Avoiding the Loudness War?

[gasolin]

What is wrong with the volume knob on your amps anyway?

Why don't you turn down these loud albums.

OMG *help*

You may as well try and explain this to your spaniel, greater chance of him understanding...*good*

Stop it Dave - it's a perfectly reasonable stance.

I have many CDs, some of the older ones were replacements for some vinyl tracks I owned.

Tracks can be louder without the upper and lower bits clipped.

I myself when recording vinyl to CD raise the level as the vinyl was eq'd too low.

'Off the wall' by Michael Jackson and Earth, Wind and Fire's 'Let's Grove' being a couple examples.

What I'm asking is what's the real argument.

There a poor recordings on every format - I always felt finding a sweet sounding album/track amongst the noise was part of the joy of hifi.

The loudness issue isn't just about clipping. It doesn't need to be clipped to suffer from heavy compression.

What you are doing with the recording level when recording from vinyl to CD isn't the same thing, it's just boosting the overall level as a turntable has a much lower output than a CD Player. All you are doing is matching this up. The difference between the peaks and troughs on the record will be as they were, you'll just need to playback at a lower volume setting on your amp.

The DR scale is all about mesuring the difference between peaks and troughs in db on a recording. The lower the number the less difference in volume there is between the peaks and troughs. On a digital format this usually means everything is maxed up to 0db from start to finish with no variation in volume and therefore lacking in dynamics.

You don't need to boost a vinly you record on to a cd since there is a miss match between the ouput from a cd player and amp and therefore you can't use the volume knob more then to 10 or 11 '0 clock before distortion, that's why a TT sounds different,one of the reasons is that you can use the volume knob over a wider range befor reaching max levels

https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=20m38s

 

[MrReaper182]

Why does every new album Rick Rubin works as the producer on have to stuffer from the stupid loudness thing? It never used to be that way. The hip-hop albums I own that he was the producer on from the early to mid 80's sound great (always makes me giggle that a hillbilliy like him help bring hip-hop to the mainstream) and Slayer's reign in blood which he was also the producer on is great sounding.

 

[gasolin]

What is wrong with the volume knob on your amps anyway?

Why don't you turn down these loud albums.

OMG *help*

You may as well try and explain this to your spaniel, greater chance of him understanding...*good*

Stop it Dave - it's a perfectly reasonable stance.

I have many CDs, some of the older ones were replacements for some vinyl tracks I owned.

Tracks can be louder without the upper and lower bits clipped.

I myself when recording vinyl to CD raise the level as the vinyl was eq'd too low.

'Off the wall' by Michael Jackson and Earth, Wind and Fire's 'Let's Grove' being a couple examples.

What I'm asking is what's the real argument.

There a poor recordings on every format - I always felt finding a sweet sounding album/track amongst the noise was part of the joy of hifi.

The loudness issue isn't just about clipping. It doesn't need to be clipped to suffer from heavy compression.

What you are doing with the recording level when recording from vinyl to CD isn't the same thing, it's just boosting the overall level as a turntable has a much lower output than a CD Player. All you are doing is matching this up. The difference between the peaks and troughs on the record will be as they were, you'll just need to playback at a lower volume setting on your amp.

The DR scale is all about mesuring the difference between peaks and troughs in db on a recording. The lower the number the less difference in volume there is between the peaks and troughs. On a digital format this usually means everything is maxed up to 0db from start to finish with no variation in volume and therefore lacking in dynamics.

You don't need to boost a vinly you record on to a cd since thers is a miss match between the ouput from a cd player and amp and therefore you can't use the volume knob more then to 10 or 11 '0 clock before distortion, that's why a TT sounds different,one of the reasons is that you can use the volume knob over a wider range befor reaching max levels

https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=20m38s

I know you don't need to boost the recording level to record onto a CD. You could quite easily record it at exactly the same level it comes off the record. It is Thomson who was talking about boosting his recording level from vinyl to CD and I was only pointing out this is not the same thing as DR compression.

I actually prefer to boost the recording level when recording from vinyl to CD as I latter rip it to iTunes. Then when my vinyl tracks are played back amongst tracks of digital origin in my iTunes playlists there is no dramatic difference in volume level.

Ohhh i see

I know how loud or low you record a lp to a cd doesn't change the the dynamic compression, it just changes how much you most move the volume knob to achieve a certain level,spl

When listening to lp's recorded on to a cd or to itunes, why not make it easier and use tidal hifi?

 

[gasolin]

Why does every new album Rick Rubin works as the producer on have to stuffer from the stupid loudness thing? It never used to be that way. The hip-hop albums I own that he was the producer on from the early to mid 80's sound great (always makes me giggle that a hillbilliy like him help bring hip-hop to the mainstream) and Slayer's reign in blood is also great sounding.

Mabye he is half deaf or that's how the artists like it,want it to sound like

 

[Covenanter]

What is wrong with the volume knob on your amps anyway?

Why don't you turn down these loud albums.

OMG *help*

You may as well try and explain this to your spaniel, greater chance of him understanding...*good*

That's very cruel but I did laugh out loud.

Chris

 

[lindsayt]

Ok....listening to Pharrell Williams 'Girl'....

That DR data base is rubbish and should not be used to assess the quality of anything....it sounds perfectly fine - the Neptunes usually do good quality productions.

I have to go put it back before the daughter notices it's missing...... *secret*

'Happy' still sounds superb and 'Come Get it Bae too.....

OK, I'll buy the vinyl version of Girl (with a light green DR of 12).

You bring your CD version round (with a red DR of 6). We'll play both - level matched roughly according to the average volume.

And we'll see which sounds better.

I know which one I'd be betting on.

 

[davedotco]

I didn't say that a DR range of 12 equated to 12 db did I? Or any other number you want to pull out of the air.

I said it is a measurement of the difference between the peaks and troughs in a recording. That IS correct. I have not implied that the numbers quoted are actual decibel levels.

You can be pedantic if you choose, but my explanation in layman's terms to simplify it for another poster is not as you say "nothing of the sort". It is what I have simplified.

No, it is not.

The DR number is an arbitary number, it is related to the relationship between the average level and the peak levels. The measurement of the 'troughs' as you call them is not attempted, it is pretty difficult to do that anyway so we have no idea of the real dynamic range of the recording.

What the DR number relates to is how compressed the recording sounds which on digital recordings effectively means how loud it sounds. The same recording mastered onto vinyl often shows a higher DR number because there is a limit on the average level that can be cut onto vinyl. The idea that a vinyl recording which has a higher DR number than the CD version has a higher dynamic range is not always true, due primarily to the higher noise floor on vinyl playback. The real advantage of vinyl in this respect is the avoidance of digital clipping at the mastering stage.

Many people (not you perhaps, but others certainly) seem to believe that the DR database gives you the actual dynamic range of a recording in dB, it doesn't, which is why I brought actual dynamic range, in dBs, into the discusion to try and explain that.

 

[MeanandGreen]

What is wrong with the volume knob on your amps anyway?

Why don't you turn down these loud albums.

OMG *help*

You may as well try and explain this to your spaniel, greater chance of him understanding...*good*

Stop it Dave - it's a perfectly reasonable stance.

I have many CDs, some of the older ones were replacements for some vinyl tracks I owned.

Tracks can be louder without the upper and lower bits clipped.

I myself when recording vinyl to CD raise the level as the vinyl was eq'd too low.

'Off the wall' by Michael Jackson and Earth, Wind and Fire's 'Let's Grove' being a couple examples.

What I'm asking is what's the real argument.

There a poor recordings on every format - I always felt finding a sweet sounding album/track amongst the noise was part of the joy of hifi.

The loudness issue isn't just about clipping. It doesn't need to be clipped to suffer from heavy compression.

What you are doing with the recording level when recording from vinyl to CD isn't the same thing, it's just boosting the overall level as a turntable has a much lower output than a CD Player. All you are doing is matching this up. The difference between the peaks and troughs on the record will be as they were, you'll just need to playback at a lower volume setting on your amp.

The DR scale is all about mesuring the difference between peaks and troughs in db on a recording. The lower the number the less difference in volume there is between the peaks and troughs. On a digital format this usually means everything is maxed up to 0db from start to finish with no variation in volume and therefore lacking in dynamics.

