Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[imeric]

When using Volume leveling and listening to just one album Volume Leveling is not using the Volume Level (R128) and is using something else.

If I shuffle multiple albums the "problem" goes away and I can see MC using the (R128) value.

Is this wanted behaviour? Is it using some sort of Album vs Track Volume leveling that I'm not aware of?
thx

[RD James]

JRiver switches between track/album modes dynamically based on the contents of the playlist.
Albums will use the average level for that album to preserve intended dynamics.
It's not limited to one mode of operation at a time though. If you place an album in the middle of a collection of random tracks, it will still be treated as an album.

[imeric]

Thanks for the answer RD James much appreciated.

Is the average value calculated each time? (My guess is that it is as I can't find any Volume Level Tag info for an album anywhere..Unless it's hidden in the MC library?)

Not sure I understand the logic ...IMHO I would prefer if MC was using the "standard" replay gain tags that have both Album and Track Gains.

This way the user can choose which ones they want to use (Album or Track gains/levels...)
I assume there was a reason to implement it this way?...  

All my existing "standard" replay_gain tags always have an EXACT 5 dB offset with MC's Volume Levels (as the other software is also using R128 but using -18 for LUFS vs -23.0 LUFS for MC)

If I could choose between the 2 tags I would definitely choose the standard replay gains with -18 to have less attenuation applied without having to try to compensate with
another DSP...(Adaptive Volume)

Is this documented anywhere? (I couldn't find anything...)

[imeric]

The two systems of analysis are different and typically produce different results.  R128 is the international standard and is probably a more accurate measure of volume level.  The replaygain tags are still written for compatibility with other players, but JRiver doesn't use them anymore.  

As far as I know both tags have been written by the analyzer since R128 was introduced.

I think I found part of my answer in my older post above.

So MC is indeed still creating the replaygain_track_gain and replaygain_track_peak (which is an exact 5 dB offset from the Volume Level (R128)) as I assume both are using the R128 algorithm...

Here is my ask:
1. Also create replaygain_album_gain and replaygain_album_peak tags for MC to use.
2. Make it user settable to choose replaygain_track_gain values over Volume Level (R128) for less attenuation when using Volume Leveling AND...
3. User settable to choose replaygain_album_gain when listening to albums and not done automatically by MC.  

[Arindelle]

Here is my ask:
1. Also create replaygain_album_gain and replaygain_album_peak tags for MC to use.
2. Make it user settable to choose replaygain_track_gain values over Volume Level (R128) for less attenuation when using Volume Leveling AND...
3. User settable to choose replaygain_album_gain when listening to albums and not done automatically by MC. 

I can maybe get why you want to choose Track over Album type leveling, so ok if the same volume is more important than dynamics.

But why would you want to use Replay Gain when you don't have to. If I understand correctly JRiver still writes these tags so they can be used externally in portable and DLNA devices that might not use anything else. If it is just the attenuation, why not just boost the preamp gain a couple of dbs -- (5 may cause clipping, not sure so play around a bit to see) in a "volume levelled" zone. DSP studio EQ or even a parametric EQ in 64 bits ... you have a bunch of headroom there. Or short of that just turn up the volume.  R128 is so much better (my opinion, but shared by a lot of people I think ) Have I missed something maybe?

[imeric]

AFAIK both replay gain and volume level are using R128 (since there is EXACTLY a 5 dB offset between the two I assume MC is using R128 to generate both tags)
That's what dBpoweramp is doing anyway and the values are also the same as per MC.

So Arindelle what should I be using? Volume Leveling + Adaptive Volume?
Volume leveling only + a 5dB boost?
I'm currently testing Adaptive Volume with Peak Level Normalize and this seems to work perfectly ie maximising Volume therefore the dynamic range.  (ie only adding or subtracting 1-3 dBs...)

Maybe this is what I should use vs Volume leveling?
I recall having read somewhere that both Volume Leveling and Adaptive should be used together? Not sure I understand why that would be... (One will reduce gain by let's say -8.8 dB and the other will bump it back up by as much...)

Why not just use Adaptive Volume therefore less messing around with the dynamic range of the song?

[blgentry]

I recall having read somewhere that both Volume Leveling and Adaptive should be used together?

Yes.  They are designed to be used together.  I'll explain further below.

Why not just use Adaptive Volume therefore less messing around with the dynamic range of the song?

