Would love to invite authors to join the discussion. 
@Nonzerobot @SmartSounds @EightBallAudio @Sam-Stone @Hyperprod @fatcatmusic @YOUR-FX @Turpak @FirstNote @Phantomatic @Luca_Clerici @VsevolodPankratov @Emsti-Pro @DelicateSound @DavidPinks
Come on guys, share your thoughts on this important topic! We all will benefit from this standard. Or maybe we won’t? Tell us!
We can’t be heard without expressing our opinions!
Totally agree with you. In some categories such as dubstep, EDM, pop we need to use some LUFS\RMS standard. This can improve the average quality of electronic music a lot.
Well, I absolutely agree that this would be great… I’m all for more dynamic mixes. Seems like it would probably mean some serious effort on Envato’s side, since all preview files (existing and new) would have to be normalized automatically. But still, I’d support the idea.
On the other hand - if we’re talking about improvements to the AJ experience for buyers - I think there are other, maybe even more pressing matters. One in particular that comes to mind is the ridiculously poor representation of versions (edits, alt. mixes etc.) on the AJ item pages.
I mean: I think versions can play an essential role in a buyer’s decision to purchase a track. But all we can do right now to get them to listen to our alternative versions is to make a list in our description, referencing a timecode in the AJ player to which the buyer then has to manually skip… That’s just poor UX.
At least we should have the ability to put links into our descriptions that let the AJ player jump automatically to the right timecode position. Just like on YouTube…
Example (see the first comment on the YouTube page):
Sorry for highjacking your topic. I now realize I should maybe open my own thread. 
But again: I think LUFS normalization is a good idea but I don’t see Envato moving on this soon and I think there are other, more pressing issues to be solved regarding the AJ buyer UX that could be implemented more easily.
Great idea, for sure.
Envato should automatize some processes. They have resourses for innovations, I believe. This would bring much objectivity to the market.
Hello AudioTrend!
Of course this is very important. When you listen to two identical tracks (the one that louder sounds better to you) Many customers are captivating despite the musical component and buy tracks that dully sound louder. Speaking of personal experience, if I created (a new experimental) track, in order for it to be sold I should make it very loud, because among the competing tracks it will sound quiet. And this can lead to a failure of sales.
Here is my opinion. Thank you!
I hate the race with loudness! It’s been a long time and not once discussed this topic … like many others … unfortunately nothing happens … we continue to hope
@Turpak
Thank you for being here and supporting the thread, mate!
@Sam-Stone
Hi, Sam! Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
I totally agree with the importance of markers for versions.
However, I would say that the benefits provided by LUFS normalization are probably more serious:
There is a cool thread about AJ player version markers by the way! Its author made a great job in that direction and already got a ready-to-use code (if I got it right). So you could probably help this idea to be heard by supporting his thread! It is not really cool that it got lost.
@Qwerty_Musical
Thank you for joining!
Definitely support your thinking. I also think that Envato is 100% able to make this idea come to life with their resources. We even provided the idea of how they can save on processing. So that all the processing done by users. It is not a problem.
@SmartSounds
Thanks for your opinion, mate! This is really important.
People actually feel that louder is better. Even producers, musicians are often fooled by that. So you are completely right!
We should stand out by making a great music, not by boosting the loudness.
@StudioEtude
Glad you joined the thread, mate!
Yes, I see what you mean.
But I strongly believe that we can be heard by making this thread huge. All authors should express their opinions on the subject. It will extremely boost our chances to make this important and big change!
“we continue to hope”
And these words are important!
If we will do nothing, nothing is what we will get. So I can’t stress enough how important to make this thread grow!
I think they could make a contract with some great mastering company like iZotope, which would make some kind of mastering-finalazing software or online-servise for junglers.
I don’t think that this should be very expensive. iZotope already has all the best technologies to make this real and realized really in hi-quality.
But this is just my unqualified humble opinion…
Hi there, here is an interesting read about how Spotify´s applies Loudness Normalization to create balance among tracks from different artists.
