INTERACT FORUM
More => Old Versions => JRiver Media Center 21 for Windows => Topic started by: dtc on December 08, 2015, 10:12:47 am
-
I have an older system to update to MC20 or MC21. Can I restore a library backup from MC 17 to either MC 20 or MC 21? Just want to check before doing it. Thanks.
-
I think so, but you'll have to try it. You might also be able to go from 17 > 19 > 21.
-
I successfully imported my MC 17 library into MC 20. I had to change the output device and it looks like the syntax of the Font Size parameter changed, but the rest seems to be OK. So I should be good to go. It will be nice to get this system up to date. It will probably be the first system I change to Windows 10, so I want it to be on a newer version of MC, just in case.
-
I successfully imported my MC 17 library into MC 20. I had to change the output device and it looks like the syntax of the Font Size parameter changed, but the rest seems to be OK. So I should be good to go. It will be nice to get this system up to date. It will probably be the first system I change to Windows 10, so I want it to be on a newer version of MC, just in case.
just a heads up, if you haven't noticed you wil have to reanalyze your files ... big change between 18 and 19. Not necessary if you don't use volume level at all though I suppose.
-
just a heads up, if you haven't noticed you wil have to reanalyze your files ... big change between 18 and 19. Not necessary if you don't use volume level at all though I suppose.
Thanks. Most of my systems are already on MC 20. It is just one that has not been updated. That system is probably going to be updated to Windows 10, so I wanted to get it current with MC .
I do not use volume leveling. I pretty much play albums, not playlists, so volume leveling is not much of an issue. A slight turn of the volume knob is fine for me. And, quite frankly, the new R128 system seems to have some problems, so I avoid it. Anything I need to make changes to (mostly digitized vinyl) I normalize outside of MC. But thanks for the heads up.
-
And, quite frankly, the new R128 system seems to have some problems, so I avoid it.
I keep hearing people say these things. First about Adaptive Volume, and now about R128 volume leveling analysis. What problems does it have?
Brian.
-
I keep hearing people say these things. First about Adaptive Volume, and now about R128 volume leveling analysis. What problems does it have?
Brian.
There are several threads about people having tracks that play significantly lower than others after R128 analysis. The solution seems to be to do the R128 analysis and then apply adaptive volume. That seems wrong to me. If the R128 analysis did its job, why would you then need to do a second process to get the volume right?
These anomalies seem to have come up when the analysis was changed to R128. It does not happen for most albums/tracks but it does for some. I have not really looked into this in detail, but some people have noted this problem with R128. Since I do not need it, I stay away from it.
-
As I understand it, R128 uses a lower volume target than the previous method. Lower than a lot of people would expect, myself included. This keeps the volume constant across the the entire range of music available.
Adaptive Volume then looks at what you have playing and says, "how much louder can I make this, and not clip anything that's currently playing?". Then it adds that fixed amount, to bring back some of the gain. This number will change as you add louder music, or remove louder music. This is why it's optional: Because the absolute volume target, when using Adaptive Volume, changes from playlist to playlist.
It's a complex situation that took me some research to understand. I'm not even 100% sure I've got it right. But I think I do. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Brian.