This is important:  Volume Leveling does not touch the dynamic range of the track.  It's just a volume offset.  Like turning the volume up or down at the beginning of the song.  It doesn't change the dynamics of the overall song.  Adaptive Volume > Peak Level Normalize is similar.  It does NOT affect track dynamics.  It is only a volume offset.

Why would one use Volume Leveling alone, versus using Volume Leveling and Adaptive Volume (peak level normalize) ?  I'm glad you asked!

Volume Leveling:  Does a volume offset on each track so that they all have the same average loudness of -23 dB, as measured by R128.  Except for songs in the same album.  They are offset to a target that is the same for the whole album.  That way a really quiet track on the album *stays* really quiet.  As was intended by the artist.  Presumably you want to hear album tracks, which are played back to back, with their intended volume differences.

Volume Leveing and Adaptive Volume (peak level normalize):  This operates *exactly* the same as above.  With one addition:  Adaptive Volume (PLN) examines all tracks in Playing Now and does a calculation to see how much louder they can be turned up without clipping.  It then applies that offset for THE ENTIRE PLAYING NOW.  So VL + AD(PLN) keeps everything at the same average volume level, but played at as high a volume as possible.  This contrasts with just Volume Leveling, playing everything at a target of -23 dB.

Summary:

VL:  Plays at an average level of -23 dB.
VL + AV(PLN):  Plays everything in Playing Now at the same average level, but as high a level as possible for each individual playing now.

You should probably be using VL + AD(PLN), based on what you've said.

Brian.

[imeric]

Yes.  They are designed to be used together.  I'll explain further below.
Volume Leveling:  Does a volume offset on each track so that they all have the same average loudness of -23 dB, as measured by R128.  Except for songs in the same album.  They are offset to a target that is the same for the whole album.  That way a really quiet track on the album *stays* really quiet.  As was intended by the artist.  Presumably you want to hear album tracks, which are played back to back, with their intended volume differences.

Volume Leveing and Adaptive Volume (peak level normalize):  This operates *exactly* the same as above.  With one addition:  Adaptive Volume (PLN) examines all tracks in Playing Now and does a calculation to see how much louder they can be turned up without clipping.  It then applies that offset for THE ENTIRE PLAYING NOW.  So VL + AD(PLN) keeps everything at the same average volume level, but played at as high a volume as possible.  This contrasts with just Volume Leveling, playing everything at a target of -23 dB.

Summary:

VL:  Plays at an average level of -23 dB.
VL + AV(PLN):  Plays everything in Playing Now at the same average level, but as high a level as possible for each individual playing now.

You should probably be using VL + AD(PLN), based on what you've said.

Brian.

Very helpful Brian thank you!!  However I've done some tests and something doesn't quite make sense to me...

What does make sense: If I just select an album I will get -3.3 of Volume leveling and a +4.7 dB which leads to an overall Volume Gain of 1.4 dB.  If I select Volume Level alone and select that same album alone in playing now I will get the same "Album gain" as mentioned by RDJames earlier so that makes sense....

However If I keep the same album, add ALL my songs to that same playlist the Volume Level suddenly went up from +3.3 dB to +10 dB!! It then kept going down (as it is looking for a peak value I suppose...) But then it stabilised at + 5.7 dB...What am I missing here? Shouldn't it never go above the +3.3 dB of that album alone to avoid clipping?

[Arindelle]

Hi Imeric ... I wasn't trying to tell you what you should do These settings work differently. I was just not understanding why you would ask for an option to use Replay gain and not R128.

AFAIK - they are two separate "norms" and they do not give the same measurements on all songs (actually some tracks with good dynamic range in one gives a bad read out in the other, albeit using different scales). However, maximising volume doesn't increase the dynamic range. If you have clipping with protection enabled its probably decreasing it. (a bit unrelated, but remember the volume wars). Nirvana and a Mozart opera can both have big dynamic ranges (quietest to loudest parts of the track), not the same as the output volume or gain to be adjusted

On playlists I have the adaptive option on with VL and it does not just bump it up the same as the gain reduction. It depends on the averaging of the songs in the playlists. When you are using this to listen to complete albums that is a different story.

