From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Sun Jun  3 23:17:01 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 15:17:01 -0600
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>

I don't know if any of you have been following or working in the AES's
AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on loudness for over the top
(OTT) and online video distribution (OVD). They have produced a standards
document that will come out for public comment soon as AES71. The
recommendations are reasonable - produce, transmit and use metadata where
possible, use BS.1770 with -23 or -24 LUFS target.

There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics and the line
between OVD and music loudness is not very crisp (YouTube is everyone's
favorite music streaming service). In these cases the -23 LUFS is at odds
with the -16 LUFS recommendation in the AES TD1004 recommendation. -16 LUFS
does appear in the AES71 draft in what appears to be a "not to exceed under
any circumstances" specification.

Aside from the potential problems connecting these recommendations, I see
problems with a -23 LUFS target for portable applications. We've discussed
limitations of portable devices and environments here and I know we don't
all agree but we have seen evidence that this is not loud enough for
certain hardware and situations and regulations.

AGOTTVS did do some experiments on this and the findings were that were
that -23 didn't work for everyone in all scenarios and that more testing
was needed. I don't know how they got from this to a -23 recommendation,
but they did.

As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft and submitted
some comments to clean up some definitions and other inconsistencies and
underspecification. I'm not sure how to broach the subject of an
unrealistic target level recommendation. I was hoping someone here could
talk me through or talk me down from this.

Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180603/371fcfc6/attachment.html>

From bobkatz at digido.com  Mon Jun  4 17:45:46 2018
From: bobkatz at digido.com (Bob Katz)
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:45:46 -0400
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>

Dear Kevin: We are all aware of the conflicts involved. I occasionally 
read the AGOTTV5 reports but got lazy about it, my bad.

Since this is primarily intended for OTT boxes and portable has not been 
mentioned, I hope there is not a big conflict. Music will be turned down 
to -23 in the OTT boxes. Sooner or later we will have to address this, 
but until metadata is standardized it's putting the cart before the 
horse. I'm concentrating on helping us get music streaming services in 
line, and then eventually we'll have to reconcile things, but until 
metadata is standardized I doubt we can solve the conflict with a 
document other than recognizing that a conflict exists.


Bob



On 6/3/18 5:17 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
> I don't know if any of you have been following or working in the AES's 
> AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on loudness for over the top 
> (OTT) and online video distribution (OVD). They have produced a 
> standards document that will come out for public comment soon as 
> AES71. The recommendations are reasonable - produce, transmit and use 
> metadata where possible, use BS.1770 with -23 or -24 LUFS target.
>
> There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics and the 
> line between OVD and music loudness is not very crisp (YouTube is 
> everyone's favorite music streaming service). In these cases the -23 
> LUFS is at odds with the -16 LUFS recommendation in the AES TD1004 
> recommendation. -16 LUFS does appear in the AES71 draft in what 
> appears to be a "not to exceed under any circumstances" specification.
>
> Aside from the potential problems connecting these recommendations, I 
> see problems with a -23 LUFS target for portable applications. We've 
> discussed limitations of portable devices and environments here and I 
> know we don't all agree but we have seen evidence that this is not 
> loud enough for certain hardware and situations and regulations.
>
> AGOTTVS?did do some experiments on this and the findings were that 
> were that -23 didn't work for everyone in all scenarios and that more 
> testing was needed. I don't know how they got from this to a -23 
> recommendation, but they did.
>
> As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft and 
> submitted some comments to clean up some definitions and other 
> inconsistencies?and underspecification. I'm not sure how to broach the 
> subject of an unrealistic target level recommendation. I was hoping 
> someone here could talk me through or talk me down from this.
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl

-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180604/aa62a621/attachment.html>

From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Mon Jun  4 23:36:20 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 15:36:20 -0600
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>

I would estimate that about a quarter of this standard is explicitly about
portable devices and applications. We should also expect the trend of
stationary application becoming portable to continue. Your cell phone or
tablet is your OTT box in increasing cases. My daughters' generation
watches most of their TV and listens to most of their music on portable
devices. I don't know where the cart is but the horse is out of the barn.

Kevin Gross - AVA Networks

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:

> Dear Kevin: We are all aware of the conflicts involved. I occasionally
> read the AGOTTV5 reports but got lazy about it, my bad.
>
> Since this is primarily intended for OTT boxes and portable has not been
> mentioned, I hope there is not a big conflict. Music will be turned down to
> -23 in the OTT boxes. Sooner or later we will have to address this, but
> until metadata is standardized it's putting the cart before the horse. I'm
> concentrating on helping us get music streaming services in line, and then
> eventually we'll have to reconcile things, but until metadata is
> standardized I doubt we can solve the conflict with a document other than
> recognizing that a conflict exists.
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 6/3/18 5:17 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>
> I don't know if any of you have been following or working in the AES's
> AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on loudness for over the top
> (OTT) and online video distribution (OVD). They have produced a standards
> document that will come out for public comment soon as AES71. The
> recommendations are reasonable - produce, transmit and use metadata where
> possible, use BS.1770 with -23 or -24 LUFS target.
>
> There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics and the line
> between OVD and music loudness is not very crisp (YouTube is everyone's
> favorite music streaming service). In these cases the -23 LUFS is at odds
> with the -16 LUFS recommendation in the AES TD1004 recommendation. -16 LUFS
> does appear in the AES71 draft in what appears to be a "not to exceed under
> any circumstances" specification.
>
> Aside from the potential problems connecting these recommendations, I see
> problems with a -23 LUFS target for portable applications. We've discussed
> limitations of portable devices and environments here and I know we don't
> all agree but we have seen evidence that this is not loud enough for
> certain hardware and situations and regulations.
>
> AGOTTVS did do some experiments on this and the findings were that were
> that -23 didn't work for everyone in all scenarios and that more testing
> was needed. I don't know how they got from this to a -23 recommendation,
> but they did.
>
> As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft and submitted
> some comments to clean up some definitions and other inconsistencies and
> underspecification. I'm not sure how to broach the subject of an
> unrealistic target level recommendation. I was hoping someone here could
> talk me through or talk me down from this.
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing listMLA at grimmaudio.nlhttp://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>
> --
>
>
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180604/4671d04d/attachment.html>

From bobkatz at digido.com  Tue Jun  5 18:32:14 2018
From: bobkatz at digido.com (Bob Katz)
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 12:32:14 -0400
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>

Well, without metadata I don't see a good solution :-(? I only see 
conflicts.

