The Loudness War

Posted on

Member Since: Dec 23, 2002

I just got the new Fall Out Boy album, and MAN is it squashed! At first I figured there was something wrong with my stereo. But then I imported a track into Audacity and saw that it was maximized like that. I hadn't realized how far the 'loudness war' has gone until then. I knew a lot of CDs sounded crushed, just not that much. It got me thinking, because I just finished mastering a CD.

I usually do a tiny bit of volume maximizing, but not nearly as much as they do on commercial CDs. This makes my recordings sound softer, but I figure people can just turn them up. I personally hate ultra-compressed CDs, but if your record isn't as loud as the next guy's, it gives it that 'homemade' feel. So I was thinking about it, and I hit upon a possible solution -- master two copies on the same CD. One, fairly pristine with dynamics intact, for the audiophiles. The other copy, maximized to be as loud as commercial CDs.

There are two ways to do this. One is to include the pristine version as the actual audio CD data, and either FLAC or MP3s of the compressed version on a data track. I'm thinking MP3s, because it would be very easy to make a new CD of the destroyed version, just drag and drop, whereas FLAC takes some work, and the people who would want the louder version generally would probably be lazy about it.

The other solution would be the other way around -- compressed version as actual audio CD data, and pristine version as FLAC (MP3 is right out since that probably does as much damage to the sound as modern mastering). Of course, that limits the length of the CD to about 53 minutes (ie, 53 minutes of full-size audio plus 53 minutes of about half-size FLAC = 80 minutes total). Audiophiles would be much more likely to take the time to burn a pristine CD-R from the FLAC files. It might be inconvenient, but it's still better than most commercial CDs, which don't give you a choice.

I'm leaning toward doing the first solution on the record I'm finishing, but both have their merits. What do you guys think -- not just about what I'm thinking about doing, but about the 'Loudness War' in general?

[ Back to Top ]


edit0r
Member
Since: Aug 17, 2004


Feb 22, 2007 02:25 am

I think its amazing how they get audio to flatline :-/. Must take some knowledge. It doesn't sound great, but if I could get levels that hot and still make it sound that good I wouldn't turn back lol...

Ne'er ate 'er
Member
Since: Apr 05, 2006


Feb 22, 2007 10:35 am

It's very sad. When audio CDs first came out, one of the great selling points of the medium was the 90 dB dynamic range. Now no one is using it. I personally think too much compression and limiting makes music sound like ****. Also, if you're mastering a CD hoping to get airplay, you have to remember that radio and TV broadcasters are going to heap a ton of more processing (Optimod) onto it, so that the final output is likely going to sound as if it went through a Cuisinart in a wildebeest stampede. This is the main reason why I rarely listen to music on the radio anymore. I listen to NPR. They have decent engineers.

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Feb 22, 2007 11:01 am

Remember all those CBS label rock albums of the seventies and eighties? (Did I just age myself then, or what?)
They were so squashed it wasn't funny. I guess it was all to do with radio and stuff. No dynamics at all.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Feb 22, 2007 11:05 am

Who has seen those late night infomercials with Greg Brady selling the "Remember the 70's" series...

Those compilation discs often strip out the guitar solos and such so they can cram another song or two on it too...or at least they used to.

www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Feb 22, 2007 11:17 am

Ah yes, the good ole K-Tel days (haha now I dated myself). Kind of reminds me of the current music.... no guitar solos :(

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Feb 22, 2007 11:17 am

I remember the 70's. It's just that I have huge portions of the 80's missing...

I wonder if CBS over-compressed my brain.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Feb 22, 2007 11:18 am

Hey, I still have "The Rock Album"...most of the tunes on it I still think are great tune, but sans solos kinda sucks.

Ne'er ate 'er
Member
Since: Apr 05, 2006


Feb 22, 2007 12:02 pm

The vinyl K-Tel albums were also mastered at very low levels so they could cram more songs onto a side. I remember having to turn the volume knob way up just to hear them.

I am not a crook's head
Member
Since: Mar 14, 2003


Feb 22, 2007 12:08 pm

Is that Freedom Rock, man?

www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Feb 22, 2007 12:33 pm

Ya, I think the levels were way down. Even looking at the grooves on the LP's you can see a lot of stuff crammed into the tracks.

Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006


Feb 22, 2007 01:12 pm

Turn it up!!!

Pinnipedal Czar (: 3=
Member
Since: Apr 11, 2004


Feb 22, 2007 04:58 pm

Good times were those days gentlemen, over compression and all ! Hell, NOT knowing was half the battle, back then .

Remember inviting a friend over with the sentence: "C'mon over and listen to records ." ? I think The Rock Album, was one of first albums I bought that wasn't from the 'used' section of the record store . Got that one after compiling the entire Kiss collection from the used record section... back when Dynasty was just out... the worst Kiss album ever... at the time . Now THAT makes me feel old . bahahaha

Member
Since: Jan 18, 2003


Feb 22, 2007 05:02 pm

haha the freedom rock commercial? jeez...

danzig 8 is unlistenable due to overcompression.

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Feb 22, 2007 06:54 pm

Out making my rounds today I had the Los Angeles Classic Rock station on. They played "Don't look back" from Boston (see above on 80's CBS). No dynamics at all. Great song, but squished into submission.

Next they played "welcome to the jungle" by G'n'R. Not one of my favourite bands, but the difference in the mastering was unreal! It's not one of those records I'll ever use as a reference, but the marked difference in the dynamics from the Boston song was breathtaking. What was going on in their minds in the 80's? It's just homogonized sound.

Oh, and please, no one be a smart-alec and come back with "Boston were not on CBS" or the like. I don't care. The point was the over-compression....hehehe.