The only reason I adjust my eq at all  is because I don't use levelling all the time like some people do here. I only use it for playlists/play doctor etc. For my normal listening, I preset my analogue Preamp volume and use Internal Volume (no levelling), depending on the type of music I listen to. That is coming out to around 85 to 90db max if the slider is set to 100% in JRiver. If I want to really go louder than that (rare) I will manually change the preamp volume, (I can configure my preamp so it always starts up at the same level, so I never half to worry about blowing my tweeters) The volume slider in the main zone is preset to 60% so it is never too loud and I'll adjust up or down to suit. When I shift zones, the volume leveling one, its preset to 63%

What happens is when I decide to listen to a playlist or shuffle a bunch of albums, I'll switch into another "playlist" zone which has Volume leveling set with the Adaptive option. The preamp eq is set to +2.5db. Which is more or less the difference between my main zone, combined with the preset slider at 63%. If I always had volume levelling on I wouldn't boost the eq at all I'd just adjust my analogue preamp settings. Some cds will go into clipping at +5db, and even if you have clipping protection on, I avoid it bad for the ol' SQ. The pream EQ is over and above the VL calculation, so better to be prudent if using this IMO.  

So mine is a particular scenario, and each person is going to go about it in a different way. I just want to not have real huge boosts in volume when switching zones. Some people want the same exact volume for every track,others select 20 albums and just listen to music all day in the background, and others want the album dynamics and just never want to mess with their volume knob -- all are valid, but the options would be different. (There's also a few that whine on the fact that the attenuation is too much, but I thinks that's for people using computer speakers and maybe using system volume, but generally that is pretty rare.)

Brian gave a very good explanation, on the options ... you can adapt them to how you want to listen to your stuff. Or like I do create a zone or two for different ways you want to listen to your collection

[Arindelle]

However If I keep the same album, add ALL my songs to that same playlist the Volume Level suddenly went up from +3.3 dB to +10 dB!! It then kept going down (as it is looking for a peak value I suppose...) But then it stabilized at + 5.7 dB...What am I missing here? Shouldn't it never go above the +3.3 dB of that album alone to avoid clipping?

Normally the the adaptive change is going to be fixed, calculated on the tracks in the list. If you add stuff, it has to recalculate and probably won't change for the song already playing. Some Cds you can add 10db to without clipping (not many new Rock and R&B albums though)

The adjustments have a lot to do with what kind of music you are listening to. If you are only listening to rock albums from say 1995-2005 .. there probably a lot of albums that are pushed to their max volumes and the difference is going to minimal. Most of the time I find that you don't have +gain, but you have reduced output. Where there are big differences, is when you mix say older classical or jazz with modern electronic dance music. The adaptive element is supposed to be calculated to not bring you to the clipping zone. Each song is going to have a different VL adjustment. Just change the track and open, the "Audio Path" box. Without any additional DSPs you should not see any clipping protection adjustments. If you do see a reduction for clipping and you have a bunch of DSP set, you should probably be adjusting them.

[imeric]

and just listen to music all day in the background,

That's basically only when I will apply some sort of volume leveling...While working or casual listening shuffling everything from Heavy Metal to Classical music .. I just want this done with minimal impact on SQ and I am indeed very happy with Brian's answers and all of your valuable feedback.

Thanks to you Arindelle, Brian and RDJames. Much appreciated!!!

However if you do have an answer as to why it never went to +4.7 dB vs the +5.7 dB...

[imeric]

And Yes I can live with + or minus 1-2 dB!!!

I'll be using VL +AV (PLN) from now on for casual listening thx!

[imeric]

As per Arindelle's I reloaded the library and it went to + 4.3.

So good enough. Case closed!

[RD James]

1. The ReplayGain tags that JRiver writes are simply offset R128 values.
2. An "Album" in context of volume leveling is two or more tracks in the playlist from the same album that play in sequence. Tracks only need to be from the same album, not sequential track numbers. Each "block" of tracks is its own album. The average level of all tracks in that group is used. This is vastly superior to pre-baked album tags.
3. Adaptive Volume will either push the playlist volume as loud as it can be without clipping (peak normalize) or start applying dynamic range compression (night/small speaker). I recommend disabling this while you are trying to understand leveling. In Peak mode, it should never go above -1.0dBFS.

[imeric]

1. The ReplayGain tags that JRiver writes are simply offset R128 values.
2. An "Album" in context of volume leveling is two or more tracks in the playlist from the same album that play in sequence. Tracks only need to be from the same album, not sequential track numbers. Each "block" of tracks is its own album. The average level of all tracks in that group is used. This is vastly superior to pre-baked album tags.

