Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Better Opus ReplayGain support #2055

Closed
nullobsi opened this issue May 31, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Better Opus ReplayGain support #2055

nullobsi opened this issue May 31, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@nullobsi
Copy link

Feature request

Hi,

Currently the support for ReplayGain for OPUS files is limited to the ReplayGain tags and OGG headers from the OPUS spec. For various reasons, I decide not to use those tags and instead use the generic REPLAYGAIN_ tags.

I would like to be able to use these tags for my library, which can probably be done by prioritizing one tag over the other and falling back when needed. I've attached a shitty little hacky patch I made that seems to make it work just with REPLAYGAIN_ tags.

Thank you
replaygain.patch

@MaxKellermann
Copy link
Member

I'm not convinced that this is a good idea or even useful.

@nullobsi
Copy link
Author

https://github.com/complexlogic/rsgain?tab=readme-ov-file#opus-files

The RSgain utility has some reasoning behind why you might prefer REPLAYGAIN_ tags over the R128_ tags for Opus (by default it writes REPLAYGAIN_ tags). I think a sane decision would be to prefer the R128_ and OutputGain over the traditional REPLAYGAIN_ tags to preserve the previous behavior, but also make it better for those (like me) who have Opus libraries with REPLAYGAIN_ tags.

I can draft a PR with better code quality than the hacky patch I made sometime soon.

@MaxKellermann
Copy link
Member

Just use RFC mode if you insist on using that tool.

@MaxKellermann MaxKellermann closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jul 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants