A ceasefire in the loudness wars?

alexdingley · Post by **alexdingley** » Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:54 am

Just a thought I was having after acquiring a new master 2-track recorder.

With all of the different delivery methods out there, and the ability for the common music apps / portable players to "auto-level" users' playlists... Is it possible that we can stop (or at least ease-up on) crushing final mixes in the mastering process?

I know that FM radio still exists... but is it possible that more dynamic mixes will make a comeback as everyone starts more digital/direct distribution methods?

I'm thinking about this, as someone who's planning on releasing his own material through Vinyl + streaming outlets & hi-res downloads (PCM & DSD)

I'm all for the mastering process, in its ability to provide sonic consistency throughout an album... but two things come to mind. a) do we need to squash the record and make it louder-than-god? b) what happens when people stop* treating "the album" as the standard unit of release?

*Maybe this is already happening.

MoreSpaceEcho · Post by **MoreSpaceEcho** » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:05 am

alexdingley wrote: a) do we need to squash the record and make it louder-than-god? b) what happens when people stop* treating "the album" as the standard unit of release?.

a) certainly not.

i master most things "reasonably loud", as opposed to "completely fucking insanely loud". some people still want their record CFIL, and i'm happy to do that if that's what they want, but most people are happy with a more reasonable volume.

this is good! i feel like the war in general is better than it was 10 years ago.

b) doesn't matter.

if you intend for your songs to be listened to in context with All Other Recordings, Ever...something i imagine most of us aspire to....then getting them mastered is still a good idea. this is more about getting the EQ right than overall level.

FWIW less crushed/more dynamic music sounds way better on the radio than crushed stuff, read this if you haven't already:

http://www.orban.com/support/orban/tech ... th_1.3.pdf

GooberNumber9 · Post by **GooberNumber9** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:25 am

It seems to me that the "loudest" possible recording has already been released. Some new releases have more headroom (crest factor, whatever you want to call it) and some have less, and it just depends on who is involved.

On the listener side, it's so fragmented that trying to predict the final delivery sounds crazy. Streaming music services, YouTube, digital music purchases, video games/movies/TV, and of course old-school radio are all in the mix, and the kids that I taught guitar to would freely consume the same music across all of those platforms. People are happy to adjust the volume frequently on most of their devices and there's no equivalent to them cruising the dial and landing on the loudest sounding station, so aside from not being way too quiet, I can't see how getting a lot of loudness on a recording is important any more.

ChrisNW · Post by **ChrisNW** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:29 am

I think a lot of people have finally started getting the memo re "the loudness wars." I've personally been thrilled to see a shift in my clients' preferences toward more dynamic masters--trading a little level for punch and musicality.

Also, the "Soundcheck" feature in the iTunes player (and iTunes Radio) seems like a pretty darn good idea. It's my understanding program material is automatically level-matched to the lowest common denominator, and as a result, more tastefully mastered content actually "sounds" louder than notably loud masters. I believe Bob Katz described this by saying, "The cream will rise to the top."

GooberNumber9 · Post by **GooberNumber9** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:45 am

ChrisNW wrote:Also, the "Soundcheck" feature in the iTunes player (and iTunes Radio) seems like a pretty darn good idea. It's my understanding program material is automatically level-matched to the lowest common denominator, and as a result, more tastefully mastered content actually "sounds" louder than notably loud masters. I believe Bob Katz described this by saying, "The cream will rise to the top."

I'm not sure why my subjective experience with Soundcheck is that it makes better-sounding masters sound worse and bad-sounding masters sound the same. I had it on pretty briefly because it made everything sound terrible. If I'm on shuffle, there's lots of volume tweaking going on.

ChrisNW · Post by **ChrisNW** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:39 am

GooberNumber9 wrote:I'm not sure why my subjective experience with Soundcheck is that it makes better-sounding masters sound worse and bad-sounding masters sound the same. I had it on pretty briefly because it made everything sound terrible.

