Music Into Noise: The Destructive Use Of Dynamic Range Compression part 2

funny, I was thinking about this thread when I read the RS article last week.

http://www.irdial.com/scum.htm

That's a rubbish article on the Irdial site - look, look, Sony are now agreeing with us that CD is crap! Yes, because they're trying to sell a new format, you divs.

haha it also rails against 44.1 PCM and calls it unlistenable, then encourages people to illegally download (I assume) MP3s, as if they sounded any better.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17777619/the_death_of_high_fidelity

Hahaha, someone beat me to it!

The answer to this and the post about Virgin and other record stores closing is the same: Ban all iPods, iPhones and similar!

geir OTM

Burn down churches and gas Jews while you're at it?

http://turnmeup.org/

That's ancient, Geir, and been posted before.

I also think you don't actually understand this phenomenon AT ALL or you wouldn't be so fucking dumbstruck by the likes of Coldplay. You LIKE compressed, shiny, smooth, undynamic music. You fucking love it.

You waste. You little man.

the vinyl vs. CD of "ga ga ga ga ga" by spoon still blows my mind how different that record sounds, i honestly cannot listen to the CD, but it sounds good on vinyl

Still tempted to pick it up on vinyl.

Yeah, it sounds amazing on CD so I'm wondering how much better it'll sound on vinyl.

i mean, it's a well produced record....i just think there's so much more space and less of that harsh hi-end on LP

Going back and listening to A Series Of Sneaks shows up Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga massively; the songs are stronger, arguably, but ASOS is just so much more pleasurable (on CD at least) to listen to.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/personal_tech/article5847674.ece

Effortless slip from one sort of "compression" to another midway through that article without any attempt to explain the difference. Kind of expected really.

He suggests that iPods may have changed our perception of music, and that as young people become increasingly familiar with the sound of digital tracks the more they grow to like it.

He compared the phenomenon to the continued preference of some people for music from vinyl records heard through a gramophone. “Some people prefer that needle noise — the noise of little dust particles that create noise in the grooves,” he said. “I think there’s a sense of warmth and comfort in that.”

Cannot fathom why anyone would listen to vinyl because it sounds like crap. I also don't see any correlation between the two "phenomenons" he points out.

What he doesn't realize is that except for music nerds most people don't give a shit how well their music sounds enough to tell the difference anyway.

Cannot fathom why anyone would listen to vinyl because it sounds like crap
Badly phrased;What I meant to say is I don't believe there are people out there who listen to vinyl for the "noise" or whatever.

also it often does sound like crap. well pressed records are harder to find than most people are prepared to admit

A lot of recent records have often been mixed differently for vinyl. Then, why don't they just use the vinyl mix on the CD version too? It will probably sound better than the version mixed for mp3 players.

A lot of recent records have often been mixed differently for vinyl. Then, why don't they just use the vinyl mix on the CD version too? It will probably sound better than the version mixed for mp3 players.

From the comments:

Encoded at high bitrates, I'm not so sure there's much apparent difference between a digital copy and a CD. What is grating, as the report says, is the brash loudness and lack of dynamic range in new recordings.

Actually this is kind of OTM. I have also noticed that - even if they are just as loud - remasters of old 70s/80s albums usually sound less flat than the recent ones. It isn't only about making the music louder, it seems today's music is compressed even more than just what it has to be as a result of getting louder.

But there is a backlash against this thing now, at least in part of the music scene. A lot of fans reacted very much against the clipping on the recent Metallica. Also in the trend indicated in my thread about Acts with LESS compression on their most recent release than the one before

“Now there’s a constant race to be louder than other people’s records,” said Stephen Street, who has produced records for Blur, the Cranberries and Kaiser Chiefs. “What you are hearing is that everything is being squared off and is losing that level of depth and clarity. I’d hate to think that anything I’d slaved over in the studio is only going to be listened to on a bloody iPod.”

God forbid we hear a Kaiser Chiefs album on anything less than pristine, crackly vinyl!!!

