You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
Now online (1)
dariusgriffin
...and 392 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614081
Today 1
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
Modern CD mastering practices - "Loudness War"
 

offline Vin3islih from United Kingdom on 2007-05-28 13:54 [#02088389]
Points: 1066 Status: Regular



[quote]Just about every CD released now is horribly
mastered. This is due to the so called "loudness war". If
you've never heard of it then here's a video explaining what
it is and the negative effects it has on music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ [/quote]

Has anyone here heard about all this? I have analysed a
selection of my CD's from the early 90's compared to now,
and there's definitely a point to it. Today's discs are
mastered too loudly and lack any dynamic range (quiet to
loud parts) it all sounds loud. The idea being that the
music can 'grab' your attention by just souding loud as fuck
on the radio... The problem is especially prevalent in rock
music, with the worst offender being 'Stadium
Arcadium',which sounds shit. It also has noticable digital
clipping all over it, totally over-compressed.

Intriguingly and unsurprisingly, the 'vinyl' equivalent
releases are mastered properly. A vinyl-rip of Stadium
Arcadium has been doing the rounds, which sounds great, not
over-amped and lots of dynamic range. Also Arcade Fire's
'Funeral' album sounds better on vinyl.

http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/weekly_article/imper
There's a long article about it here for those interested...
fect-sound-forever.htm



 

offline oscillik from the fires of orc on 2007-05-28 13:55 [#02088391]
Points: 7746 Status: Regular



funnily enough CD's are (or at least were) the prevailing
commecial format

that's the music industry mate


 

offline Vin3islih from United Kingdom on 2007-05-28 13:59 [#02088393]
Points: 1066 Status: Regular



I'm not disputing popularity of the CD format... I'm
disputing why they are knowingly mastered so shit? At the
least, there should be uniformity with vinyl.


 

offline sheffieldbleep from Sheffield (United Kingdom) on 2007-05-28 14:03 [#02088396]
Points: 2466 Status: Lurker



I agree. A lot of new stuff (mainly pop shit) are mastering
to loud, they probably think they'll stand a better chance
of getting on the radio 1 play list.


 

offline isnieZot from pooptown (Belgium) on 2007-05-28 14:04 [#02088397]
Points: 4949 Status: Lurker



that's because the consumer wants things loud. louder =
better for the consumer. they are just following demand.

and why vinyl is mastered correctly is because vinyl has
limitations. if for example your bass frequencies aren't in
the center it is possible that the needle will jump of the
record.
that doesn't happen with CD's. but there are lots of other
stuff you have to keep in mind when mastering for vinyl.


 

offline futureimage from buy FIR from Juno (United Kingdom) on 2007-05-28 14:06 [#02088398]
Points: 6427 Status: Lurker



Yeah heard about it many times, it's shit. That's another
reason why vinyl's better.


 

offline goDel from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2007-05-28 14:06 [#02088399]
Points: 10225 Status: Lurker | Followup to Vin3islih: #02088389



isn't it ironic. at first cds were meant to sound exactly as
the real thing, and now we have to fall back again on vinyl
to hear the real music instead of that compressed crap
that's released these days.


 

offline Vin3islih from United Kingdom on 2007-05-28 14:12 [#02088402]
Points: 1066 Status: Regular



The two links I posted are messed up- fixed:-
Loudness war youtube vid
Stylus Mag Article


 

offline jkd from Twitch City (Canada) on 2007-05-28 14:17 [#02088404]
Points: 1138 Status: Lurker | Followup to Vin3islih: #02088402



Stylus Mag Article (fixed link)


 

offline jkd from Twitch City (Canada) on 2007-05-28 14:23 [#02088405]
Points: 1138 Status: Lurker



Depending on the style of music, heavy compression can make
it sound way better.

Here's an interview where Daft Punk talk about using
compression. LAZY_TITLE



 

offline stilaktive from a place on 2007-05-28 14:27 [#02088406]
Points: 3162 Status: Lurker



blame canada. and clark.


 

offline jkd from Twitch City (Canada) on 2007-05-28 14:28 [#02088407]
Points: 1138 Status: Lurker



Sometimes too much dynamic range can be annoying. For
example, Mogwai - Young Team. That album has crazy dynamic
range, where the quiet parts are very quiet, which makes the
loud parts seem extremely loud.

This is cool if you've got your system cranked. But if you
just want to listen to the album at a reasonable volume, you
can't even hear the quiet parts.



 

offline jkd from Twitch City (Canada) on 2007-05-28 14:31 [#02088408]
Points: 1138 Status: Lurker



I think the heavy compression on MSTRKRFT - The Looks works
well. Makes it really banging and in your face.

On the other hand, I do notice my ears get tired listening
to heavily compressed stuff for long periods.

I don't know, it's a complicated issue. I don't think you
can say "compression is evil" in general, but the articles
do have a point.



 

offline Vin3islih from United Kingdom on 2007-05-28 14:40 [#02088409]
Points: 1066 Status: Regular | Followup to jkd: #02088407



But equally you now have the option to just switch up the
volume to hear it rather than hearing a compressed
approximation at low volume as demonstrated in the video. I
guess compression has it's benefits and obviously suits some
artists but for me, the cons outweight the pros by a HUGE
margin.


 

online dariusgriffin from cool on 2007-05-28 15:15 [#02088413]
Points: 12423 Status: Regular



Compression is great, it's to the 2000s what reverb was to
the 80s.


 

offline Vin3islih from United Kingdom on 2007-05-28 15:16 [#02088414]
Points: 1066 Status: Regular



But reverb was shit...I hate that shitty 80's reverb sound.



 

online dariusgriffin from cool on 2007-05-28 15:24 [#02088416]
Points: 12423 Status: Regular



They're just trends, signs of time, you should appreciate
them as this. It's another aesthetic, not something better
or worse. Just as realistic sound is also another aesthetic,
and shouldn't be considered as an absolute ideal.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2007-05-28 15:34 [#02088423]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to jkd: #02088408



Why not? I avoid compression like the plague.


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2007-05-28 16:08 [#02088438]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Haven't we already dealt with this in two or three earlier
threads?


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2007-05-28 16:09 [#02088440]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #02088423 | Show recordbag



I use it as an effect. It's great for faking whispering,
lo-fi'ing pianos, etc.


 

offline CS2x from London (United Kingdom) on 2007-05-28 20:12 [#02088488]
Points: 5079 Status: Lurker | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02088440



Yeah. You can do very interesting things with chains of
compression on odd attack/release, gain, threshold, etc.
settings.


 

offline OK on 2007-05-29 00:42 [#02088510]
Points: 4791 Status: Lurker



Í´ve read about it before. well they should do this only
to singles. how much control does the artist have over how a
record is mastered?

I think dynamic range is veyr important part of a
composition. and mastering should aim at leaving it there.


 


Messageboard index