You don't need to boost a vinly you record on to a cd since thers is a miss match between the ouput from a cd player and amp and therefore you can't use the volume knob more then to 10 or 11 '0 clock before distortion, that's why a TT sounds different,one of the reasons is that you can use the volume knob over a wider range befor reaching max levels

https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=20m38s

I know you don't need to boost the recording level to record onto a CD. You could quite easily record it at exactly the same level it comes off the record. It is Thomson who was talking about boosting his recording level from vinyl to CD and I was only pointing out this is not the same thing as DR compression.

I actually prefer to boost the recording level when recording from vinyl to CD as I latter rip it to iTunes. Then when my vinyl tracks are played back amongst tracks of digital origin in my iTunes playlists there is no dramatic difference in volume level.

Ohhh i see

I know how loud or low you record a lp to a cd doesn't change the the dynamic compression, it just changes how much you most move the volume knob to achieve a certain level,spl

When listening to lp's recorded on to a cd or to itunes, why not make it easier and use tidal hifi?

I have no real interest in streaming services. I am happy creating my own playlists from my own music collection. I have many, many playlists stored in iTunes and I either play them via my iPod/DAC in my main system. Or via my iMac/DAC in my second system.

There is no intuitive way of me using streaming services as part of my main system without adding a streamer to it. It's easier to whack on my iTunes playlists. Or I play the actual CDs or records if I'm listening to a particular album. I like it that way

 

[MeanandGreen]

P

I didn't say that a DR range of 12 equated to 12 db did I? Or any other number you want to pull out of the air.

I said it is a measurement of the difference between the peaks and troughs in a recording. That IS correct. I have not implied that the numbers quoted are actual decibel levels.

You can be pedantic if you choose, but my explanation in layman's terms to simplify it for another poster is not as you say "nothing of the sort". It is what I have simplified.

No, it is not.

The DR number is an arbitary number, it is related to the relationship between the average level and the peak levels. The measurement of the 'troughs' as you call them is not attempted, it is pretty difficult to do that anyway so we have no idea of the real dynamic range of the recording.

What the DR number relates to is how compressed the recording sounds which on digital recordings effectively means how loud it sounds. The same recording mastered onto vinyl often shows a higher DR number because there is a limit on the average level that can be cut onto vinyl. The idea that a vinyl recording which has a higher DR number than the CD version has a higher dynamic range is not always true, due primarily to the higher noise floor on vinyl playback. The real advantage of vinyl in this respect is the avoidance of digital clipping at the mastering stage.

Many people (not you perhaps, but others certainly) seem to believe that the DR database gives you the actual dynamic range of a recording in dB, it doesn't, which is why I brought actual dynamic range, in dBs, into the discusion to try and explain that.

I see your point.

I was in no way trying to imply that the DR database is showing actual db level averages for recordings. Perhaps my post wasn't worded completely accurately. I was just trying to simplify it into a basic description as some seem to completely miss understand the concept of the subject. You're right my reference to the 'troughs' isn't actually accurate and the average couldn't be based on that very easily.

I do understand the DR database as a guide and the 'loudness wars' or dynamic range compression subject. Obviosuly that wasn't coming across properly and my attempt to simplify it failed.

 

[Vladimir]

What is wrong with the volume knob on your amps anyway?

Why don't you turn down these loud albums.

OMG *help*

You may as well try and explain this to your spaniel, greater chance of him understanding...*good*

Stop it Dave ...

"Stop Dave ..."

Inside Thompsons head no one can hear you scream.

 

[loneranger]

This loudness war is very frustrated. For example al the cd's of one of my favorites band are very bad. The lp versions are better. I'm in dubt to buy a turntable and buy lp's from my most favorites bands. From Nightwish al there records now available on lp. What do you think?

 

[Vladimir]

This loudness war is very frustrated. For example al the cd's of one of my favorites band are very bad. The lp versions are better. I'm in dubt to buy a turntable and buy lp's from my most favorites bands. From Nightwish al there records now available on lp. What do you think?

Considering how much trouble you went through getting speakers and amp that soften the loudness compression, maybe getting a TT is a smart idea.

 

[davedotco]

I see your point.

