Some ideas for upgrading the WikiLoops player to online mixing...

Those who enjoy coding in Java will certainly understand the benefit of these free APIs...

https://alemangui.github.io/pizzicato/

---

DidierS attached the following image:

---

Hey Didier,
there are similar tools available in JavaScripts AudioContext, which would be the thing to use for in-browser audio manipulation.

Still, I wonder what exactly would want to use that on?
To add a graphic EQ to the player might be somewhat nice, but would you seriously end up tweaking EQs when browsing around checking out some new tracks? Most likely rather not. To me, the need for such tools would arise once I have a track imported in my DAW, but once it is there, I have all the tools at hand.

Maybe I am missing a point here?

If one was to aim at creating a in-browser multitrack DAW like recording tool, integrating sound manipulation would be a must.
I'm not really too fond of the idea because it won't replace a proper DAW, and loading times for imports of multi-track remixes would be brutal on mobile devices, too. That'd be an app to code ;)

---

Hello and thank you for the feedback!

I thought I read somewhere in the very copious forum that it would be interesting if a member who uploaded a track to Wikiloops could be formatted according to a standardized configuration of sound settings which would thus be common to all tracks, thus ensuring quality homogeneous listening on the site not to mention the easy remixing of downloaded tracks.

Some basic mixing treatments could be applied - depending on the musical genre for example -: same volume/gain, frequency adjustment, peak processing, LUFS as offered for example by SoundCloud.

These different treatments could be carried out with or without the intervention of the musician given the technical nature of these skills.

But maybe I was wrong?

---

Use Audacity on line to master a mix before/after uploading in Wikiloops?
[youtube]RQu-UGplbd0?si=1C7LfHAaVEH0Zz2h[/youtube]

---

I don't think it's wise to make a piece of software mandatory in the creative soup we all are in. And repetitive mastering is seldomly beneficial for the quality of the following generation(s) of mix(es). Also maximizing low quality - low volume mixes is probably not always an improvement for those.

And although my mixes usually are quite loud and probably will be turned down by 2 or 3 dB by Spotify's norm, I do believe that limiting in the way those big streaming services do can be beneficial. It may improve in narrowing that difference and smoothing that experience. That's if it's not happening already. By leaving those low mixes alone and only cut the loud ones we might have the best of both worlds? Keep a low threshold for 'beginners' and a ceiling for the (too) loud ones?

Furthermore in my humble opinion should mastering only be done when the (preferably unprocessed) stem is supplied. But hey, it's just my 2 cent opinion. ;)

---