SVTJON87
Hard-core CEG'er
holy crap. I'm going to yell at my friends recording.
http://funl.blogspot.com/2007/06/loudness-war.html
http://funl.blogspot.com/2007/06/loudness-war.html
-
Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.
You can register to join the community.
Why New Music Doesn't Sound As Good As It Did
- Thread starter SoundQ SVT
- Start date
fordsvt98
Veteran CEG'er
SO, that is what happens with compression eh?
Why dont they leave it like it was in the first place?
Is it compressed so when you play your disc on your lil' shelf- type system it sounds better?
Maybe they need to fine tune compression software??
Why dont they leave it like it was in the first place?
Is it compressed so when you play your disc on your lil' shelf- type system it sounds better?
Maybe they need to fine tune compression software??
Last edited by a moderator:
CLASSVT
Veteran CEG'er
Listening to Gospel or Harry Belafonte is precisely the kind of music that doesn't need a whole lot, or any, processing or "molesting". That kind of music at it's best just plain and stripped. Rock, pop, hip-hop, electronic, and other modern forms of music all benefit from current recording and mastering technology. Thinking that you and others would rather listen to "unmixed" music is rediculous, especially the more saturated tracks of today. Now if you're listening to a jazz quartet, or a string section, or an opera singer then you don't really need much mixing or processing. But when recording a rock band with sound effects and ten different guitar tracks alone, you would be a fool to want to listen to that without being mixed. As far as having a compressor for your own sake during playback...there's nothing stopping you from going and buying one. But the point is to record it right so the listener doesn't have to worry about that stuff. Not every song with compression needs compression, or the amount it receives. But the majority of popular music needs compression to keep the listening experience as enjoyable as possible. You may consider yourself an "audiophile", but that doesn't mean that your opinion of how music should sound is any more right than mine, and vice-versa. The majority of listeners listen on ipods and consumer level electronics. Those are people who listen to popular music, and not much else. Those of us who listen to other, more cultured, types of music understand the value of minimal processing of a recorded track. That doesn't mean I want to hear it raw, unmixed without any EQ. Live music is different all together, but compression is a MUST for live music especially. You would be surprised how quickly things can get ugly without the modern technology you "audiophiles" curse at. There's nothing wrong with wanting to hear untouched simple more acoustic kinds of music. But understand that popular music is a business, not an art preservation society. And it has been mastered and shaped into a very solid and sellable product. It's not perfect, but then again nothing is.
.....And speakers can be smaller in size today because of the technology that allows them to handle much higher amounts of power. Nothing has moved backwards within recording and production or audio in general. Music as an art may be lacking in many ways. But recording, engineering, production, and mastering are at levels never dreamed of in the good ol' days.
.....And speakers can be smaller in size today because of the technology that allows them to handle much higher amounts of power. Nothing has moved backwards within recording and production or audio in general. Music as an art may be lacking in many ways. But recording, engineering, production, and mastering are at levels never dreamed of in the good ol' days.
CLASSVT
Veteran CEG'er
That link is horse-**** !!! No engineer in thier right mind compresses a track to that extent. Don't believe everything you read guys. Properly compressing a track doesn't have near that effect on the waveform. What a bunch of crap.:nonono:
Last edited:
CLASSVT
Veteran CEG'er
Compression limits the peak of the waveform to keep the louder audio from distorting, and to keep the track playing at a more consistant volume. But it is NOTHING like the example from that link. That is an example of another douchebag trying to badmouth the record labels, like everyone else. Record labels don't own studios or recording gear for the most part. Open up the liner notes to your favorite CD, and see where it was recorded. I'll bet it's not RCA studios, or Warner Bros studios. They go to local recording studios, who use the latest and greatest technology for recording and mastering. There are exceptions to the "newer technology is better" rule. Vintage tube compressors, amps, and mics sound great in comparison to even the newest technology. But studios keep a lot of vintage gear around. Analog tape is still used a lot to record on rather than a software program, due to it's warm and thick sound. Record labels and studios want it to sound as great as possible. No detail is spared when recording an album, ever.
jamesmason1
CEG'er
Nice, calm and composed CLASSVT
Crazy guy CLASSVT, it's like dr. jeckle and mr. hide. Craziness I tell you, craziness:laugh:
I think it's a mix of equipment/engineer. Studios with millions of dollars in equipment with a poor engineer are going to make poor sounding CDs.
No, I don't think that's it. I'm not a big believer in high-end cables, though many seem to be, but I am a fan of very high quality cables but thats a different topic altogether.
Using computer enhancements, eqs, compressors, etc are all part of the process, the problem comes from the people using them in a manner that I and most music aficianados find annoying.
That could be an option for him or many others, Mapleshade makes some high quality recordings in my experience.
I don't understand what you are getting at?
Yes, excellent mics, electronics, acoustical environment is a good start.
of course.
Not necessary but likely beneficial to most people.