Bob



On 6/4/18 5:36 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
> I would estimate that about a quarter of this standard is explicitly 
> about portable devices and applications. We should also expect the 
> trend of stationary application becoming portable to continue. Your 
> cell phone or tablet is your OTT box in increasing cases. My 
> daughters' generation watches most of their TV and listens to most of 
> their music on portable devices. I don't know where the cart is but 
> the horse is out of the barn.
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com 
> <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>
>     Dear Kevin: We are all aware of the conflicts involved. I
>     occasionally read the AGOTTV5 reports but got lazy about it, my bad.
>
>     Since this is primarily intended for OTT boxes and portable has
>     not been mentioned, I hope there is not a big conflict. Music will
>     be turned down to -23 in the OTT boxes. Sooner or later we will
>     have to address this, but until metadata is standardized it's
>     putting the cart before the horse. I'm concentrating on helping us
>     get music streaming services in line, and then eventually we'll
>     have to reconcile things, but until metadata is standardized I
>     doubt we can solve the conflict with a document other than
>     recognizing that a conflict exists.
>
>
>     Bob
>
>
>
>     On 6/3/18 5:17 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>     I don't know if any of you have been following or working in the
>>     AES's AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on loudness for
>>     over the top (OTT) and online video distribution (OVD). They have
>>     produced a standards document that will come out for public
>>     comment soon as AES71. The recommendations are reasonable -
>>     produce, transmit and use metadata where possible, use BS.1770
>>     with -23 or -24 LUFS target.
>>
>>     There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics and
>>     the line between OVD and music loudness is not very crisp
>>     (YouTube is everyone's favorite music streaming service). In
>>     these cases the -23 LUFS is at odds with the -16 LUFS
>>     recommendation in the AES TD1004 recommendation. -16 LUFS does
>>     appear in the AES71 draft in what appears to be a "not to exceed
>>     under any circumstances" specification.
>>
>>     Aside from the potential problems connecting these
>>     recommendations, I see problems with a -23 LUFS target for
>>     portable applications. We've discussed limitations of portable
>>     devices and environments here and I know we don't all agree but
>>     we have seen evidence that this is not loud enough for certain
>>     hardware and situations and regulations.
>>
>>     AGOTTVS?did do some experiments on this and the findings were
>>     that were that -23 didn't work for everyone in all scenarios and
>>     that more testing was needed. I don't know how they got from this
>>     to a -23 recommendation, but they did.
>>
>>     As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft and
>>     submitted some comments to clean up some definitions and other
>>     inconsistencies?and underspecification. I'm not sure how to
>>     broach the subject of an unrealistic target level recommendation.
>>     I was hoping someone here could talk me through or talk me down
>>     from this.
>>
>>     Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     MLA mailing list
>>     MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
>>     http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>>     <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
>
>     -- 
>
>     If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz
>     407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering
>     Audio *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees
>     were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>     of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     MLA mailing list
>     MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
>     http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>     <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
>
>

-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180605/4fc952e1/attachment.html>

From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Tue Jun  5 23:18:37 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:18:37 -0600
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>

We're not there with metadata. Maybe this is something this group could
focus on.

AES71 should do the right thing if there is metadata. I believe it wants to
but is lacking specific recommendations for how players use metadata.

AES71 should do something reasonable in the absence of metadata. What it
recommends in this case is delivery of -23/-24 LUFS material to portables.
As per the tests that AGOTTVS did (we've done some of this too), listeners
are going to want to turn their device's volume all the way up. They're not
going to be able to make out dialog in loud listening environments. When
they receive a text message they will get blasted by the notification sound.

My concern with this is that platform providers are going to implement it,
listen to it and reject it. They will then each implement a higher target
level of their own choosing and the loudness war will continue.

Kevin

On Jun 5, 2018 10:33 AM, "Bob Katz" <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:

Well, without metadata I don't see a good solution :-(  I only see
conflicts.

Bob



On 6/4/18 5:36 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:

I would estimate that about a quarter of this standard is explicitly about
portable devices and applications. We should also expect the trend of
stationary application becoming portable to continue. Your cell phone or
tablet is your OTT box in increasing cases. My daughters' generation
watches most of their TV and listens to most of their music on portable
devices. I don't know where the cart is but the horse is out of the barn.

Kevin Gross - AVA Networks

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:

> Dear Kevin: We are all aware of the conflicts involved. I occasionally
> read the AGOTTV5 reports but got lazy about it, my bad.
>
> Since this is primarily intended for OTT boxes and portable has not been
> mentioned, I hope there is not a big conflict. Music will be turned down to
> -23 in the OTT boxes. Sooner or later we will have to address this, but
> until metadata is standardized it's putting the cart before the horse. I'm
> concentrating on helping us get music streaming services in line, and then
> eventually we'll have to reconcile things, but until metadata is
> standardized I doubt we can solve the conflict with a document other than
> recognizing that a conflict exists.
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 6/3/18 5:17 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>
> I don't know if any of you have been following or working in the AES's
> AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on loudness for over the top
> (OTT) and online video distribution (OVD). They have produced a standards
> document that will come out for public comment soon as AES71. The
> recommendations are reasonable - produce, transmit and use metadata where
> possible, use BS.1770 with -23 or -24 LUFS target.
>
> There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics and the line
> between OVD and music loudness is not very crisp (YouTube is everyone's
> favorite music streaming service). In these cases the -23 LUFS is at odds
> with the -16 LUFS recommendation in the AES TD1004 recommendation. -16 LUFS
> does appear in the AES71 draft in what appears to be a "not to exceed under
> any circumstances" specification.
>
> Aside from the potential problems connecting these recommendations, I see
> problems with a -23 LUFS target for portable applications. We've discussed
> limitations of portable devices and environments here and I know we don't
> all agree but we have seen evidence that this is not loud enough for
> certain hardware and situations and regulations.
>
> AGOTTVS did do some experiments on this and the findings were that were
> that -23 didn't work for everyone in all scenarios and that more testing
> was needed. I don't know how they got from this to a -23 recommendation,
> but they did.
>
> As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft and submitted
> some comments to clean up some definitions and other inconsistencies and
> underspecification. I'm not sure how to broach the subject of an
> unrealistic target level recommendation. I was hoping someone here could
> talk me through or talk me down from this.
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing listMLA at grimmaudio.nlhttp://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>
> --
>
>
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>

-- 


If you want good sound on your album, come to
Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website
<http://www.digido.com/>

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

_______________________________________________
MLA mailing list
MLA at grimmaudio.nl
http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180605/1e8df8d1/attachment-0001.html>

From bobkatz at digido.com  Wed Jun  6 00:02:03 2018
From: bobkatz at digido.com (Bob Katz)
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 18:02:03 -0400
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>

Yes, it's a mess. And designing a fall back to -23 in this day and age 
is a real problem. And you are correct about the notification sound 
issue! Even on IOS I had to struggle to keep the bluetooth "ding" from 
being too loud compared to the navigation speech. And so music is even 
worse. Apple tries to make things "easy" but the customization choices 
get buried.

Here's an idea:

Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable 
devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. 
Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it 
was normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without 
metadata how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular 
program to -23 it will be too low for many portable devices, also.


Shit (excuse my French),



Bob



On 6/5/18 5:18 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
> We're not there with metadata. Maybe this is something this group 
> could focus on.
>
> AES71 should do the right thing if there is metadata. I believe it 
> wants to but is lacking specific recommendations for how players use 
> metadata.
>
> AES71 should do something reasonable in the absence of metadata. What 
> it recommends in this case is delivery of -23/-24 LUFS material to 
> portables. As per the tests that AGOTTVS did (we've done some of this 
> too), listeners are going to want to turn their device's volume all 
> the way up. They're not going to be able to make out dialog in loud 
> listening environments. When they receive a text message they will get 
> blasted by the notification sound.
>
> My concern with this is that platform providers are going to implement 
> it, listen to it and reject it. They will then each implement a higher 
> target level of their own choosing and the loudness war will continue.
>
> Kevin
>
> On Jun 5, 2018 10:33 AM, "Bob Katz" <bobkatz at digido.com 
> <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>
>     Well, without metadata I don't see a good solution :-(? I only see
>     conflicts.
>
>     Bob
>
>
>
>     On 6/4/18 5:36 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>     I would estimate that about a quarter of this standard is
>>     explicitly about portable devices and applications. We should
>>     also expect the trend of stationary application becoming portable
>>     to continue. Your cell phone or tablet is your OTT box in
>>     increasing cases. My daughters' generation watches most of their
>>     TV and listens to most of their music on portable devices. I
>>     don't know where the cart is but the horse is out of the barn.
>>
>>     Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>
>>     On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com
>>     <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Dear Kevin: We are all aware of the conflicts involved. I
>>         occasionally read the AGOTTV5 reports but got lazy about it,
>>         my bad.
>>
>>         Since this is primarily intended for OTT boxes and portable
>>         has not been mentioned, I hope there is not a big conflict.
>>         Music will be turned down to -23 in the OTT boxes. Sooner or
>>         later we will have to address this, but until metadata is
>>         standardized it's putting the cart before the horse. I'm
>>         concentrating on helping us get music streaming services in
>>         line, and then eventually we'll have to reconcile things, but
>>         until metadata is standardized I doubt we can solve the
>>         conflict with a document other than recognizing that a
>>         conflict exists.
>>
>>
>>         Bob
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 6/3/18 5:17 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>>         I don't know if any of you have been following or working in
>>>         the AES's AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on
>>>         loudness for over the top (OTT) and online video
>>>         distribution (OVD). They have produced a standards document
>>>         that will come out for public comment soon as AES71. The
>>>         recommendations are reasonable - produce, transmit and use
>>>         metadata where possible, use BS.1770 with -23 or -24 LUFS
>>>         target.
>>>
>>>         There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics
>>>         and the line between OVD and music loudness is not very
>>>         crisp (YouTube is everyone's favorite music streaming
>>>         service). In these cases the -23 LUFS is at odds with the
>>>         -16 LUFS recommendation in the AES TD1004 recommendation.
>>>         -16 LUFS does appear in the AES71 draft in what appears to
>>>         be a "not to exceed under any circumstances" specification.
>>>
>>>         Aside from the potential problems connecting these
>>>         recommendations, I see problems with a -23 LUFS target for
>>>         portable applications. We've discussed limitations of
>>>         portable devices and environments here and I know we don't
>>>         all agree but we have seen evidence that this is not loud
>>>         enough for certain hardware and situations and regulations.
>>>
>>>         AGOTTVS?did do some experiments on this and the findings
>>>         were that were that -23 didn't work for everyone in all
>>>         scenarios and that more testing was needed. I don't know how
>>>         they got from this to a -23 recommendation, but they did.
>>>
>>>         As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft
>>>         and submitted some comments to clean up some definitions and
>>>         other inconsistencies?and underspecification. I'm not sure
>>>         how to broach the subject of an unrealistic target level
>>>         recommendation. I was hoping someone here could talk me
>>>         through or talk me down from this.
>>>
>>>         Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>>
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         MLA mailing list
>>>         MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
>>>         http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>>>         <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
>>
>>         -- 
>>
>>         If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz
>>         407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author:
>>         *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain Website
>>         <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending
>>         of this message. However a large number of electrons were
>>         terribly inconvenienced.
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         MLA mailing list
>>         MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
>>         http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>>         <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
>>
>>
>
>     -- 
>
>     If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz
>     407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering
>     Audio *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees
>     were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>     of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     MLA mailing list
>     MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
>     http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>     <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
>
>

-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180605/49805bd0/attachment-0001.html>

From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Wed Jun  6 01:39:20 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 16:39:20 -0700
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q0pSh+hK37tWjJ+Et95Q2NT=X7P1OmzUpBRtzHpEW2Pqg@mail.gmail.com>

I think headroom and environmental issues are just as bad or worse for
non-music program.

