Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Perhaps! But if they don't go below 9, then they really only go to 2, don't they?
Loudness Wars, is the end actually coming?
- Thread starter Cjm75
- Start date
Perhaps! But if they don't go below 9, then they really only go to 2, don't they?
Julf
Facts are our friends
These go to eleven.
So why are you so against this?
Cowbells are a matter of taste, i hate rap music, but a well recorded rap album can sound superb and I would listen to it (once), if you admit freely that you enjoy a natural recording more than a compressed one then surely this is the way to go!!
After all, if it is not loud enough, then how about.......wait for it......turning up the volume a bit????
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
steve_1979
pfm Member
A bit off topic but here's a couple of loudness pictures to make you laugh. 
They're images of the Red Hot Chili Peppers song Parellel Universe from the album Californication. The top one is the 'pre-mastered' studio version and the bottom on is from the retail CD version. The red lines show where it's reached the maximum possible volume and/or gone passed the maximum volume and started clipping.
They're images of the Red Hot Chili Peppers song Parellel Universe from the album Californication. The top one is the 'pre-mastered' studio version and the bottom on is from the retail CD version. The red lines show where it's reached the maximum possible volume and/or gone passed the maximum volume and started clipping.
Paul R
pfm Member
What is a 'natural recording, well mastered'?
And Random Access Memories is very non-fatiguing to listen to. It exemplifies 'well mastered'.
Look at the various Jimmy Page remasterings of Zeppelin albums.
Look at the various Jimmy Page remasterings...
'DR' numbers are not a reliable guide to good sound, they seem relatively insensitive to clipping for example, which is really when things start to sound bad. They do provide a reasonable relative guide to distinct masterings of the same material.
Paul
Julf
Facts are our friends
I am not "so against this", it just seems DR has become another simplistic "bigger numbers must be better" criteria.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Exactly. And even with the same material, comparing DR values between vinyl and digital can be misleading.
ToTo Man
the band not the dog
I agree with everything written in this post.
Chefren
pfm Member
This is not true, for example most pre-installed cars and their audio systems have issues playing material with a moderate or large dynamic range simply due to the background noise when driving. Not to mention streaming is very challenging to do in cars reliably due to mobile network coverage issues.
I'm also not convinced that today's mobile phones and portable headphones are significantly better than the portable CD/MP3 players and portable headphones of yesterday to cope with natural-ish dynamics in recordings
merlin
Avatar changed - Town names deemed offensive.
I would have said that streaming and playback software like iTunes have made the problem worse rather than better.
A mastering engineer can cut a CD 16db louder that he could before digital limiters became popular. Sure it'll resemble a square wave and sound like sh*t but that's a huge average level difference.
Artists, as much as marketing men in suits, will complain about having to turn their work up in the car compared with another CD and if there's something like 10db difference that's subjectively massive.
The problem is that for one track, a single, loud does typically sound better. We don't have the time to get bored so we like loud and punchy. On an album however, that soon becomes tiresome and we switch off, but computer audio and streaming means many never listen to an album in it's entirety. They listen to shuffled tracks or playlists. Now imagine if one track on a playlist is taken from an album that has a superb dynamic range and was cut 6db quieter than the others. It's going to sound rubbish in the playlist isn't it?
So the answer would be to have the compression system built into the playback software or hardware. A button marked "playlist" or "party". This would allow artists and mastering engineers to master albums for diversity and quality without concern for comparative performance. And if you are going to compress the signal in the domestic setting, then surely starting with 24/192 resolution makes sense?
A mastering engineer can cut a CD 16db louder that he could before digital limiters became popular. Sure it'll resemble a square wave and sound like sh*t but that's a huge average level difference.
Artists, as much as marketing men in suits, will complain about having to turn their work up in the car compared with another CD and if there's something like 10db difference that's subjectively massive.
The problem is that for one track, a single, loud does typically sound better. We don't have the time to get bored so we like loud and punchy. On an album however, that soon becomes tiresome and we switch off, but computer audio and streaming means many never listen to an album in it's entirety. They listen to shuffled tracks or playlists. Now imagine if one track on a playlist is taken from an album that has a superb dynamic range and was cut 6db quieter than the others. It's going to sound rubbish in the playlist isn't it?
So the answer would be to have the compression system built into the playback software or hardware. A button marked "playlist" or "party". This would allow artists and mastering engineers to master albums for diversity and quality without concern for comparative performance. And if you are going to compress the signal in the domestic setting, then surely starting with 24/192 resolution makes sense?
Julf
Facts are our friends
Have you ever came across a recording where the source material would have a dynamic range exceeding 90 dB (before any compression)?
I dont think it is the fact that people are seeking the most DR they can get from an album, although it certainly helps, it is not life and death.
And infact I would agree with you that some music can sound very good when compressed and limitered to appropriate levels.
The problem stems from the ongoing battle that record producers have been having to make their tracks sound a little bit louder than the next track in an effort to sell more albums. When compression and limitering is taken to excess, for me it can really makes the music difficult to listen to. I have many an album which although I really enjoy the music, it becomes a task to finish listening to the album.
And I would like to throw this into the mix: While Im sure most artists have full creative input on their albums, once they sign a contract with a record producer, I would think that in most cases final mastering is not under their complete control. The agenda of the record company takes over, as does the contract they have signed.
Surely making the album sound as loud as possible would not be something that any quality musician would strive to achieve? Is the whole point not to produce a track that sounds as good as possible, and makes your hairs on the back of your neck stand up on end.......Not one that you can hear from space
As I said before, why can't engineers simply master the albums so they sound as good as they can, without taking them to the limits of compression and loudness, leave the dynamic range intact, and put the playback choice back in the hands of the consumer/broadcaster.
Surely this will mean the best of both worlds for everyone involved, no one is on the stiff end of the deal if we could get to that point
Win, Win!
Julf
Facts are our friends
One reason is that we have a generation of mastering engineers (and buying audience) that has learned that loud is good, and that is how it is supposed to sound. Some engineers actually take pride in how they can take a recording that sounds "amateurish" (I guess we would call it "natural"), and turn it into a Very Loud professional product.
merlin
Avatar changed - Town names deemed offensive.
Actually no. 85db was the largest dynamic range I've heard. I just say hey it's there, what's the problem in having it. You say hey it's there, we don't need it, get rid of it.
darrenyeats
pfm Member
Exactly. This is why it's called the Loudness War, it involves many people over a long period.
Im not saying loud is good, but lets say for a minute thats what you wanted to listen to....there is a vast difference between a professional well mastersd product, and one that has been taken to extremes, with a waveform that looks like a big fat sausage!
Like that chilli peppers example above
zarniwoop
hoopy frood
The article linked to in post #9 suggests that with loudness normalisation on playback highly compressed music will suffer in comparison with a "natural" master.
Eeeeh these young people today like all this loud pop music/you can't hear yourself think/its a wonder they aren't all deaf/why can't they just play something nice/its not like our kind of music...
What, it isn't what you call rock'n'roll? I should stick to Pink Floyd sweepings-up, wrinkly Kate and Ferry. That way you can avoid any exposure to anything not nice.
What, it isn't what you call rock'n'roll? I should stick to Pink Floyd sweepings-up, wrinkly Kate and Ferry. That way you can avoid any exposure to anything not nice.