TLDR; "Tracks are delivered to the app with their original volume levels, and positive/negative gain compensation is only applied to a track while it’s playing. "
Thank you very much for the invitation, AudioTrend! I carefully studied this topic. Honestly, I do not like it when my tracks sound too loud. I do not see any reason to pump up my tracks for customers who eventually use it for Youtube, Vimeo, etc.
But I support you and your proposal for normalization. A single standard on AJ would save the buyer from the fader and unexpected “sound explosions”. But will this increase our sales? 
This is another question.
Until now, I’m waiting for AudioJungle to add a watermark in automatic mode, as it has long been implemented on other audio stocks. 
And also I want to see the total number of listening to my tracks for the week, month and year. Not everyone separately, but all at once. But maybe this is another topic and I need to create a separate topic.
With joy I support you! Great idea for everyone! We must be heard!
@Qwerty_Musical
iZotope is a great company, no doubt.
However, LUFS normalization is a very simple process. All you have to do is to measure volume with any LUFS meter and turn the level down. There is really no need for any complex technology offered by iZotope Which is I great, it’s that simple!
@MeGustaMusic
Thank you for the great article! Didn’t know it existed
I think it is cool to do such normalization in real time, for their purposes. But probably it could be a better idea to provide already normalized previews on Audiojungle. Our buyers are often downloading previews to compare them side-by-side inside projects. That’s where authors may benefit from making things louder. What do you think about it?
@VsevolodPankratov
Glad to see you here!
“But will this increase our sales?”
I think that not everything is supposed to increase sales directly. We are making things better and more comfortable for everyone. Eventually, if buyers feel better searching music on AJ, they will tend to visit it more than other sites (where they feel less comfortable). At least, I believe that this is why many streaming services have done that.
Agree with you on the watermark. The automatic process would make it easier for authors. However, I think that adding the watermark is quite a simple procedure. At least, it doesn’t make me destroy my music as loudness maximization does…
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and supporting the idea, Vsevolod!
We must continue to grow this thread until we heard!
It is not really hard for authors to express their opinion here.
While benefits we will get from LUFS normalization are tremendous, in my opinion.
Better music quality - More pleasant music creation - Smooth and comfortable experience for buyers. How is it not awesome? 
I think it all worth leaving a post in this thread.
it seems like you are supporting this as much as if you where a disappointed client, like you are the buyer and don’t enjoy the system…I agree in a system that makes justice for all, of course , that buyers listening experience is the best, that’s nice and it would be higher technology, artificial intelligence (thanks Chrome for auto spelling because I wouldn’t know how to spell that ) but thats not the most important thing here for me, the thing is why the sales gone down? 
: .
H mate! Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
There are more advantages to this feature. More of them were described in this thread earlier.
Actually, sales are always down. Or up. It’s different for different authors. Depends on what we are uploading and probably some other things. But this is what is happening all the time.
“higher technology, artificial intelligence”
I would like to emphasize that LUFS normalization is a pretty simple process, nothing hi-tech, generally.
I got it. This is not a very important thing to you. But it is not so for many authors and buyers.
Most authors are not enjoying destroying the dynamics of their music when boosting loudness to compete with others. We want to change it. Would we like to enjoy making our music more? There is no doubt. I think that only that makes LUFS (or ReplayGain) normalization a must.
Buyer experience. If nothing annoys visitors (such as huge differences in loudness) and they feel good on the site, there are more chances that they will gladly come back. More visitors = more buyers? I think yes.
Of course, there are more factors contributing to a client’s satisfaction, it is a cumulative thing. Some factors have more weight, some less.
Are negative emotions caused by sudden changes in volume can be a serious factor?
I think that yes. Giants like Youtube and Spotify would say the same thing.
“but thats not the most important thing here for me, the thing is why the sales gone down?”
This can be discussed forever because different people think differently and prioritize things differently. A more important question would be is it beneficial and should we go for it?
I perfectly see your point. We all would love to get a quick immediate boost in sales. I would definitely want to!
But this change is directed towards long-term sales increase for all authors, as I see it
Why:
So this why I think we should make this as soon as possible.