I was in no way trying to imply that the DR database is showing actual db level averages for recordings. Perhaps my post wasn't worded completely accurately. I was just trying to simplify it into a basic description as some seem to completely miss understand the concept of the subject. You're right my reference to the 'troughs' isn't actually accurate and the average couldn't be based on that very easily.

I do understand the DR database as a guide and the 'loudness wars' or dynamic range compression subject. Obviosuly that wasn't coming across properly and my attempt to simplify it failed.

The problem here is that a lot of the way audio/hi-fi works, particularly in the digital realm, is little understood and sometimes counter intuitive, we have seen it explained how adding distortion to a recording can often make it sound better, more realistic even.

Sometimes it is very often easy to attribute things that you can hear to the wrong cause, often through a lack of understanding. For example, a lot of the sound that people complain about when listening to music with a low DR number, the harshness for example, is not a function of compression at all, but of digital overload, clipping in effect.

Why recordings are deliberately driven into hard clip is beyond me, but they routinely are, it has been suggested to me that it adds a bit of 'edge' to some music, particularly on lo-fi playback but I really don't know. Excessive compression has always been an integral part of pop music since Phil Spector in the '60s, maybe even earlier but naff though it is, I do not consider it the worst evil out there, I reserve that accolade for digital overload as just described, absolutely the pits.

 

[Jota180]

Any suggestions how we can make them 'come to their senses'?

Machine guns. Big armies swear by them.

 

[Jota180]

I see your point.

I was in no way trying to imply that the DR database is showing actual db level averages for recordings. Perhaps my post wasn't worded completely accurately. I was just trying to simplify it into a basic description as some seem to completely miss understand the concept of the subject. You're right my reference to the 'troughs' isn't actually accurate and the average couldn't be based on that very easily.

I do understand the DR database as a guide and the 'loudness wars' or dynamic range compression subject. Obviosuly that wasn't coming across properly and my attempt to simplify it failed.

The problem here is that a lot of the way audio/hi-fi works, particularly in the digital realm, is little understood and sometimes counter intuitive,

The truest of true's. I had a retired BT engineer try to explain all the ins and outs of the digital realm and so much of it runs counter to the way we understand analogue that really it's only the scientists and mathematicians that truly get much of it.

Your point about the higher DR of a vinyl recording not necessarily resulting in a higher dynamic range than a CD with the lower DR with the same recording is exactly the sort of thing that your average person, me included, finds difficult to get our heads around.

 

[Vladimir]

Loudness compression shouldn't sound harsh and distorted if it's not driving your amplifier into clipping due to larger continuous power requirements. However, as Dave pointed out, if there was digital clipping in the mastering process, the sound will be nasty at all listening levels.

Thompson correctly pointed out "what's the big deal, just turn the volume knob down", "don't put too much blind trust in that DR website" and "I swear you guyz...".

For crying out loud the man graduated with distinction in mathematics. Listen to him.

 

[loneranger]

Lyndorf has with the tdai 2170 amp a icc chip that restore dynamics. Is this the resolution against the loudness war? Then the loudness war goes ahead tgen cd, it goes also when you are streaming. And lp is nice but also expensive but everybode knows that streaming will be the future.

 

[davedotco]

Lyndorf has with the tdai 2170 amp a icc chip that restore dynamics. Is this the resolution against the loudness war? Then the loudness war goes ahead tgen cd, it goes also when you are streaming. And lp is nice but also expensive but everybode knows that streaming will be the future.

Not exactly a new idea, I gice you this from about 1975...

 

[lindsayt]

No, it is not.

The DR number is an arbitary number, it is related to the relationship between the average level and the peak levels. The measurement of the 'troughs' as you call them is not attempted, it is pretty difficult to do that anyway so we have no idea of the real dynamic range of the recording.

What the DR number relates to is how compressed the recording sounds which on digital recordings effectively means how loud it sounds. The same recording mastered onto vinyl often shows a higher DR number because there is a limit on the average level that can be cut onto vinyl. The idea that a vinyl recording which has a higher DR number than the CD version has a higher dynamic range is not always true, due primarily to the higher noise floor on vinyl playback. The real advantage of vinyl in this respect is the avoidance of digital clipping at the mastering stage.