AES71 introduces a "DRC Profile" concept which I would hope could be used
to implement your limiter suggestion. DRC Profile is not fleshed out so
there would be work to do.

Kevin

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 3:02 PM Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:

> Yes, it's a mess. And designing a fall back to -23 in this day and age is
> a real problem. And you are correct about the notification sound issue!
> Even on IOS I had to struggle to keep the bluetooth "ding" from being too
> loud compared to the navigation speech. And so music is even worse. Apple
> tries to make things "easy" but the customization choices get buried.
>
> Here's an idea:
>
> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable
> devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since
> it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was
> normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata
> how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it
> will be too low for many portable devices, also.
>
>
> Shit (excuse my French),
>
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 6/5/18 5:18 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>
> We're not there with metadata. Maybe this is something this group could
> focus on.
>
> AES71 should do the right thing if there is metadata. I believe it wants
> to but is lacking specific recommendations for how players use metadata.
>
> AES71 should do something reasonable in the absence of metadata. What it
> recommends in this case is delivery of -23/-24 LUFS material to portables.
> As per the tests that AGOTTVS did (we've done some of this too), listeners
> are going to want to turn their device's volume all the way up. They're not
> going to be able to make out dialog in loud listening environments. When
> they receive a text message they will get blasted by the notification sound.
>
> My concern with this is that platform providers are going to implement it,
> listen to it and reject it. They will then each implement a higher target
> level of their own choosing and the loudness war will continue.
>
> Kevin
>
> On Jun 5, 2018 10:33 AM, "Bob Katz" <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>
> Well, without metadata I don't see a good solution :-(  I only see
> conflicts.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 6/4/18 5:36 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>
> I would estimate that about a quarter of this standard is explicitly about
> portable devices and applications. We should also expect the trend of
> stationary application becoming portable to continue. Your cell phone or
> tablet is your OTT box in increasing cases. My daughters' generation
> watches most of their TV and listens to most of their music on portable
> devices. I don't know where the cart is but the horse is out of the barn.
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Kevin: We are all aware of the conflicts involved. I occasionally
>> read the AGOTTV5 reports but got lazy about it, my bad.
>>
>> Since this is primarily intended for OTT boxes and portable has not been
>> mentioned, I hope there is not a big conflict. Music will be turned down to
>> -23 in the OTT boxes. Sooner or later we will have to address this, but
>> until metadata is standardized it's putting the cart before the horse. I'm
>> concentrating on helping us get music streaming services in line, and then
>> eventually we'll have to reconcile things, but until metadata is
>> standardized I doubt we can solve the conflict with a document other than
>> recognizing that a conflict exists.
>>
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/3/18 5:17 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>
>> I don't know if any of you have been following or working in the AES's
>> AGOTTVS initiative. This group is working on loudness for over the top
>> (OTT) and online video distribution (OVD). They have produced a standards
>> document that will come out for public comment soon as AES71. The
>> recommendations are reasonable - produce, transmit and use metadata where
>> possible, use BS.1770 with -23 or -24 LUFS target.
>>
>> There is, however, a large portable aspect to these topics and the line
>> between OVD and music loudness is not very crisp (YouTube is everyone's
>> favorite music streaming service). In these cases the -23 LUFS is at odds
>> with the -16 LUFS recommendation in the AES TD1004 recommendation. -16 LUFS
>> does appear in the AES71 draft in what appears to be a "not to exceed under
>> any circumstances" specification.
>>
>> Aside from the potential problems connecting these recommendations, I see
>> problems with a -23 LUFS target for portable applications. We've discussed
>> limitations of portable devices and environments here and I know we don't
>> all agree but we have seen evidence that this is not loud enough for
>> certain hardware and situations and regulations.
>>
>> AGOTTVS did do some experiments on this and the findings were that were
>> that -23 didn't work for everyone in all scenarios and that more testing
>> was needed. I don't know how they got from this to a -23 recommendation,
>> but they did.
>>
>> As an officer in AES standards, I have reviewed the draft and submitted
>> some comments to clean up some definitions and other inconsistencies and
>> underspecification. I'm not sure how to broach the subject of an
>> unrealistic target level recommendation. I was hoping someone here could
>> talk me through or talk me down from this.
>>
>> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MLA mailing listMLA at grimmaudio.nlhttp://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>
>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MLA mailing list
>> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
>> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>>
>>
>
> --
>
>
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180605/d2fe507f/attachment-0001.html>

From ian at mastering-media.co.uk  Wed Jun  6 02:49:43 2018
From: ian at mastering-media.co.uk (Ian Shepherd)
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 01:49:43 +0100
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
Message-ID: <5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>



> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it will be too low for many portable devices, also. 
> Shit (excuse my French)
> 

We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.

We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16 or -18, I think.

I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?

Ian


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180606/f6011997/attachment.html>

From bobkatz at digido.com  Wed Jun  6 21:22:57 2018
From: bobkatz at digido.com (Bob Katz)
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 15:22:57 -0400
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
Message-ID: <244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>

I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But 
it's always interim.


-18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of 
program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable 
devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices 
playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and 
the need for metadata.


Bob



On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>
>
>> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on 
>> portable devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection 
>> limiter. Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 
>> dB so if it was normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the 
>> limiter. But without metadata how do you know it's music? And if they 
>> normalize regular program to -23 it will be too low for many portable 
>> devices, also.
>>
>> Shit (excuse my French)
>>
> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud 
> on my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to 
> be similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>
> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the 
> podcast providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also 
> settled on -16 or -18, I think.
>
> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would 
> trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the 
> median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be a 
> workable compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?
>
> Ian
>
>

-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180606/849f7e23/attachment.html>

From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Wed Jun  6 23:01:00 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 15:01:00 -0600
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>

We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to use
metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport it or what
you should do with it. Is this something that we help could flesh out?

Kevin Gross - AVA Networks

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:

> I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But it's
> always interim.
>
>
> -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of
> program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable
> devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices
> playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and
> the need for metadata.
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>
>
>
> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable
> devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since
> it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was
> normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata
> how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it
> will be too low for many portable devices, also.
>
> Shit (excuse my French)
>
> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on
> my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be
> similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>
> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast
> providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16
> or -18, I think.
>
> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would trigger
> excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the median of the
> AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable compromise, when
> there?s no meta-data ?
>
> Ian
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180606/80c90964/attachment.html>

From bobkatz at digido.com  Thu Jun  7 02:31:57 2018
From: bobkatz at digido.com (Bob Katz)
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 20:31:57 -0400
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>

I think we'd have to bring in Dolby and other experts at least as 
consultants. I only understand the basics of Metadata so I'd be shooting 
in the dark.


Bob



On 6/6/18 5:01 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
> We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to 
> use metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport 
> it or what you should do with it. Is this something that we help could 
> flesh out?
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com 
> <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>
>     I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target!
>     But it's always interim.
>
>
>     -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the
>     majority of program with an emergency protection limiter, at least
>     for portable devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target
>     for set top devices playing wide range program material on
>     loudspeakers. There's the rub and the need for metadata.
>
>
>     Bob
>
>
>
>     On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>
>>
>>>     Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on
>>>     portable devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a
>>>     protection limiter. Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR
>>>     of less than 16 dB so if it was normalized to -23 it would
>>>     hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata how do you know
>>>     it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it will
>>>     be too low for many portable devices, also.
>>>
>>>     Shit (excuse my French)
>>>
>>     We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty
>>     loud on my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the
>>     BBC seems to be similar, and also works works fine, for the most
>>     part.
>>
>>     We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the
>>     podcast providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had
>>     also settled on -16 or -18, I think.
>>
>>     I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would
>>     trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is
>>     the median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be
>>     a workable compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?
>>
>>     Ian
>>
>>
>
>     -- 
>
>     If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz
>     407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering
>     Audio *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees
>     were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>     of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>

-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180606/59b3894a/attachment-0001.html>

From ian at mastering-media.co.uk  Thu Jun  7 09:10:35 2018
From: ian at mastering-media.co.uk (Ian Shepherd)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:10:35 +0100
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
Message-ID: <46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>


Same. I suspect it was left vague in AES71 because it?s a massive can of worms, and they want to allow flexibility in actually implementing it.

Either way I don?t personally have the bandwidth, either as part of this group or for the AES directly.

Having said that, I think including a recognition that mobile devices may need to use a higher level as an interim measure would be a good idea.

Ian



> On 7 Jun 2018, at 01:31, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
> 
> I think we'd have to bring in Dolby and other experts at least as consultants. I only understand the basics of Metadata so I'd be shooting in the dark.
> 
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
>> On 6/6/18 5:01 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>> We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to use metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport it or what you should do with it. Is this something that we help could flesh out?
>> 
>> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>>> I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But it's always interim. 
>>> 
>>> -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and the need for metadata.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Bob
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it will be too low for many portable devices, also. 
>>>>> Shit (excuse my French)
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>>>> 
>>>> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16 or -18, I think.
>>>> 
>>>> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?
>>>> 
>>>> Ian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>>> Author: Mastering Audio              
>>> Digital Domain Website
>>> 
>>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: Mastering Audio              
> Digital Domain Website
> 
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180607/461c692e/attachment.html>

From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Fri Jun  8 16:41:54 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 07:41:54 -0700
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
	<46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q3+xDKW6B=QdMCmcFmMkBfhjNmabgF1_1hau_mnS9hLEg@mail.gmail.com>

I have done some work with Dolby on this but not specific to loudness.
There is a standards initiative they've started to define a network format
for metadata to go along with our network formats for audio and video.
There are already means to carry metadata in video and AES3 and in many of
the coded audio and video formats.

I think what is mostly missing is a metadata definition for loudness. What
metadata would be in a loudness dataset? I know LUFS and dBTP would be
central but the devil is in the details. Are these short-term, long-term or
for the entire program. If for the program, how do we know where the
program starts and ends. What is needed to specify the "DRC Profile" that
AES71 introduces? How does a player use all of this stuff?

Kevin Gross - AVA Networks

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Ian Shepherd <ian at mastering-media.co.uk>
wrote:

>
> Same. I suspect it was left vague in AES71 because it?s a massive can of
> worms, and they want to allow flexibility in actually implementing it.
>
> Either way I don?t personally have the bandwidth, either as part of this
> group or for the AES directly.
>
> Having said that, I think including a recognition that mobile devices may
> need to use a higher level as an interim measure would be a good idea.
>
> Ian
>
>
>
> On 7 Jun 2018, at 01:31, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>
> I think we'd have to bring in Dolby and other experts at least as
> consultants. I only understand the basics of Metadata so I'd be shooting in
> the dark.
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 6/6/18 5:01 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>
> We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to use
> metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport it or what
> you should do with it. Is this something that we help could flesh out?
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But it's
>> always interim.
>>
>>
>> -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of
>> program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable
>> devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices
>> playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and
>> the need for metadata.
>>
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable
>> devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since
>> it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was
>> normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata
>> how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it
>> will be too low for many portable devices, also.
>>
>> Shit (excuse my French)
>>
>> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on
>> my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be
>> similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>>
>> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast
>> providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16
>> or -18, I think.
>>
>> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would trigger
>> excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the median of the
>> AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable compromise, when
>> there?s no meta-data ?
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>
>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>
>>
>
> --
>
>
> If you want good sound on your album, come to
> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>
> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180608/9cd64262/attachment.html>

From eelco at grimmaudio.com  Sat Jun 16 11:11:29 2018
From: eelco at grimmaudio.com (Grimm | Eelco)
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2018 11:11:29 +0200
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q3+xDKW6B=QdMCmcFmMkBfhjNmabgF1_1hau_mnS9hLEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
	<46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<CALw1_Q3+xDKW6B=QdMCmcFmMkBfhjNmabgF1_1hau_mnS9hLEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B54BF8F6-5DAB-4B50-A161-523CDDF653A7@grimmaudio.com>

Dear friends,

I?m sorry I did not check my MLA mailbox the past week and did not respond more early. 

Kevin, can you please tell me under what circumstances there will be no metadata and/or guaranteed normalization level? All OTT formats I know cannot be used without metadata. Did they specify these circumstances in AES71 more precisely?

Also, what does it mean ?-23 LUFS when there is no metadata?? If the audio is measured, metadata can be added. If the audio is not measured, it could be -6 LUFS and it is dangerous to treat it as if it is -23 LUFS.

But perhaps we are dealing with a completely different problem. The loudness of the program at the OTT service is known, with or without metadata: -23 LUFS. The question then is: how to do playback on a portable device? The solutions is to solve it in either the app (with 7 dB extra gain and a limiter) or in the OS. I will reach out to the OTT contacts at Google and Apple that Matthieu Parmentier gave me to pitch a simple solution I came up with: let the app signal to the OS that it has turned normalization on at a certain level (let?s say -23 LUFS), and then the OS offers 7 dB (in this case) extra headroom. Buddy Judge has already checked this idea within Apple and apparently the engineers have been thinking along simiar lines. You can?t fool the OS since the app needs to comply to AppStore rules and will be tested prior to release. I want to pitch this idea to as many developers within Apple as possible so chances are higher it will be adopted.

Cheers,
Eelco


> On 8 jun. 2018, at 16:41, Kevin Gross <kevin.gross at avanw.com> wrote:
> 
> I have done some work with Dolby on this but not specific to loudness. There is a standards initiative they've started to define a network format for metadata to go along with our network formats for audio and video. There are already means to carry metadata in video and AES3 and in many of the coded audio and video formats. 
> 
> I think what is mostly missing is a metadata definition for loudness. What metadata would be in a loudness dataset? I know LUFS and dBTP would be central but the devil is in the details. Are these short-term, long-term or for the entire program. If for the program, how do we know where the program starts and ends. What is needed to specify the "DRC Profile" that AES71 introduces? How does a player use all of this stuff?
> 
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
> 
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Ian Shepherd <ian at mastering-media.co.uk <mailto:ian at mastering-media.co.uk>> wrote:
> 
> Same. I suspect it was left vague in AES71 because it?s a massive can of worms, and they want to allow flexibility in actually implementing it.
> 
> Either way I don?t personally have the bandwidth, either as part of this group or for the AES directly.
> 
> Having said that, I think including a recognition that mobile devices may need to use a higher level as an interim measure would be a good idea.
> 
> Ian
> 
> 
> 
> On 7 Jun 2018, at 01:31, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
> 
>> I think we'd have to bring in Dolby and other experts at least as consultants. I only understand the basics of Metadata so I'd be shooting in the dark.
>> 
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/6/18 5:01 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>> We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to use metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport it or what you should do with it. Is this something that we help could flesh out?
>>> 
>>> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>>> I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But it's always interim. 
>>> 
>>> -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and the need for metadata.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Bob
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it will be too low for many portable devices, also. 
>>>>> Shit (excuse my French)
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>>>> 
>>>> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16 or -18, I think.
>>>> 
>>>> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?
>>>> 
>>>> Ian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>>> Author: Mastering Audio              
>>> Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>> 
>>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>> Author: Mastering Audio              
>> Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>> 
>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180616/a7a523e3/attachment.html>

From kevin.gross at avanw.com  Thu Jun 28 21:32:47 2018
From: kevin.gross at avanw.com (Kevin Gross)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 12:32:47 -0700
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <B54BF8F6-5DAB-4B50-A161-523CDDF653A7@grimmaudio.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
	<46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<CALw1_Q3+xDKW6B=QdMCmcFmMkBfhjNmabgF1_1hau_mnS9hLEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<B54BF8F6-5DAB-4B50-A161-523CDDF653A7@grimmaudio.com>
Message-ID: <CALw1_Q3-t8=MLf1Q+jaHZ4HxR3is4uiXW_3S=605XpyxBFBObA@mail.gmail.com>

AES71 calls out what to do in various permutations of content with and
without metadata and systems with and without metadata capabilities. The
situation I am concerned about is systems that do not support metadata.
AES71 does noes not include any specifics on the nature of the metadata or
the systems that support it.

When you say all OTT formats require metadata, can you give some examples
and do you know details about the metadata formats and systems used?

If we have good support for metadata, AES71 can work. I am concerned about
its default behavior when no metadata is available. AES71 is not helping
its own adoption by not at least referencing any existing metadata formats
or systems.

Kevin Gross - AVA Networks

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 2:11 AM, Grimm | Eelco <eelco at grimmaudio.com> wrote:

> Dear friends,
>
> I?m sorry I did not check my MLA mailbox the past week and did not respond
> more early.
>
> Kevin, can you please tell me under what circumstances there will be no
> metadata and/or guaranteed normalization level? All OTT formats I know
> cannot be used without metadata. Did they specify these circumstances in
> AES71 more precisely?
>
> Also, what does it mean ?-23 LUFS when there is no metadata?? If the audio
> is measured, metadata can be added. If the audio is not measured, it could
> be -6 LUFS and it is dangerous to treat it as if it is -23 LUFS.
>
> But perhaps we are dealing with a completely different problem. The
> loudness of the program at the OTT service is known, with or without
> metadata: -23 LUFS. The question then is: how to do playback on a portable
> device? The solutions is to solve it in either the app (with 7 dB extra
> gain and a limiter) or in the OS. I will reach out to the OTT contacts at
> Google and Apple that Matthieu Parmentier gave me to pitch a simple
> solution I came up with: let the app signal to the OS that it has turned
> normalization on at a certain level (let?s say -23 LUFS), and then the OS
> offers 7 dB (in this case) extra headroom. Buddy Judge has already checked
> this idea within Apple and apparently the engineers have been thinking
> along simiar lines. You can?t fool the OS since the app needs to comply to
> AppStore rules and will be tested prior to release. I want to pitch this
> idea to as many developers within Apple as possible so chances are higher
> it will be adopted.
>
> Cheers,
> Eelco
>
>
> On 8 jun. 2018, at 16:41, Kevin Gross <kevin.gross at avanw.com> wrote:
>
> I have done some work with Dolby on this but not specific to loudness.
> There is a standards initiative they've started to define a network format
> for metadata to go along with our network formats for audio and video.
> There are already means to carry metadata in video and AES3 and in many of
> the coded audio and video formats.
>
> I think what is mostly missing is a metadata definition for loudness. What
> metadata would be in a loudness dataset? I know LUFS and dBTP would be
> central but the devil is in the details. Are these short-term, long-term or
> for the entire program. If for the program, how do we know where the
> program starts and ends. What is needed to specify the "DRC Profile" that
> AES71 introduces? How does a player use all of this stuff?
>
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Ian Shepherd <ian at mastering-media.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Same. I suspect it was left vague in AES71 because it?s a massive can of
>> worms, and they want to allow flexibility in actually implementing it.
>>
>> Either way I don?t personally have the bandwidth, either as part of this
>> group or for the AES directly.
>>
>> Having said that, I think including a recognition that mobile devices may
>> need to use a higher level as an interim measure would be a good idea.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 Jun 2018, at 01:31, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think we'd have to bring in Dolby and other experts at least as
>> consultants. I only understand the basics of Metadata so I'd be shooting in
>> the dark.
>>
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/6/18 5:01 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>
>> We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to
>> use metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport it or
>> what you should do with it. Is this something that we help could flesh out?
>>
>> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But
>>> it's always interim.
>>>
>>>
>>> -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of
>>> program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable
>>> devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices
>>> playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and
>>> the need for metadata.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable
>>> devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since
>>> it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was
>>> normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata
>>> how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it
>>> will be too low for many portable devices, also.
>>>
>>> Shit (excuse my French)
>>>
>>> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on
>>> my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be
>>> similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>>>
>>> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast
>>> providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16
>>> or -18, I think.
>>>
>>> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would
>>> trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the
>>> median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable
>>> compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>>> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>>
>>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>> Author: *Mastering Audio              *Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>
>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180628/51e9abbd/attachment.html>

From eelco at grimmaudio.com  Sat Jun 30 01:08:11 2018
From: eelco at grimmaudio.com (Grimm | Eelco)
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 01:08:11 +0200
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q3-t8=MLf1Q+jaHZ4HxR3is4uiXW_3S=605XpyxBFBObA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
	<46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<CALw1_Q3+xDKW6B=QdMCmcFmMkBfhjNmabgF1_1hau_mnS9hLEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<B54BF8F6-5DAB-4B50-A161-523CDDF653A7@grimmaudio.com>
	<CALw1_Q3-t8=MLf1Q+jaHZ4HxR3is4uiXW_3S=605XpyxBFBObA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <848A1D7C-448B-4741-A8FE-942FD09E72DA@grimmaudio.com>

Hi Kevin,

> When you say all OTT formats require metadata, can you give some examples and do you know details about the metadata formats and systems used? 

What I meant is that most streaming services offer their own apps and have a communication channel within their own ecosystem. For streaming to a browser you are right: in that case the metadata needs to be integrated with the audio stream and so it is dependent on the format. But I?m afraid we cannot guarantee that this will never be abused (like feeding it with wrong metadata). So my recommendation would be that the OS will only offer additional gain to approved apps, not to browsers. I agree it is not a complete solution, but a large majority of users (and content providers) will profit from it. 

It should work like this: in the browser, -16 LUFS will be the target level. Programs that are softer will sound softer. In the app -23 LUFS can be the target level and all content (soft and loud) will be normalized. 

