On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:
>> For example, to produce R128
>> normalized files it's more reliable for post-processing application to
>> update the 'output gain' field and write a comment 'R128_TRACK_GAIN=0'
>> than to put the normalized value directly in the comment."
>
> Should the example there be ALBUM_GAIN rather than track gain
> (consistent with what we recommended before these changes, and
> with what is probably preferred in the absence of finer grained
> recalibration)?

Is there a reason we shouldn't just have two examples?

_______________________________________________
codec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec

Reply via email to