vinyl track is brighter a loudness lift to try to reach same loudness of a bassy track results in a louder brighter sound (spectrum content doesn't change). Finally to reach a louder target limited by peak value (as always) means that compression must be in action to reach loudness target without clipping, indeed one can simulate actual recording "quality" cranking up the target at -5 LUFS or higher to appreciate pure brickwalled sound.
And yes, I made all the experiments first before any conclusion and measured the results with iZotope statistics info and spectrum results that I posted here to show easy images of the process.
I have made many (many!) vinyl rips...and some time of my life was dedicated to calibration of audiometric and impedance audiometry gear with B & K instruments...fwiw
 

JP

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Messages
2,276
Likes
2,449
Location
Brookfield, CT
Of course EQ matters - it's perceived loudness so weighting is a given. I use LUFS for loudness normalization as it's just a smarter algo. One doesn't need set a peak target or otherwise employ compression.
 

Rock Rabbit

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
174
In detail: same music passage at -10 LKFS and -0.5 dB true peak...very representative of modern music "produced" on digital gear
IMG_20220307_192437.jpg

I don't wanna play that...btw that's why Amir test DACs at 0 dBFS and the reason every Ifi DAC suffers.
For example Tracy Chapman GH on CD is worst than this example.
The first Chapman album (1988) fortunately is not brickwalled, compared to vinyl version they both have the same loudness statistics (except min RMS level -inf CD & -52 dB on vinyl) and SAME frequency response with slightly better extension on vinyl, that's how I know the AT VM540ML has a very good frequency response without any treble rise. I tested some 6 x 540, 1 x 440 and some good Ortofon, only the 440 has some rise in treble.
Good vinyl dynamic range has been massively destroyed (in general) in digital version. Take care of your vinyls many of them are a time machine, a monument of good engineering with limited media and analog electronics
 

JP

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Messages
2,276
Likes
2,449
Location
Brookfield, CT
Seems kinda silly. I could RMS normalize higher than peak level and induce clipping, but I don't.

540ML certainly does have treble rise. You can make it not terrible with low C and dropping Rl to around 36k - then you're only around +1.4dB at 11kHz, and -2.3dB at 20kHz.
 

Rock Rabbit

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
174
Thanks for the input. I've been pre-recording each album, finding the peak dB for each album using the amplify tool in Audacity, then setting my gear to capture as close to this limit without clipping. No post processing normalization or gain adjustments after the final rip. Usually I can get very close to 0.0 dB target.
That's the nightmare: to find the peak of the disc avoiding false positive from clicks. Then a decent declick to proper normalization. But there's no necessity to be near 0 dB the digital world has dynamic range to spare -3 to -6 has no effect on rip
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,314
Location
UK
Hey folks,

I've been exploring digitizing my LP's so I can play them on my upstairs stereo where a turntable setup isn't an option. I wanted to open a discussion about methods to properly bring in the analog data and have it at a reasonable playback volume. In particular normalization methods.

From the research I've done so far, while most agree a high bit depth at capture is best, it seems people are split on capture method otherwise. Here are some of the methods I've seen proposed/used:

  • capture at a lower peak, around -6.0 dBFS, then use peak normalization to bring each side of the LP up to around -1.0 to -0.5 dBFS.
  • capture at as close to -1.0 to -0.5 dbFS, no normalization
  • capture at a lower peak (-6.0 dBFS), no normalization, adjust output volume with playback device (volume control)
  • capture at a low peak then use REPLAYGAIN tag to adjust volume

The lower capture volume seems important to avoid clipping/distortion and remove any added THD+N from the soundcard itself, although the noise floor of the LP is most likely much higher than that of the soundcard.

The problem with normalization, and peak normalization in particular, is the presence of artificial peaks from record noise (i.e. clicks and pops). While one can meticulously groom the waveforms to remove them, some are still liable to be present and can then affect the normalization process. Additionally, this adds an additional layer of processing to the digital capture. I assume this is why some don't care for it.

However, I came across this article which explains the three different methods for normalization: peak, RMS, and EBU-R128. The latter two methods were interesting, and I had come across RMS normalization in Pro Tools, but never understood what it did.

My question is then, why isn't anyone discussing normalizing to an appropriate LUFS, instead of the peak dBFS? For instance, I own a digital copy of Khruangbin's Mordechai as well as the LP. I could import the FLAC files and check the LUFS level on each track, then using the Loudness Normalization tool in Audacity (which utilizes the EBU-R128 volume detection method) to bring the LP rip to the same perceived LUFS?
When you play a vinyl and you found some tracks sound louder or quieter than the others do you adjust the volume? If not why do you want to change track to track levels on digitizing?

If yes, then I will bow out of this thread. :)
 

Rock Rabbit

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
174
By the way this is Chapman CD 1st track
IMG_20220307_203439.jpg

An the 540 rip version
IMG_20220307_203550.jpg

.. that's the "impressive" difference between digital and analog. No expensive cables other than Sommer (used for AES/EBU) 2' handmade RCA, but any cable with decent shield yields same results.
Obs.: Trying to find the capsule resonance I tested with 5' cable (nothing) using 100 pF on phono stage, then adding 150 pF start to loose high frequency...and get bored
 

Robin L

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
5,213
Likes
7,593
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
I record with plenty of headroom. As much as an extra 10 db. The self-noise of the phono system is going to be huge compared to a 24 bit recording. Then I run through Click Repair if necessary. Backwards first, then forwards. Makes for a more consistent background. If I feel the need for EQ, this is the point where where I try that out. Then I raise the level for the whole file, both sides of the record, so it peaks at -1db, chop into tracks and tag. I don't normalize track by track, that ruins the dynamics.
 
OP
Lttlwing16

Lttlwing16

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
201
Likes
113
When you play a vinyl and you found some tracks sound louder or quieter than the others do you adjust the volume? If not why do you want to change track to track levels on digitizing?

If yes, then I will bow out of this thread. :)
See here
 
Top Bottom