Cheers,
Eelco

> If we have good support for metadata, AES71 can work. I am concerned about its default behavior when no metadata is available. AES71 is not helping its own adoption by not at least referencing any existing metadata formats or systems.
> 
> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
> 
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 2:11 AM, Grimm | Eelco <eelco at grimmaudio.com <mailto:eelco at grimmaudio.com>> wrote:
> Dear friends,
> 
> I?m sorry I did not check my MLA mailbox the past week and did not respond more early. 
> 
> Kevin, can you please tell me under what circumstances there will be no metadata and/or guaranteed normalization level? All OTT formats I know cannot be used without metadata. Did they specify these circumstances in AES71 more precisely?
> 
> Also, what does it mean ?-23 LUFS when there is no metadata?? If the audio is measured, metadata can be added. If the audio is not measured, it could be -6 LUFS and it is dangerous to treat it as if it is -23 LUFS.
> 
> But perhaps we are dealing with a completely different problem. The loudness of the program at the OTT service is known, with or without metadata: -23 LUFS. The question then is: how to do playback on a portable device? The solutions is to solve it in either the app (with 7 dB extra gain and a limiter) or in the OS. I will reach out to the OTT contacts at Google and Apple that Matthieu Parmentier gave me to pitch a simple solution I came up with: let the app signal to the OS that it has turned normalization on at a certain level (let?s say -23 LUFS), and then the OS offers 7 dB (in this case) extra headroom. Buddy Judge has already checked this idea within Apple and apparently the engineers have been thinking along simiar lines. You can?t fool the OS since the app needs to comply to AppStore rules and will be tested prior to release. I want to pitch this idea to as many developers within Apple as possible so chances are higher it will be adopted.
> 
> Cheers,
> Eelco
> 
> 
>> On 8 jun. 2018, at 16:41, Kevin Gross <kevin.gross at avanw.com <mailto:kevin.gross at avanw.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> I have done some work with Dolby on this but not specific to loudness. There is a standards initiative they've started to define a network format for metadata to go along with our network formats for audio and video. There are already means to carry metadata in video and AES3 and in many of the coded audio and video formats. 
>> 
>> I think what is mostly missing is a metadata definition for loudness. What metadata would be in a loudness dataset? I know LUFS and dBTP would be central but the devil is in the details. Are these short-term, long-term or for the entire program. If for the program, how do we know where the program starts and ends. What is needed to specify the "DRC Profile" that AES71 introduces? How does a player use all of this stuff?
>> 
>> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>> 
>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Ian Shepherd <ian at mastering-media.co.uk <mailto:ian at mastering-media.co.uk>> wrote:
>> 
>> Same. I suspect it was left vague in AES71 because it?s a massive can of worms, and they want to allow flexibility in actually implementing it.
>> 
>> Either way I don?t personally have the bandwidth, either as part of this group or for the AES directly.
>> 
>> Having said that, I think including a recognition that mobile devices may need to use a higher level as an interim measure would be a good idea.
>> 
>> Ian
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 7 Jun 2018, at 01:31, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I think we'd have to bring in Dolby and other experts at least as consultants. I only understand the basics of Metadata so I'd be shooting in the dark.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Bob
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/6/18 5:01 PM, Kevin Gross wrote:
>>>> We need to get this metadata thing sorted out. AES71 tells you when to use metadata but it doesn't say exactly what it is, how to transport it or what you should do with it. Is this something that we help could flesh out?
>>>> 
>>>> Kevin Gross - AVA Networks
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com <mailto:bobkatz at digido.com>> wrote:
>>>> I'm in favor of any solution that lowers the recommended target! But it's always interim. 
>>>> 
>>>> -18 LUFS is 5 dB away from -23. It ought to be safe for the majority of program with an emergency protection limiter, at least for portable devices. But I would NOT recommend -18 LUFS target for set top devices playing wide range program material on loudspeakers. There's the rub and the need for metadata.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Bob
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 6/5/18 8:49 PM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maybe the solution for fallback in the absence of metadata on portable devices we recommend a gain boost of 7 dB with a protection limiter. Since it's music it's likely to have a PLR of less than 16 dB so if it was normalized to -23 it would hardly trigger the limiter. But without metadata how do you know it's music? And if they normalize regular program to -23 it will be too low for many portable devices, also. 
>>>>>> Shit (excuse my French)
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> We?ve settled on around -18 LUFS for my podcast, which is plenty loud on my (European) iPod with stock earbuds. Anecdotally the BBC seems to be similar, and also works works fine, for the most part.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We should look back through our notes for the meeting where the podcast providers joined in, Bob - from memory most of them had also settled on -16 or -18, I think.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I assume your concern is that raising normal program to -16 would trigger excessive limiting, Bob. Perhaps suggesting -18 (which is the median of the AES recommended range) for everything would be a workable compromise, when there?s no meta-data ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ian
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> 
>>>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>>>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>>>> Author: Mastering Audio              
>>>> Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>>>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>>> Author: Mastering Audio              
>>> Digital Domain Website <http://www.digido.com/>
>>> 
>>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> MLA mailing list
>> MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
>> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl <mailto:MLA at grimmaudio.nl>
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl <http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MLA mailing list
> MLA at grimmaudio.nl
> http://grimmaudio.nl/mailman/listinfo/mla_grimmaudio.nl

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180630/034b17fb/attachment.html>

From bobkatz at digido.com  Sat Jun 30 20:55:23 2018
From: bobkatz at digido.com (Bob Katz)
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:55:23 -0400
Subject: [MLA] AES71 comments
In-Reply-To: <848A1D7C-448B-4741-A8FE-942FD09E72DA@grimmaudio.com>
References: <CALw1_Q1ts5TmyCr-pMKQCszWnvp5MAtPbAPaO+vJErYrU-Wpvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b8c0167-4bc4-322c-6ea5-95a14f5087ad@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3Pt8UU2i9YSw3t=iRWU5GNvECvwd9mu2Hti8ZVmHR9fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<dfe710c9-1603-c193-ca05-cc88048a8dd9@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q3kAsLDbHD4sDt1an08aoWMSDtWVbh8f7f7gG57WCARJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<ac152ff6-bd04-ff3f-ab84-a663b128ff24@digido.com>
	<5BA7E1AD-0E6E-42CA-A33D-65D7373FE8FD@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<244defff-2a2f-32ff-07a3-ee09d627e486@digido.com>
	<CALw1_Q2TS-7H3QOsHU97t0ns3KOfJSe7AkSroH9zb-cEg2c7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<31d80814-f375-d27f-1aa0-6ef007d558aa@digido.com>
	<46C6B9C4-5691-461B-B8E4-6F4A48CF6606@mastering-media.co.uk>
	<CALw1_Q3+xDKW6B=QdMCmcFmMkBfhjNmabgF1_1hau_mnS9hLEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<B54BF8F6-5DAB-4B50-A161-523CDDF653A7@grimmaudio.com>
	<CALw1_Q3-t8=MLf1Q+jaHZ4HxR3is4uiXW_3S=605XpyxBFBObA@mail.gmail.com>
	<848A1D7C-448B-4741-A8FE-942FD09E72DA@grimmaudio.com>
Message-ID: <0c7bdb8e-33f5-d369-0c38-a34ca0f5f87e@digido.com>

Dear Eelco:

You wrote:

> It should work like this: in the browser, -16 LUFS will be the target 
> level. Programs that are softer will sound softer.


I wish we had a better word for defining this behavior. I've been 
calling this feature "no upward normalization" or "downward 
normalization only".




> In the app -23 LUFS can be the target level and all content (soft and 
> loud) will be normalized.
>

What about the unlikely situation of material with a PLR greater than 
23???? That's the case for some very highly dynamic movie scores in 
surround.


Bob


-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20180630/525e9d98/attachment.html>