Many people (not you perhaps, but others certainly) seem to believe that the DR database gives you the actual dynamic range of a recording in dB, it doesn't, which is why I brought actual dynamic range, in dBs, into the discusion to try and explain that.

The bit I've highlighted in bold is total 100% utter nonsense. I'm surprised nobody else has challenged it yet.

If the same recording on vinyl has a significantly higher DR rating than the CD version (eg 12 vs 6 for the aforementioned GIRL album) it's because the dynamics of the recording haven't been hammered down by being passed through a compressor on it's way to the vinyl. Unlike the CD version

In these cases the vinyl has a higher DR rating because it is less compressed than the CD version.

This will be reflected in the listening experience - and in measurements of peak / average / minumum sound levels when played back.

The most dynamic rock or pop recording that I have has a dynamic range of about 32 dbs give or take a bit.

A humble budget Pro-ject Carbon turntable has a signal to noise ratio of 68 dbs. That's about 35 dbs in excess of the requirements of even the most dynamic recordings. Which allows plenty of leeway in how loud the vinyl can be cut whilst still preserving the entire dynamic range.

The noise floor of vinyl is easily low enough to be a complete non-factor when it comes to the dynamic range of these recordings.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

No, it is not.

The DR number is an arbitary number, it is related to the relationship between the average level and the peak levels. The measurement of the 'troughs' as you call them is not attempted, it is pretty difficult to do that anyway so we have no idea of the real dynamic range of the recording.

What the DR number relates to is how compressed the recording sounds which on digital recordings effectively means how loud it sounds. The same recording mastered onto vinyl often shows a higher DR number because there is a limit on the average level that can be cut onto vinyl. The idea that a vinyl recording which has a higher DR number than the CD version has a higher dynamic range is not always true, due primarily to the higher noise floor on vinyl playback. The real advantage of vinyl in this respect is the avoidance of digital clipping at the mastering stage.

Many people (not you perhaps, but others certainly) seem to believe that the DR database gives you the actual dynamic range of a recording in dB, it doesn't, which is why I brought actual dynamic range, in dBs, into the discusion to try and explain that.

The bit I've highlighted in bold is total 100% utter nonsense. I'm surprised nobody else has challenged it yet.

If the same recording on vinyl has a significantly higher DR rating than the CD version (eg 12 vs 6 for the aforementioned GIRL album) it's because the dynamics of the recording haven't been hammered down by being passed through a compressor on it's way to the vinyl. Unlike the CD version

In these cases the vinyl has a higher DR rating because it is less compressed than the CD version.

This will be reflected in the listening experience - and in measurements of peak / average / minumum sound levels when played back.

?

The most dynamic rock or pop recording that I have has a dynamic range of about 32 dbs give or take a bit.

A humble budget Pro-ject Carbon turntable has a signal to noise ratio of 68 dbs. That's about 35 dbs in excess of the requirements of even the most dynamic recordings. Which allows plenty of leeway in how loud the vinyl can be cut whilst still preserving the entire dynamic range.

The noise floor of vinyl is easily low enough to be a complete non-factor when it comes to the dynamic range of these recordings.

Doh!.... You beat me to it I thought the 'arbitrary measurements' was a dosy.....

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Ok....listening to Pharrell Williams 'Girl'....

That DR data base is rubbish and should not be used to assess the quality of anything....it sounds perfectly fine - the Neptunes usually do good quality productions.

I have to go put it back before the daughter notices it's missing...... *secret*

'Happy' still sounds superb and 'Come Get it Bae too.....

OK, I'll buy the vinyl version of Girl (with a light green DR of 12).

You bring your CD version round (with a red DR of 6). We'll play both - level matched roughly according to the average volume.

And we'll see which sounds better.

?

I know which one I'd be betting on.

Honestly LindsayT I would take you up on this, no joke.

After level matching we'd then play both tracks at their optimum level on your amp....

Provided you're not one of those with a Marantz cd6005 on a DAC and can confirm you're not an ax murderer....seriously I'll bring the CD.

 

[MajorFubar]

Loudness compression shouldn't sound harsh and distorted if it's not driving your amplifier into clipping due to larger continuous power requirements. However, as Dave pointed out, if there was digital clipping in the mastering process, the sound will be nasty at all listening levels.