Absolutely. In my opinion, speakers with nicely controlled directivity are a good starting point (dipoles/waveguides/some horns) to remove the room from the equation, or at least take advantage of some of the typical acoustical properties of a living room while eliminating others. Sensitive speakers are advantageous, as well. You don't get efficient and small, unless you don't want bass, so I guess I vote for big speakers. Big, efficient speakers don't require as much power, and therefore don't suffer from compression within the driver when the coil starts to heat up. Plenty of power on tap is never a bad thing all else being equal. Good front end electronics are also a must, especially with vinyl if you still use it. I have found that when using an external DAC for my CDPs, I don't have a system good enough to hear the difference between transports, whether using a nice denon CDP, a cheap panasonic or JVC DVD player, or the digital out on my computer. Other people claim to hear differences in transports and maybe when I eventually improve my speakers, I will. Then again, I haven't heard differences on very high end systems in recent years. oh well...i'm rambling...
I think to the average listener who isn't interested in dynamics and realistic music, today's recordings are probably better. Think about the typical customer...they are generally younger people who are probably in their cars more than their homes. In a mobile environment with all the background noise one might think that the compressed recordings may have MORE detail because the subtle details are more prevalent than the would have been previously. Thats fine for some, but keep it out of my car. Like someone else mentioned, add a DSP with built in compression in cars and homes and record the music as it was. The cost to add to current electronics would be mere pennies as most of the DSPs without the capability can be upgraded for a few cents by the mfg.
fordsvt98
Veteran CEG'er
I just hate buying a cd with only like 3 good tracks on it, ya know.
Ya, I guess its a combo of all attributes put into one, to dicern the quality of one given disc. Or studio....But I also hear what dude was saying about how, Interscope records, or Virgin or Whatever label you can think of, doesnt record in house but like you say, are at the place where they will get the best sound to lay down.
And then as the Singer hears his/her voice on the equipment, he all like " I likes it alot" then it goes into production and the track butchering begins behind his/her back lol. J/k.
Then Steve, Joni's manager comes out.......after she hears the track on disc....
"we had to change it Joni....these kids these days use that Ipod stuff...who cares anyways...."
"but STEEEVE in verse 3 on track 10 I sound flatter than an Ironing Board......"
"Don't worry Joni.....Joe is a master of the art, hell take care of you.....remember Ipod sound Joni. Ipods are the future."
"steve your always right...."
"thats why I get the big bux Joni..."
Ya, I guess its a combo of all attributes put into one, to dicern the quality of one given disc. Or studio....But I also hear what dude was saying about how, Interscope records, or Virgin or Whatever label you can think of, doesnt record in house but like you say, are at the place where they will get the best sound to lay down.
And then as the Singer hears his/her voice on the equipment, he all like " I likes it alot" then it goes into production and the track butchering begins behind his/her back lol. J/k.
Then Steve, Joni's manager comes out.......after she hears the track on disc....
"we had to change it Joni....these kids these days use that Ipod stuff...who cares anyways...."
"but STEEEVE in verse 3 on track 10 I sound flatter than an Ironing Board......"
"Don't worry Joni.....Joe is a master of the art, hell take care of you.....remember Ipod sound Joni. Ipods are the future."
"steve your always right...."
"thats why I get the big bux Joni..."
Last edited:
The Harry Belafonte recording was to illustrate that the equipment of today doesn't necessarily allow for better sound quality. That near 50 year old recording still stands on its own as one of the best recordings I have ever encountered. I'm not a particularly big fan of Calypso music and only threw it on initially because I know of Living Stereo's reputation. I heard it and my jaw dropped. You consider it a benefit to appease the masses, whcih for sales probably is a benefit. Hearing rock/pop/etc music without today's compression levels and then comparing it to today's makes me wonder what, if any purported SQ benefits compression provides aside from possibly making something sound better on an inadequate stereo system not capable of playing dynamic music.
It's a fairly extreme sample, but gives you an idea of what you are running into. They don't leave it like it was because of exactly the reason you state and what CLASSVT has mentioned. CDs with very little compression will sometimes have dynamic passages 15-25dB louder than the average volume of the recording. So, if you are listening at an average of 10w on your typical low sensitivity small speakers (which translates to 93-97dB with most speakers in this class), and your music has extremely dynamic passages that are 20dB higher than the average, you would need 1000w on tap for that not to clip. Every 10dB takes 10x as much power and will be 2x as loud. 90dB is 2x as loud as 80dB, 100dB is 2x as loud as 90dB and 4x as loud as 80dB. Now, take the example of some big speakers with a sensitivity in the mid-high 90s range, to listen to that recording, you'd start with an average of 1w of power going to the speaker to produce the same volume. Now, to play that dynamic passage in the classical recording, you only need 100w. There are an awful lot of affordable 100w systems out there. Like engines, there is no replacement for displacement. You can add turbos and superchargers to small engines, but you can also add them to engines with lots of displacement.
With the low efficiency system described initially, not only are 1000w amps expensive, but any extended time sending a lot of power to small speakers will cause them to compress unless they have outstanding cooling capabilities, and possibly a copper faraday to wick away the heat.
