QUOTE(Ookami @ Feb 11 2003 - 06:04 AM)
Hello...
Do you think that you can manage to keep your promise? With promise I mean the (quote from a old mail to you) ...
QUOTE
What would, IMO, be the perfect solution is to add a checkbox or something
> for automatic applying of the "max no-clip gain" to all those files that
> would clip with the standard setting. With this implemented I (and others
> :-) ) could add the files and fire and forget, without messing around with
> files that would clip with the default settings.
You've replied that you will add it among the first things after the 1.0 version

.
The one-button "Track Gain but don't clip any files" function is still high on my "To Do" list.
But because it is currently possible to do this (even though it takes a little more than one click), I am first working on something that is
not possible with the current program: storing "undo" information and analysis results in APE tags in the mp3 file itself.
Quick instructions for anyone who hasn't figured out the easiest way to do "Track Gain but don't clip" for a group of files:
- Load files into MP3Gain
- Do "Track Analysis"
- Sort by the "clip(Track)" column (by clicking on that column header)
- Shift-select all of the files that do not have a "Y" in the "clip(Track)" column
- Right-click in the list box and select "Apply Track Gain" (this will apply the suggested Track gain only to the selected files)
- When Track Gain is finished do "File > Invert Selection" (or just press Ctrl+V). Now all the the files that do have a "Y" in the "clip(Track)" column are selected
- Right-click in the list box and select "Apply Max No-clip Gain for Each file"
As for the "number of clipped samples" request, that's still a bit lower on my To Do list. Not
much lower, but it's less frequently requested than storing undo info and the "Apply Gain but don't clip" functions.
And when I do add the # of clipped samples in, it will only be the
current number of clipped samples. To show the number of samples that would clip for other gains, you'd have to do a noticable amount of extra computation for
every single sample as it's decoded. Basically, you'd have to say,
"Is the sample > 32767?
Is (sample * 1.189) > 32767?
Is (sample * 0.841) > 32767?"
And that's just checking for gain +/- 1.5dB.