LibriVox Forum

Hello,

I wonder if it can be corrected at all, so I think I'll report it. I've been listening to Phineas Finn by Trollope and one section is in stereo (only one channel has sound) and the volume is below 80 dB : http://www.archive.org/download/phineas_finn_0808_librivox3/phineasfinn_27_trollope.mp3 . So far it's the only one, I have not (yet) encountered another.

Fixing one file is not a huge undertaking, but the trouble is in re-cataloging of the book I suppose.

Thanks!

https://librivox.org/phinneas-finn-by-anthony-trollope/

Phineas Finn the Irish Member was cataloged 27 August 2008. The volunteer who was MC/Admin had not been around in years.

Please be patient and let me check into it.

David O

Certainly no rush, David. By all means, take your time.

I was just curious whether anything can be done relatively painlessly, or it's a big undertaking to replace derivative files on Archive.

Can you recall a precedent? Has it ever been done to any other tracks?

In general we do not attempt to make old files conform to present day standards. When LV started there was no freely available noise cleaning, microphones were very expensive, proof listening was not part of the process, just to name a few.
The trouble with being a "proof listener" or newbie checker is that you get used to listening for faults , not just for pleasure - I know, I still have to turn the PL in me off when I'm listening for pleasure.
It is possible to do many things but the question is , does this really help our prime directive (see my signature) and the answer is no it wouldn't
Another problem is that Archive has made a number of changes to the way files are handled and displayed so that changing a 9 year old project would cause at least 2 things I can think of not to work as they are meant to.

Anne

tovarisch wrote:Certainly no rush, David. By all means, take your time.

I was just curious whether anything can be done relatively painlessly, or it's a big undertaking to replace derivative files on Archive.

Can you recall a precedent? Has it ever been done to any other tracks?

To answer your questions in reverse order, Yes it has been done, occasionally. If you read through the rest of the posts in Error Reports you will see many requests and a few cases where it was done because an MC determined it to be worth the effort. It is a detailed process and the difficulty varies with each specific situation.

To follow up on what Anne said, we only control part of the process and are dependent on Archive for the rest. Whenever we look at changing something already in the catalog the Archive processing has to be taken into account.

David O

To summarize:

* Yes, it can be done.
* For it to be done we would need (a) a compelling reason and (b) an MC who'd agree to facilitate.
* The compelling-ness of the reason is in the eye of the beholder.
* The original MC for that book is not around, and between two admins who spent time discussing it, one does not perceive it as worth the effort and the other has no opinion.

Did I get all this correctly?

<sigh>

Not fully.
It's not that it is too much work which is what you imply.
It is because we respect people's work.
We respect that the reader has produced the best they are able and were happy with the result the way it is, though I think everyone thinks they would like to have read it better.
We respect that the proof listener has done the best they are able.
And so only in very exceptional circumstances does LibriVox tamper with a reader's file.
So your files won't be improved by anybody who decides they are too fast or that you stumbled over a word or repeated a phrase. We have more checks in the validation process now so stereo files may not get through and volumes are more uniform but history is history.

Anne

It is not that I don't have an opinion. I just like to check and confirm my facts before I get quoted and mis-quoted. I do not think this section needs to be corrected.

This project was produced in Librivox's early formative years. It was started in 2007 when Librivox had only published about 1,000 projects and finished in 2008 when about 1,600 projects were complete. The hardware, software, and procedures have changed quite a bit the almost decade of years between then and now.

We tend to fix errors of omission - missing paragraphs or entire chapters. We do not fix files just to "make them sound better" if they are understandable. The section does stand out a bit from the volumes of the preceding and following chapters, but I found it understandable when listening in order without adjusting the volume on my speakers from the preceding section.

The section you selected does fall below the current volume standards. However, just amplifying the entire recording to increase overall volume will cause portions to clip or exceed the maximum volume. The section you selected is not the only section in this project in stereo. There are many sections that background noise above the level that would be expected today. Were I to, as you suggest, correct this to today's standards I would also have to modifying many other files in this project.

David O

In the order of increasing annoyance:
- Stereo (although by itself never presents a problem),
- Background noise (although by itself rarely presents a problem),
- Low volume (although by itself rarely presents a problem).

However, when you combine two or three, and the stereo only has one channel with audio, the other silent, we have a problem.

You know, it does not matter anymore. It became a moot point as soon as Anne expressed the opinion that it was not going to help our "prime directive".

Have a good evening!

LV's policies have some advantages and disadvantages (as with all policies ... and choices ... in life). The "choice of voice" policy presents another option. One could create another version of Phineas Finn that is up to current standards.

Don

Could you perhaps quote the policy here? I only saw an opinion. Not to be waved away by any means, but just an opinion.