Now that I understand how it all works I couldn't agree more! definitely a smart way to implement it!

3. Adaptive Volume will either push the playlist volume as loud as it can be without clipping (peak normalize) or start applying dynamic range compression (night/small speaker). I recommend disabling this while you are trying to understand leveling. In Peak mode, it should never go above -1.0dBFS.

Yep...Got this figured out now and it pushes it as high as it can (I thought something was off at first but after having played with it it seems to work as advertised by you folks.

Night/small speaker is not an option for me as I want the dynamic range untouched and don't want MC to sound like a poor quality FM station (as there are still a few good ones out there...) or online streaming .

Thx RD James. Much appreciated.

[imeric]

I've been using this all day and something doesn't seem right (or I just don't get it )

I have my whole library in the playlist. I have Volume leveling and Adaptive Volume with peak normalize.  If I play continuously the adaptive Volume will start at + 11 dB and then work its way down to around +4 dB after a while... A long while (20-30+ songs).

As it was mentioned before it looks like it's calculating a Peak Value but if I hit stop it will go right back to using 10-11 dB of Adaptive Volume and will keep going down after a while...This can get a bit annoying

I'll keep playing with this maybe it will eventually make sense to me ?

[Arindelle]

I've been using this all day and something doesn't seem right (or I just don't get it )

I have my whole library in the playlist. I have Volume leveling and Adaptive Volume with peak normalize.  If I play continuously the adaptive Volume will start at + 11 dB and then work its way down to around +4 dB after a while... A long while (20-30+ songs).

As it was mentioned before it looks like it's calculating a Peak Value but if I hit stop it will go right back to using 10-11 dB of Adaptive Volume and will keep going down after a while...This can get a bit annoying

I'll keep playing with this maybe it will eventually make sense to me ?

Not sure I understand why this makes a difference, but it looks like you are right ... I just did what you did, shuffled playback on my entire library and got a 342 days of playback in my playing now  .

Need confirm on this but with a big list like this, the boost from the Adaptive option changes only seems to happen when it has to prevent clipping. Otherwise it won't move unless you add stuff to the list.  So maybe it is taking x number of tracks, and then recalculates.

This shouldn't affect the total output volume though, should it?

To verify sort of, I just spot checked this with a cruddy iPhone microphone and my average SPL analogue output is pretty much the same. I admit that when there are adjustments made for when clip protection kicks in ... thee music sounds compressed (subjective bias maybe!!) . If I'm not mixing older pre-volume wars recordings with "loud" highly compressed stuff and classical with hard rock and EDM though, I'm not seeing this happening.

So when not invoking the album mode (ie; shuffled tracks not sequential album tracks), the algorithm seems to sort it self out pretty nicely on my end at least. If using this with a bunch of albums, I can measure differences, but I think that's normal as the album dynamics are kicking in. Checked the simple math of a couple of tracks and the tag value +/- VL adjustment +/- Adaptive volume gives an almost identical total between the tracks.  

[RD James]

I've been using this all day and something doesn't seem right (or I just don't get it )
I have my whole library in the playlist. I have Volume leveling and Adaptive Volume with peak normalize.  If I play continuously the adaptive Volume will start at + 11 dB and then work its way down to around +4 dB after a while... A long while (20-30+ songs).
As it was mentioned before it looks like it's calculating a Peak Value but if I hit stop it will go right back to using 10-11 dB of Adaptive Volume and will keep going down after a while...This can get a bit annoying
I'll keep playing with this maybe it will eventually make sense to me ?

Any time you change the playlist, the peak level is likely to change.
If you want a fixed playback level, disable adaptive volume and use leveling on its own.
 
However stopping and starting playback should not affect volume level at all if you aren't changing the playlist.
The behavior you describe sounds like you have enabled adaptive volume and are playing tracks which haven't been analyzed.
Either that or you might be running some other DSP which is interfering.

[Arindelle]

Either that or you might be running some other DSP which is interfering.

Yes! like maybe you boosted the preamp EQ like I talked about for my setup?

[imeric]

Any time you change the playlist, the peak level is likely to change.

Understood and this is working perfectly on a small playlist with a few albums or tracks.  It will adjust to around + 4-6 dB of Adaptive Volume (PLN).

