Wavegain vs. MP3Gain, Why the former might be better... Options

[Jebus]

Yes, I know that MP3Gain is lossless. No, I am not talking about how MP3Gain is limited to 1.5dB steps (though this is another reason).
What I am thinking is this:

Psychoacoustic models tend to encode louder signals with more bits, right? This is why remasters (compressed) tend to use higher bitrates than older versions. Correct?

If we are then encoding a VERY LOUD album with LAME -aps for instance, then normalizing it down say 10.5dB (for a really bad one), aren't we wasting bits? Wouldn't we be able to save some bits by normalizing it down to 89dB FIRST, then encoding it?

I know wavegain is NOT LOSSLESS, but I am (incorrectly) assuming that this is just a theoretical lossiness, not a perceptible one. If this is the case, couldn't we argue that wavegained tracks will be of lower bitrates while still maintaining transparency (the goal, afterall, of -aps)?


---------------------------------
| UPDATE (May 21st, 2005) |
---------------------------------

The discussion below basically concludes that running a wavegain analysis, then applying the recommended scalefactor to lame (via the --scale switch) will save bits due to high-frequency bloat inherent in the mp3 format. Lots of people have since chosen to use this method over mp3gain, and in fact it can be automated now from within EAC using Wack, or my own Omni Encoder. Read on!

This post has been edited by Jebus: Jul 18 2006, 14:05

[Gabriel]

My opinion is that if you intend to always play your tracks on a specific adjusted level, it would be wise to take this into consideration while encoding.

It seems to me that extraction->album analysis->encoding with proper scale value would be the best choice.

Disabling the ath adjustment would be a bad idea. The ath adjustement is taking care (a little) about a possible misadjustement of track level (that is when the sound engineer did not used a proper level for the track).
But to my mind, it is also taking care of the constant sensitivity adjustement of the middle ear. Disabling this would reduce the quality. (I used "to my mind" because some do not agree about this)

Using the auto ath adjustement to take into consideration a whole track level misadjutement is not very efficient. First, the ath adjustement is limited in amplitude, and second it is progressive and not instantaneous.

You can alter the ath base level with --athlower, but I would prefer to use --scale.