Loudness War!!!!!!

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

Here is a very interesting little tid bit that I found today.

On lower quality speakers this really isn't that noticeable unless played a/b like they have done, BUT, when I play many of my Vinyl Records vs the same album 'digitally remastered' on CD there is a big difference. The Power Station is a perfect example of this. This is one of the reasons why.

Check it out...

Forum

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=26696

Article

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/33549

Video

http://funl.blogspot.com/2007/06/loudness-war.html

Click to read more...

 

[djman37 5,000+ posts]

i had a couple of U2 Cd singles that were clipped to h3ll. BAD recordings. No headroom in digital.

 

[wesl56 10+ year member]

yeah i heard that TV stations use that too... they brodcast the shows in the wider band and then play the commercials in a narrower i guess "compressed" format so they seem much louder than the show u were watching

 

[1loudsuv 10+ year member]

This is exactly what I am getting while listining to a cd. I have to usually turn it up to loud to be able to enjoy the music.

but if both are mastered the same wont cd have the edge?

so pretty much all this is saying is the cd is getting shitty masters.

I know in the hd dvd/blu ray world some get better masters then others.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

This is exactly what I am getting while listining to a cd. I have to usually turn it up to loud to be able to enjoy the music.

I think you're misunderstanding the loudness war. The music is actually louder from the get go as the crest factor (or dynamic range) is reduced. You can't gain or lose any detail by turning your volume up, either, as it's lost.

What's really funny is when they take a quality mastering and re-master it into something worse. It's an ongoing issue rarely discussed outside of the production world.

 

[1loudsuv 10+ year member]

I think you're misunderstanding the loudness war. The music is actually louder from the get go as the crest factor (or dynamic range) is reduced. You can't gain or lose any detail by turning your volume up, either, as it's lost.

No I get what they are talking about, I have to turn it up just to hear certain things. hands down any concert I have on hd dvd or blu ray sounds way better then on cd. Usually with cd I listining to it at volume -45 or so and If I really want to hear all the instruments I have to turn it up to about -30. Now while listning to a concert say on blu ray like NiN I usually have it at -33 or so, and it is not loud at all and sounds very detailed and smooth.

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

Well LIVE is always going to be a whole different animal than studio.

A shit ton of live stuff sucks anus juice... However if you have a REALLY good FOH (Front of House, the guy who mixes the show) guy then it rocks. Primus Hallucino-Genetics is a perfect example of what I am saying. But, live also depends on the band being able to play live as well as their 'over processed' studio sound. Many bands today **** so much that if they had a live DVD it would sound terrible. But, most of the people that listen to those bands really have no clue so, whats the use.

Really actually what is causing this problem is producers and engineers relying so heavily on a compressor. Many people who have worked in the audio industry can hear the compressor 'sound' if you look for it and it amazes me when I listen to a CD and hear the squash sound. It just kills me...

CD may have much more dynamic range than vinyl, but **** vinyl usually uses it.. LAWL...

 

[djman37 5,000+ posts]

yeah i heard that TV stations use that too... they brodcast the shows in the wider band and then play the commercials in a narrower i guess "compressed" format so they seem much louder than the show u were watching

TV STATIONS don't. The commercials' audio is like that, normalized and dynamic range reduced to seem louder. I hate it.

 

[mtlhead 10+ year member]

Well LIVE is always going to be a whole different animal than studio.
A shit ton of live stuff sucks anus juice... However if you have a REALLY good FOH (Front of House, the guy who mixes the show) guy then it rocks. Primus Hallucino-Genetics is a perfect example of what I am saying. But, live also depends on the band being able to play live as well as their 'over processed' studio sound. Many bands today **** so much that if they had a live DVD it would sound terrible. But, most of the people that listen to those bands really have no clue so, whats the use.

Really actually what is causing this problem is producers and engineers relying so heavily on a compressor. Many people who have worked in the audio industry can hear the compressor 'sound' if you look for it and it amazes me when I listen to a CD and hear the squash sound. It just kills me...

CD may have much more dynamic range than vinyl, but **** vinyl usually uses it.. LAWL...

Yea, most producers rely on compressors now...and that "breathing" sound annoys the piss out of me when i hear it. You really need a good mastering engineer, otherwise they'll destroy a GREAT mix. I understand that compressors are needed to get the volume up to a reasonable level..but when it starts to effect the quality of the mix, thats when you know you have a bad mastering engineer.

Vinyl has a dynamic range of 64dB, whereas CDs are 96dB, but when you get digital distortion, it adds odd order harmonics, which gives you that nasty sound, as opposed to the analog (with tubes) distortion where it just gives that extra "bite" which a lot of people want

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

Well Compressors were originally designed to increase the dynamic range.

If you had a PA with less dynamic range than you needed for example you used lets say a 2:1 compressor so that you could match the dynamic range of the mix to the PAs capabilities.

 

[thylantyr 10+ year member]

My first CD player was in 1984, in a high powered, high SQ car audio system, full range of

course, not just boom boom bass like everyone else has.

Right away you can tell the difference between different recordings, some CD's

were bad, some were great.

... and this is news in year 2007 ?

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

lol

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/santa.gif.e1ec9cf2e0a0dd232ad35aa594a126d0.gif

 

[Beat_Dominator 5,000+ posts]

I think I posted a link to one of those 3 articles a few months back.

It's a shame CD has that huge dynamic range capability but these dumbass engineers are limithing it to less than 11dB of dynamic range most of the time!

 

[azbass 5,000+ posts]

I ares louder then teh beat dominator

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

i had a couple of U2 Cd singles that were clipped to h3ll. BAD recordings. No headroom in digital.

What?? No headroom?? The CD format itself has plenty of headroom, alot more than vinyl could ever dream of. It's the morons engineering these CDs that are doing it WRONG !!!

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

Here is a very interesting little tid bit that I found today.
On lower quality speakers this really isn't that noticeable unless played a/b like they have done, BUT, when I play many of my Vinyl Records vs the same album 'digitally remastered' on CD there is a big difference. The Power Station is a perfect example of this. This is one of the reasons why.

One thing to note is that all formats can have bad recordings as much as all can have great recordings. I know for a fact that you have a very nice stand alone CD player which you would NOT own if there were NO good CD recordings. I know you know this but some guys on here might not. The CD format has/had the potential to be head and shoulders above vinyl but sadly this format has not been taken advantage of fully except for a few studios that decided to do it right.

In short: A CD recorded the right way blows away any vinyl recording. IMHO of course.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

Discrete stereo >>> Matrixed stereo