Interesting topic @AudioTrend
There are some great ideas. Could normalization be coded into the app that Envato uses to play back the previews some how?
I don’t know if this was an intented joke? (about loudness - oh well 
So I am all with you on the subject. I would love to be able to stop at -14 LUFS… but if I do so, well, you know, in the hiphop category, people would instantly jump to the next song, feeling that mine is really not energetic enough!
So yes, a kind of normalization would be really good.
It could be a check after upload. If not within the limits => rejected.
Then… what about the hundreds of thousands of already uploaded tracks…
Yes man, that idea is way more easier. I just wanted to show how big streaming companies are addressing the subject in a conscious way in order to enhance the experience of the customers. Hope this to be on envato radar (among copycats protection, false/duplicated accounts detection and other toxic stuff in the jungle)
I totally agree with this idea of automatic LUFS normalization… ear fatigue (and squashed dynamics do that) makes people more crazy than they’re already! Good idea, hope AJ will implement it soon!
Totally agree. It should only be on the preview, as the big problem here is the squashing/overcompression aimed to “impress” the listener when evaluating/confronting the tracks.
It must not be left to reviewers, neither to check and eventually reject, nor to modify the file(s), because all the previous published tracks would be left out of this process.
@envato.com has the possibility to investigate how Spotify is doing it, and implement an API that does the same inside the preview player.
@criskcracker
Thank you for joining!
It definitely can be done
Spotify do exactly this, as we can see from the article shared by MeGustaMusic
@frozenjazz
Haha it was not an intended joke 
I see what you mean. Loudness war in its purest form!
I think there are many ways to deal with already uploaded tracks.
automatic processing by Envato (the easiest way for authors)
asking authors to process their previews
something similar to the theoretical “AJ LUFS Normalizer” can be used, as I suggested in this post:
★ LUFS Normalization for All Audiojungle Tracks a.k.a. How To Stop Destroying Your Music?
(can be not too easy for authors with huge portfolio)
real-time on-site level changer (Spotify do that)
(this is cool but I’m afraid that loudness can still be a factor because buyers will download and compare not-normalized previews)
Probably there are some other ways
Got you, mate.
Envato definitely should care about the things you mentioned!
@davedondee
Glad to see you in the thread, mate!
Absolutely agree with everything you said!
@pietrogirardi
Thank you for joining and sharing your thoughts!
I also think that this is not the best idea to let reviewers do the normalization. You named the first reason and this is solid. And the second reason is that loudness analysis and normalization is a boring and non-creative process. Reviewers are people and they should do what is interesting to them! Just like we, authors, do!
I think that Spotify implementation is attractive. But maybe it is not fully suitable for Audiojungle. My concern is that buyers will download non-normalized previews and compare them side-by-side inside their projects. Louder tracks would have an advantage.
It would be perfect if this on-site player could generate an mp3 with a desired LUFS for a client to download. Makes sense if we want to allow a buyer to choose a target LUFS in Account settings (like Spotify do). Or an option to turn normalization off. But if we want only normalized previews (at -13db, let’s say) to be available, then it’s probably easier to process previews once an for all. What would you say?
@AudioTrend it definitely makes sense, but I do not agree about letting the customer choose a target LUFS, for the following reasons:
it might generate a bit of confusion. Consider that most of Audiojungle customers are not familiar with the concept of “loudness war”, let alone the LUFS standard. I think what AJ needs is a very simple way to normalize loudness throughout the website.
it might be harder / too complex to realize (but I’m not a programmer so I’m not really aware of this)
Imagine this scenario: a customer choose 3 “normalized” tracks, he downloads them and put them on 3 temp tracks in Premiere.
a) if the downloaded previews are normalized, he chooses one, buy licence, download the non-watermarked version (which has a different loudness value), replace it in the project and finds out he has to remix / rebalance music and speech/sfx. From a customer standpoint this could be pretty upsetting.
b) if the normalization occurs only in the online player the customer can download a preview that will sound exactly as the purchased version.
Hope this makes sense, let me know what you think