Ken Nelson, producer of Coldplay’s first two albums, said: “An example of overcompression is the last Green Day album. If you try listening to it from beginning to end it’s hard work. After three songs you need to put something on that’s been recorded in the 70s.”

Because those first two Coldplay albums are shining examples of proper, listenable production... right???

The only Coldplay album that has obviously way too much compression is the third one. The first two are not at all bad sounding.

Makes this cd labeling system a bit difficult

http://lovelypackage.com/music-cd-labeling-system/

While we're on the topic, has anyone heard the vinyl pressing of "What's the Story (Morning Glory)"? Is it mastered any better than the CD?

A tru fan would just own it on both media.

More of the same:

http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/03/the-sizzling-sound-of-music.html

While we're on the topic, has anyone heard the vinyl pressing of "What's the Story (Morning Glory)"? Is it mastered any better than the CD?

I sincerely doubt so. Oasis want to sound that way. They even sound that way live. So that is their own wish, not some wild idea by some guy in their record company.

I've said this time and time again, Geir; most artists who make big loud compressed records are NOT made to do so by "some guy in their record company" - they choose to do so themselves because they're dickheads. Show me the evidence otherwise; I researched this, wrote about it extensively. It's not an Artist vs The Man dichotomy; it's uneducated artists not knowing what they're doing.

so you're in agreement!

Argh, no; Geir always blames the record company guy, hence why he's used Oasis as a counter-example in this example.

OK, gotcha.

Where are 65DOS when you need 'em, eh?

Actually, I'd be well up for a new 65DOS album. I'd imagine they're currently working on it.

it's uneducated artists not knowing what they're doing

underlined.
i have discussed the excessive compression issue with a few bedroom producers (one was signed to 4ad !), and the feedback was 'i know little of that side of things'.

Why are people so fucking bothered about HDTV when they don't give a shit about stereo sound.

because more people watch tv than sit around listening to music?

Give a perfectly sensible answer, why don't you.

xpost
true but i don't think that's really the thing.

just coming from video games and the way it operates, it's been my opinion that one of the reasons that the music industry has suffered more than others (aside from the obvious -- small data footprint), is that while games and movies have generally moved towards better fidelity - both audio and visual fidelity - the music industry has pushed in the opposite direction. it's ridiculous. there's absolutely no reason for things to sound worse than they did 20 years ago, but that's absolutely the case...just another way that i feel devalues music for people, even if they don't actively realize that everything sounds sort of grating and tinny, i think there's a lingering feeling of cheapness about how a lot of stuff sounds...ie dylan's famous quote "it ain't worth nothin' anyway" wrt file sharing.

I think that encapsulates my worldview pretty neatly. And depressingly.

Why has this happened?

"there's absolutely no reason for things to sound worse than they did 20 years ago"

Except there is actually a very good reason why they do (hint: it's called convenience.)

The bit about iPods sounding worse than cassette tapes is challoping of the highest order.

none of the music i like sounds grating or tinny to my ears

Except there is actually a very good reason why they do (hint: it's called convenience.)

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:53 PM (12 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

when I can easily download stuff on Xbox live that's as complex as say a Fallout expansion pack or GTA Lost and the Damned you meant to tell me that shitty MP3s are a necessity?

flatscreen tvs are way worse than crt oldies imho.

btw I look forward to the future of lossless digital music with actual quality servers, we're just stuck in this hellish period right now

The bit about iPods sounding worse than cassette tapes is challoping of the highest order.

― Hreidarsson The Storm (Matt DC), Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:00 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

cassettes (and 8 tracks) are sort of a contradiction, but still right now the average person's little bookshelf CD stereo system of 15 years ago sounds way better than their ipod dock now.

flatscreen tvs are way worse than crt oldies imho.

― FREE DOM AND ETHAN (special guest stars mark bronson), Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:07 PM (40 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

what? no.

"when I can easily download stuff on Xbox live that's as complex as say a Fallout expansion pack or GTA Lost and the Damned you meant to tell me that shitty MP3s are a necessity?"

So you download lossless stuff to your iPod?