I'm off to listen to Tool. (The other end of the spectrum)


Member
Since: Apr 26, 2006


Feb 23, 2007 12:53 am

Perhaps one of the things we see happening is the result of a group of people that grew up hearing not so dynamic music overly compressed in the 80's, now working the boards of very dynamic music but compressing it to the levels of the norm they grew up on.

Member
Since: Jan 18, 2003


Feb 23, 2007 01:16 am

the last tool album was also overcompressed...and not a good album, i thought! aenima was their crowning acheivement, due to the occasional 'chord change' and 'hint of melody.' that one's also got some interesting production on it.


I am not a crook's head
Member
Since: Mar 14, 2003


Feb 23, 2007 09:48 am

I've taken a liking to Menomena's Friend & Foe lately. but the very first thing on that album, you're introduced to an extremely squashed drum kit. I mean the brass sounds like its going to jump out of the speakers and hit you in the forehead. Great indie rock album tho, if you're looking for one.

Hold 'Em Czar
Member
Since: Dec 30, 2004


Feb 23, 2007 01:18 pm

yeah bob katz is tryin to get loudness standardized...movies already are (they mix at 83Db SPL) i think that would help us out alot on this issue.

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Feb 23, 2007 02:41 pm

Forty: I disagree, I thought 10,000 Days was great. Some odd moments, but on the whole it's pretty good. 'The Pot' is a great song.
Yes, that album was a little more compressed than others. I love 'Undertow'.

Member
Since: Jan 18, 2003


Feb 23, 2007 05:25 pm

tallchap, you are saying that 10,000 days was more compressed than the others, yes? i'm glad someone else can hear this. the atmosphere that was integral to aenema is totally missing from 10,000 days, i think. you hear it mainly where singing occurs over distorted guitar. i found it to be lifeless there, with the singing bordering on 'buried.'

you think 10,000 days is better than aenema? i think there are big differences in songwriting smarts between the two albums. when tool fails to insert at least one chord change and inject that hint of melody, they get very boring to me. a guy can only jam on drop d for so long before i get bored. in eulogy, when maynard sings the lyric 'so loud,' that's such a very simple musical moment, going to that one chord, and yet without it, the song would have no drama.

of course, i wish every tool song could be as good as 'opiate' and '46&2'



Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Feb 23, 2007 06:57 pm

Yes, forty. Very compressed compared to Aenema and Undertow. Definitely agree with the vocals getting buried too. There are times when it all but disappears. I haven't had a chance to listen on my new home audio through optical cable. Perhaps something will jump out there.

And no, 10,000 days is not better than any of their other albums, but I don't think it's worse. It is what it is. I like it.

Member
Since: Jan 18, 2003


Feb 23, 2007 08:19 pm

if you were going to try to get someone else to like it, which track would you recommend? i bought the album but only listened to it twice, and while driving. i know i didn't get the full impact and there were even tracks i missed...


Member
Since: Jan 18, 2003


Feb 24, 2007 04:16 am

HAMBURGERS


Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Feb 24, 2007 11:26 pm

forty, I posted a couple of the tracks I though were great from 10,000 days as well a few months back. Now I gotta go read the track names later to remember which I liked. But indeed, overcomped is what it is. But they were truly going for something different with it and I do commend them for that. I do like it while I'm driving. But in the Vibe it is a $5000 system so I suppose that makes a huge difference in the listening.

But on the whole, I completely agree that most of todays radio friendly CD's are so squished it makes me not want to listen to them and makes them sound horrible in my eyes.

I have never and will never do that kind of mixing or mastering here. And that is how I lost one client two year ago. I told them out right I would not smash their music like that to gain a few dB's of volume on the final product. So they took the tracks and headed out to some brain dead moron who proceeded to crush the life completely out of the music. They printed 1000 copies to start and probably only sold 100 of them as when people started listening and telling others no one wanted it.

Master of the Obvious?
Member
Since: Jun 29, 2004


Feb 25, 2007 10:32 am

Unfortunately, loudness sells. Mostly, I believe the reason is that most people don't listen to the lyrics, the melody, or really the song as a whole. They remember the hook, and how loud the song was, and that's it. Reason being? Listening conditions. People these days can listen to 100 different bands in as many minutes. Within 20 seconds of hearing about a band, you can be on their myspace and listen to them. Bands/songs have about 20 seconds to make an impression these days. Nobody's willing to sit down, put a great CD/record in, and give it the time it deserves. Nobody cares about quality anymore, be it quality of musicianship, quality of recording, etc. And it sucks!

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Feb 25, 2007 05:12 pm

Hey Hue, if ya wanna feel really old then try this one on. I can say the first time i saw Ted Nugent was with the Amboy Dukes and the encore song was Journey to the Center of my Mind. Now that is old.

Pinnipedal Czar (: 3=
Member
Since: Apr 11, 2004


Feb 27, 2007 06:12 pm

Quite, noize . But, with age comes wisdom... for some, anyway . ; )


I listened to the Police's 'Outlandos D'Amour' the other night on an original cassette... KILLER dynamics on that... just right .

I wonder how much a cassette medium has to do with the approach they used back then ?

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Feb 27, 2007 08:46 pm

It had a little to do with it as it was harder to cram all that info on an 1/8" or less of magnetic media. So they had to work a little harder to keep things sounding good.

And ya, that Police album is great for having tons of intricate little nuances in it. I used to love that one in headphones.

One album, and I do mean vinyl here that was killer for the dynamics on it was the first Duran Duran album. That sucker had more dynamics then most bands of that time.

Another good one for not only dynamics but for probably one of the best mixes I have ever heard is the Mathew sweet album with Girl Friend on it. It is actually as good or better on CD then it was on vinyl. You can sit almost anywhere and hear everything so clearly placed it is unbelievable.

Why don't they make record's or CD's like that anymore?

Related Forum Topics:



If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.