Thompson correctly pointed out "what's the big deal, just turn the volume knob down", "don't put too much blind trust in that DR website" and "I swear you guyz...".

For crying out loud the man graduated with distinction in mathematics. Listen to him.

No that's not necessarily the case. Recordings which don't clip can still be unlistenable (to my ears at any rate) if their dynamics have been compressed to virtually a flat line. They're like listening to white noise with some semblence of melody to it.

 

[davedotco]

Compression may be used for practical purposes or as a means of 'artistic expression' this to me is not an issue.

The problem is delberately overdriving a system to give clipping distortion, this is horrible on anything like a compedent system sounds nasty.
Over compressing, without clipping, may or may not be acceptable. That depends on the recording and the circumstances of playback, but squeezing the life out of what should be wide ranging material ia pretty unpleasant, in that we agree. A little earlier this evening I followed some links from a playlist to an album by Black Rebel Motorcycle Gang. The track sounded great despite the albums DR rating of 4min-6max, the rest of the album was driven into clip and unlistenable, I shall avoid in future.

 

[gasolin]

Try looking at cd's how they are recorded, often older records is made from the lp when recording it on to a cd a record like elton john's a single man is definitely recorded,made from the lp version and isn't remastered or LOUDER, its and aad version analog/analog/digital, DR is over 10 and the recoding level is soooo low that you do not have a miss match between cdplayer and amp (gain) it's not loud at 9 'o clok or 10'o clock, that is what i like,find to be very pleasant when listen to a cd.

In loudness,recoding level it almost sounds like an lp

If older lp's before the early 80's (when the start making cd's) sounds good, why change it when it's recorded on to a cd?

 

[Jota180]

No, it is not.

The DR number is an arbitary number, it is related to the relationship between the average level and the peak levels. The measurement of the 'troughs' as you call them is not attempted, it is pretty difficult to do that anyway so we have no idea of the real dynamic range of the recording.

What the DR number relates to is how compressed the recording sounds which on digital recordings effectively means how loud it sounds. The same recording mastered onto vinyl often shows a higher DR number because there is a limit on the average level that can be cut onto vinyl. The idea that a vinyl recording which has a higher DR number than the CD version has a higher dynamic range is not always true, due primarily to the higher noise floor on vinyl playback. The real advantage of vinyl in this respect is the avoidance of digital clipping at the mastering stage.

Many people (not you perhaps, but others certainly) seem to believe that the DR database gives you the actual dynamic range of a recording in dB, it doesn't, which is why I brought actual dynamic range, in dBs, into the discusion to try and explain that.

The bit I've highlighted in bold is total 100% utter nonsense. I'm surprised nobody else has challenged it yet.

If the same recording on vinyl has a significantly higher DR rating than the CD version (eg 12 vs 6 for the aforementioned GIRL album) it's because the dynamics of the recording haven't been hammered down by being passed through a compressor on it's way to the vinyl. Unlike the CD version

In these cases the vinyl has a higher DR rating because it is less compressed than the CD version.

This will be reflected in the listening experience - and in measurements of peak / average / minumum sound levels when played back.

The most dynamic rock or pop recording that I have has a dynamic range of about 32 dbs give or take a bit.

A humble budget Pro-ject Carbon turntable has a signal to noise ratio of 68 dbs. That's about 35 dbs in excess of the requirements of even the most dynamic recordings. Which allows plenty of leeway in how loud the vinyl can be cut whilst still preserving the entire dynamic range.

The noise floor of vinyl is easily low enough to be a complete non-factor when it comes to the dynamic range of these recordings.

"Finally, the research team found scientific evidence for the so-called "loudness war". Owing to mastering and compression techniques, new songs are literally louder than old songs. Or, as the scientists put it: "The empiric median of the loudness values x grows from −22 dBFS to −13 dBFS, with a least squares linear regression yielding a slope of 0.13 dB/year (p < 0.01, t-test)." Despite this fact, the Spanish team also found that songs' "absolute dynamic variability has been conserved" over the years. In other words, the overall dynamic range of recordings – the distance between a song's quietest and loudest moments – has remained more or less the same."

Science, isn't it wonderful!