There is no problem with the compression tools that exist, it's the people behind the controls, that in my opinion aren't doing their best to create good sounding recordings. There are obviously many exceptions to that.
fordsvt98
Veteran CEG'er
But I feel that if I engage Dolby prologic II, or Loudness, or THEATER1, or ANY realistic Home Amplifier DSP, to the track, it does ALOT to the playback of the sound I hear, what are they taking into consideration for Compression, is it, a low wattage system sold at walmart? are are they compensating for good listening level at a moderately "low" volume? Or are they changing it so it doesnt distort at high volume, wich wouldnt be correct in that assumption because we all agree it sounds like crap when turned up?
I bet you could make a buck or two remapping the EQ and compression on some stuff people might like....good pART TIME JOB LOL.
dIGITALLY remastered BY THE pRO'S at CEG!
I bet you could make a buck or two remapping the EQ and compression on some stuff people might like....good pART TIME JOB LOL.
dIGITALLY remastered BY THE pRO'S at CEG!
Last edited:
Well, we have made the Steve Hoffman forums....
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=120680
Guys from the music/recording industry run rampant over there...
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=120680
Guys from the music/recording industry run rampant over there...
Rooster
New CEG'er
I read there **** and i'm still with clasvt. Bass hits way harder.
Unfortunately, IASCA and the rest of the car audio competition sanctioning bodies were not in a position to make their own recordings. They either selected a CD known to have good quality recordings (SLAP used the "Sheffield Drive" CD from Sheffield Labs; MECA uses "The Ultimate Demonstration Disc" from Chesky Records) or make up their own compilation CD's (which IASCA and USACi did and Alpine did before them in the late 80's for Car Audio Nationals I & II) using selected tracks from already released CD's that tested specific areas of the system's reproduction capability. The bad part about the compilations was they had to get permission to reproduce the copyrighted material and also pay royalties for its use.
Recently, the compilation CD's also added specific "Bass tracks" with computer/electronically generated and/or enhanced information typical with commercially available bass CD's for the specific task of measuring how loud the system could play. These tracks were not used for the general sound quality evaluations of the car audio systems however.
When Mapleshade was still fairly new, they had representatives at a few of the larger IASCA competitions (Spring Break Nationals and Finals) to share their product. It was an immediate hit, especially since one of the IASCA judging tracks was from a Mapleshade release. Sheffield Labs was also on hand selling their discs and has long been associated with car audio sound quality competitions. There are other labels that have contributed as well, such as Reference Recordings, Telarc, Chesky, etc.
fordsvt98
Veteran CEG'er
Borat says: Bass rulez.
SQSvt ya thanks for the clarification there guy on that one.
Personally, I could care less about the quality, or if those trumpets and guitars or whatever sound too muted..... cause I dont buy Cd's.
I Dl'd all the new stuff anyways for free so Ill take what I can get I guess.
All I give 2 craps about is the bitrate Im dld'n my music at lol.
And if I want to change the way it sounds, I just use the friggen Amp's Processor, and TURN IT UPPP.
I got some cheapie definitives and an elite amp and Im happy.
SQSvt ya thanks for the clarification there guy on that one.
Personally, I could care less about the quality, or if those trumpets and guitars or whatever sound too muted..... cause I dont buy Cd's.
I Dl'd all the new stuff anyways for free so Ill take what I can get I guess.
All I give 2 craps about is the bitrate Im dld'n my music at lol.
And if I want to change the way it sounds, I just use the friggen Amp's Processor, and TURN IT UPPP.
I got some cheapie definitives and an elite amp and Im happy.
CLASSVT
Veteran CEG'er
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: All I can do is laugh. They can say whatever they want, and continue to tear it all to pieces. I stand by what I have been saying. And all I have been saying is that compression is a necessary evil, recording technology is outstanding now, and that using a compressor correctly does not ruin everything about music. I said earlier how great vintage mics, gear, and analog tape sound in comparison to today's gear. But computer technology is so advanced that YES... YOU CAN RECORD IN YOUR BEDROOM AND MAKE IT SOUND JUST AS GOOD AS A PROFESSIONAL STUDIO. That is why sooo many professional studios are going out of business. These guys are just like everyone else in the music business, they think they are something special because they have worked with so and so and worked on this album and that. But in actuality there are soooo many variables in recording, and soooo many different opinions about everything, that it would take a matter of two minutes to find a hundred guys in the music business who think these other guys are fools. I am not some idiot as they seem to want to portray me. My education is from a very good school, and my experience is with major recording artists at professional studios. My opinions and views come from years of working and learning from studio owners, seasoned engineers and producers, and musicians alike. So they can keep the comments comming. It doesn't mean a hill of beans to me. That link and example of compression was outrageous, compression wouldn't be used on near every major release if it were such a terrible thing. Not everyone in the music business is out to ruin the dynamics of music. So don't believe the hype.
elraido
I kant speel
Downloaded music is no where near as crisp, clean, or clear as a cd. The bass doesn't sound nearly as good either. So if all you care about is bass, you are still loosing.