It seems to be doing what it's supposed to (ie grab an ideal max peak level out of the entire playlist) when you have a "limited" number of files.  And it looks like that number can be quite high (I took about 4000 files and it found the value right away and didn't move...)

It's when you have a LOT of files (mixed content from classical to Heavy metal, Trance etc...Including Redbook hi-res etc...) That it doesn't like it and will just use the Peak of the file being played then work its way down as I mentioned earlier.

The reason this is annoying is it will start at 11-12 dB of Adaptive volume gain every time you hit stop and then will work its way down to around 4-6 dB)... We're talking about a 7 dB difference which means you need to play with volume on your amp or dac or MC Volume.  Arindelle I'm surprised you didn't hear this...It's quite loud at first then will go back to "normal" after a few songs...

Looks to me it doesn't calculate the whole playlist after a certain number of files (5000+) in the playlist and will just "play it by ear  " ....

I can understand why after a certain number of files it might be too long or complex to find a peak value....As a suggestion (workaround) maybe when this value is not calculated or found the peak should be limited to around 6-7 dB?

If you want a fixed playback level, disable adaptive volume and use leveling on its own.

This value is very low and can be a pain with some portable DACs with high impedance headphones...
AND one thing I really like about using the two together is the end volume is similar to what was intended (ie closer to peak)
Now that I know it's not messing with the dynamic range I want it!!!

However stopping and starting playback should not affect volume level at all if you aren't changing the playlist.

Yes!! If this behaviour alone can be "resolved" as I'm not changing my playlist I would be a happy camper!!!  I can live with the adjustment at the beginning.  I can't live with it changing after hitting stop without the playlist changing.

The behavior you describe sounds like you have enabled adaptive volume and are playing tracks which haven't been analyzed.
Either that or you might be running some other DSP which is interfering.

Nope. Only DSPs I'm using here is VL+ AV (PLN).  I don't want to temper with SQ especially the dynamic range.  RD James, just like Arindelle did, just try it and you'll see what I mean.

Yes all my songs have been analysed by MC using the Analyze Volume algorithm.

[blgentry]

Yes all my songs have been analysed by MC using the Analyze Volume algorithm.

You should double check that.  Go to:  Playlists > Smartlists > Audio -- Task -- Needs audio analysis

See if any of your tracks show up.  If so, analyze them.  If not, maybe we have some kind of bug going on with giant playing now lists.  I generally mix no more than about 500 songs into playing now, and even that is kind of a lot.  But that's just my usage pattern.

Brian.

[Arindelle]

Have to admit, unless I really haven't been following this, it just doesn't make sense that you can have a 7db difference -- that's huge and of course I'd hear it. As I said I even measured the volume differences. 

Now frankly I'm never choose more than a couple of hours worth of music at a time. 5000 tracks is more than 1000 hours of music so how this works on really big lists doesn't really affect me.

But you have the meta data tag lets adj. plus the adaptive adjustment its almost like the levelling is not taking affect, just the adaptive adjustment (euh you are clicking both in DSP studio aren't you?  )

looking right now I get

Song 1 -11.4db VL +10.5db PNL
Song 2 -8.2db +10.5db PNL
Song 3 -11db VL +10.5db

now I click manually on Song 8
and yep it recalculates the PNL adj to +9.2db but if I just hit the jump to next track button it stayed at +10.5. So it seems like it depends on your jump config and if you just let the playlist play without skipping around.

Regardless Song 1 net change is only -0.9db; Song 2 net change is +2.3db Song three happens to come from the same album, for info and has a net change of -1.5db.

Sticking in volume war champs (like a 2 in the dynamic range measurement, super compressed ... super "loud") I might have up to a -7db adjustment if the playlist contains lower level recordings (edit: actually I found a -15db adjustment haha),  but the album output gain is much higher compared to the other tracks in the list. But it is not a 7db output difference. Its a -7db adjustment.

If you are going from Joan Baez singing an acoustic guitar from a cd made in the 80s to some post-hardcore song from the late 90's, you might perceive the latter being louder, but measuring them with a mike I'm not getting an average SPL level that a lot different over the length of the song, certainly not 7dbs.

[RD James]

That sounds like it is either a bug, or it is only looking at the upcoming playlist and not the entire playlist for Adaptive Volume when playback is started.