Very interesting. Well, I'd say it's completely possible Soundcheck may be less transparent than it suggests itself to be. I'd be curious to set up a few null tests. If I can carve out some time later this week, I'll report back.

All that said, the concept of a completely transparent level-matching feature, which brings loud material down (and not quiet material up) seems like a great way to encourage dynamic range over notable loudness.

tjcasey1 · Post by **tjcasey1** » Thu Dec 18, 2014 5:55 pm

Great article in Stereophile this month about this; it mentions that the RMS level of the average CD has increased by 9 db since the format was introduced. 9 db! Can you believe that?

MoreSpaceEcho · Post by **MoreSpaceEcho** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:42 am

The Scum · Post by **The Scum** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 11:18 am

9 actually seems low.

Have you ever ripped an older CD? Peaks hit -6 dBFS, RMS level is maybe -15...

MoreSpaceEcho · Post by **MoreSpaceEcho** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 8:45 am

they're even lower than that. pretty sure records like pj harvey's 'rid of me' or breeders' 'pod' are down at like -20.

they also sound better than almost anything if you turn them up.

anyway, 9db is probably about right. a good mix of a standard rock tune, with nothing done to it for loudness, will likely average about -15. and it's not uncommon to have tunes sitting at -6 nowadays. sometimes they even sound sort of not-completely-terrible.

but listen to a bunch of modern stuff for an hour and then put on an 80s record and you'll be like "woah, drums."

vvv · Post by **vvv** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 11:38 am

I read tjcasey1 to say, "the average CD has increased by 9 db", not that 9 is a average?

I thought this interesting:
"While the increase in CD loudness was gradual throughout the 1990s, some opted to push the format to the limit, such as on Oasis's widely popular album (What's the Story) Morning Glory?, which averaged −8 dBFS on many of its tracks?a rare occurrence, especially in the year it was released (1995). In 1997, Iggy Pop assisted in the remix and remaster of the 1973 album Raw Power by his former band The Stooges, driving the level to −4 dBFS in places.[6]" wikipedia

Bob Katz published this

cite

Of course, we are now 14 years later; I haven't found any current attempts at claiming averages, although this is interesting ...

And this is kinda amusing.

ashcat_lt · Post by **ashcat_lt** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:12 pm

MoreSpaceEcho wrote:they also sound better than almost anything if you turn them up.

Yeah, but have you ever tried to listen to Rid Of Me driving down the freeway with a mother and her small child? Unless you really want to keep your hand on the V knob, the verses might as well just be silence.

That album is always my prime example of going to far in the opposite direction - why too much dynamic range isn't always a good thing. Steve Albini pretty much rebutted his own philosophy on that one.

MoreSpaceEcho · Post by **MoreSpaceEcho** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:42 pm

i agree. i've looked at 'rid of me' and there's a few stray peaks that are way higher than everything else. really short, literally fractions of a millisecond. they could be limited a bunch without hurting the sound of the record any.

ott0bot · Post by **ott0bot** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 3:20 pm

I think it's curbing off a bit for indie artists who want to press albums to vinyl and want to preserve the vinyl sound for the digital files. even so, I tend to adjust those tracks volume in te options setting in iTunes...so I don't have to crank it up before it plays and lower it once it's over.

but....no matter what you do, most people still have this perception that a quieter album is either:
1) a local band
2) an old album
3) a demo
or
4) "weak"

I call those people the audience. you can either give them what they want, or give them your vision, and hope for the best.

dennisjames · Post by **dennisjames** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:05 pm

I was thrilled with the mastering job Scott did for me and while there is an overall level change in a shuffle situation, he suggested doing a digital version that I ended up including in the release as a "louder modern version more suitable for your personal electronic devices". Great suggestion -- I feel good about artistic vision as well as offering my listeners a choice.

Big thumbs up to Old Colony!

Message Board

A ceasefire in the loudness wars?

A ceasefire in the loudness wars?

Re: A ceasefire in the loudness wars?

Who is online