[Hendrik]

Playlists over 10000 tracks don't use the same method of playlist leveling for performance reasons. I suggest to use more manageable lists instead of just throwing everything in there.
Also, all tracks need to be analyzed, otherwise it uses the "safe" approach and sticks to per-track leveling.

[imeric]

Arindelle just let it run for a few hours and it will eventually come down to 6-7 dB of AV.  (assuming you have all kinds of music in your playlist).

Playlists over 10000 tracks don't use the same method of playlist leveling for performance reasons.

That's understable and I totally accept that.  However instead of recommending how I should create my playlists could we look into keeping the Adaptive Volume value to its previous value when the playlist remains unchanged after hitting stop?  This would work.

Thanks for considering.

[imeric]

You should double check that.  Go to:  Playlists > Smartlists > Audio -- Task -- Needs audio analysis

See if any of your tracks show up.  If so, analyze them.  If not, maybe we have some kind of bug going on with giant playing now lists.  I generally mix no more than about 500 songs into playing now, and even that is kind of a lot.  But that's just my usage pattern.

Brian.

Again...None come up...

[Arindelle]

Arindelle just let it run for a few hours and it will eventually come down to 6-7 dB of AV.  (assuming you have all kinds of music in your playlist).

ok let's says it does for argument's sake.  it would take a long time and unless you click tracks manually which forces it to recalculate, it would be a very gradual change. Sorry just can't duplicate your problem on my end Imeric  It just works for me at least for a 4 hour playlist that I had going this afternoon, haven't changed the volume control once

[imeric]

Try files with lots of Vocals (Blues and or Jazz).  As an example The song "Too Bad" from Eric Clapton's Crossroads will attenuate AV to 5.4 dB every time.  The VL (128) on that song  is -3.1 dB.

As a side note I was watching this video yesterday on LUFS vs DBFs etc... Very interesting!

http://productionadvice.co.uk/lufs-dbfs-rms/

If we could just keep the Adaptive Volume to its previous value when we hit stop without changing the playlist that's all we need.
The reason I would hit stop vs just pause is to use the soundcard for something else (youtube etc..)

When the AV goes all the way back to +11-12 dB on a restart it's annoying.

[imeric]

ok let's says it does for argument's sake.  it would take a long time and unless you click tracks manually which forces it to recalculate, it would be a very gradual change. Sorry just can't duplicate your problem on my end Imeric  It just works for me at least for a 4 hour playlist that I had going this afternoon, haven't changed the volume control once

All right...Not that annoying but I do need to play with the volume...  I will take the habit of hitting pause instead of stop if I don't need the card for something else but if the behaviour could easily be changed by the developers that would be great.

I do have a list that is getting rid of what I don't want to listen to but it is still larger than 10 000 songs unfortunately...

[blgentry]

You actually listen to lists of over 10,000 songs at once?  I understand having a library that large.  But playing now with 10,000 songs?  That doesn't seem useful.

Brian.

[imeric]

I just added "Limit number to" 9999 to tmy smartlist to see what would happen and yep...Went straight to + 4.5 dB of Adaptive Volume.  Went to 10000 in the smart playlist. ->4.4 dB

Then 10001 and boum back up to 12 dB. Ouch..Ears hurt!

Yes I could limit the size of my smart list but that's beside the point I'm trying to make.  You can tell me in every way possible to reduce my playing now list to work around it but that's not how I want it and have been using MC for music. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

One main reason for this is I may want to do a search in the playing now window to listen to a specific song.  Reducing my playing now will not let me do this and I will have to go in my main library.

[blgentry]

Yes I could limit the size of my smart list but that's beside the point I'm trying to make.  You can tell me in every way possible to reduce my playing now list to work around it but that's not how I want it and have been using MC for music. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I find your stance on this to be unreasonable.  I don't work for JRiver or otherwise represent them in any way.  That's just my opinion.

Brian.

[imeric]

All I'm asking for here is to leave the Adaptive Volume to its previous value on stop if the playlist isn't changed.

I don't find this to be an unreasonable request.

[Hendrik]

It has no place to store this information, since its all generated dynamically. Sorry.

[imeric]

Fair enough.  Thanks for following up.

[JimH]

Yes I could limit the size of my smart list ...

Why don't you do that?  This is not a problem we need to spend more time on.

[Matt]

Coming next build:
Changed: Switched the limit for calculating all the volume leveling information from 10,000 tracks to 50,000 tracks.