I can totally agree with tempestadiossa. Sorry but for listeners who play music for joy not "to kill silence" will definitely prefer a record which resembles a live performance.
Dynamics...
- Thread starter nefram
- Start date
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion ,man
Just because you like some of the "modern" music productions doesn' t mean you are a person who uses music to kill silence. Same goes for the live perfomances thing.
Sure, but definitely the MAJORITY who are paying attention to what they listen to prefer productions which have wide dynamics range. In other words: the majority has opinion that dynamic productions > flat productions. You can have your opinion, as well as me and everyone else, and that's the place to discuss it with good arguments. My argument is that music which has close to no dynamics range sounds less natural and worse on better speakers. If you have other opinion than a wikipedia link, post it.
I did post my opinion. I get what you wanna say but I have a different view on this topic (which I kinda need as I want to keep on earning some money with music) and you get pissed because I dont suck your hifi dick. man most of you hifi guys even have speakers that boost some of the high frequencies
talking about natural sounds. But when it comes to jazz for example I totally dig your opinion man. But most of the music I listen to works great with the loudness war compression.
And the wiki link wasnt expressing and couldnt even express any of my opinions, that was some bad joke dude.
The problem is there are many so-called sound technicians that have absolutely no idea what they are doing, and probably don't even listen to their records on anything different than their headphones, or higher end than their iPods. Otherwise they would reckon how bad they sound.
Last time I checked, most hi-fi users had perfectly neutral speakers. It's not hard to tell when speakers are artificially altering treble, and hi-fi users generally don't like it.
Of course loads of people dont know what they do, thats why I dont say that every new overcompressed record is good.
Then we haven't been expressing so different opinions after all. I stated in my first post in this thread that compression can be an artistic choice. The problem with the Loudness War is that artists and labels now feel compelled to master their records loud to be competitive, the need for which has been proven wrong by research, and don't even consider dynamics an option any longer.
Of course there isnt a real 'need' to compress the stuff but things just tend to sound bigger and heavier/more brilliant. I don't know what kind of music you listen to but maybe just some genre where people nowadys tend to fuck up the mastering. Today's people are used to big sounds and punchy productions where every bit of the track being as loud as possible, so if you want to get your money from a quite big amount of people there IS a need to take part in the loudness war (talking of popular music, not real underground stuff) because people tend to think it sounds weak if you dont do so.
The recording quality is also a big and important factor: making the stuff loud and bigger is sometimes a method to cover up the lame recordings (since nowadays any fool "is able to" record a band). Well music = big business and all. People dont feel the urge to listen to an extremely loud album they just want to hear the louder album
Dynamics "arent considered (in the mastering process)" anymore because less people would buy the music if it was as dynamic as before.
The recording quality is also a big and important factor: making the stuff loud and bigger is sometimes a method to cover up the lame recordings (since nowadays any fool "is able to" record a band). Well music = big business and all. People dont feel the urge to listen to an extremely loud album they just want to hear the louder album
Dynamics "arent considered (in the mastering process)" anymore because less people would buy the music if it was as dynamic as before.That's most untrue, and there is research to prove it (on top of common sense: when's the last time you purchased a record based on how loud it sounded, rather than on whether you liked the music?)...
... BUT Edguy were kind enough to provide us with a more concrete example: their new album Age of the Joker has 11db of dynamic range (as opposed to the current average of 5db which is rapidily becoming 4db), it sounds 1000 times better than 100% modern compressed records, and it's selling like crazy. 25th on the wordlwide Top 50 chart, and it wasn't even out in Canada and the U.S. yet.
The Loudness War does not sell records. Good music does. Artists can't blame their lack of talent on the lack of loudness if they don't sell. Volume knobs aren't just decorative tinsels
EDIT: New Opeth is also dynamic (well, more than average anyway).
Volume knobs aren't just decorative tinsels
I thought so too until the volume knob just fell off my guitar by itself
vivebodom
New Metal Member
- Sep 20, 2011
- 149
- 0
- 0
I vastly prefer the sound quality on older records (you know back when 'turning up' was the latest thing before your so called 'modern recording industry' took it's hold). Read: Alice Cooper vs. Children of Bodom (sorry guys I love the music, but Alice Cooper beats your ass any day of the week). Even though the dynamic contrast between loud and soft in rock music seems to rarely exceed 10db, I do believe that the older recording styles did a better job of preserving that. But like you say we're all digital now and digital does (allegedly) preserve the sound much better. Of course, there are considerations as you've all mentioned. I have to agree that there is definitely a trend toward tone destruction going about these days (even live- there exists a faction of people who have improperly latched onto that experimental notion of distortion and taken it to an irritatingly asinine place).
Personally, I blame the grunge era. Fucking Nirvana has ruined our lives (I have a theory that Kurt Cobain was well aware of this and that is the reason he offed himself)- destroying sound quality and setting that ever so stylish precident of the overdose that many illusioned youths have so tragically emulated.
Personally, I blame the grunge era. Fucking Nirvana has ruined our lives (I have a theory that Kurt Cobain was well aware of this and that is the reason he offed himself)- destroying sound quality and setting that ever so stylish precident of the overdose that many illusioned youths have so tragically emulated.
Actually, all Nirvana albums had a pretty decent dynamic range when they were released (you can see it here: http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/index.php?search_artist=nirvana&search_album=); it's the remasters that fell victim of the Loudness War, as with 99% of modern remasters. The Loudness War era roughly started in 1995.
vivebodom
New Metal Member
- Sep 20, 2011
- 149
- 0
- 0
Yah, I have seen that before. I am well aware. I still hate Nirvana. Anyone else find it interesting that the loudness war started (roughly) a year after Kurt Cobain died?
Most modern records have a digital master, which is kinda sad since analog is clearly superior in sound quality and beats the crap out of digital with its hands tied and blindfold any time of day (both in recording and in reproduction).
vivebodom
New Metal Member
- Sep 20, 2011
- 149
- 0
- 0
very true. I've had to convert various flac files to mp3 to put on my digital jukebox, and it's always sad with classical recordings because so much is lost there. But when it comes to mixed analog and digital sound it is really the only way to go- the digital gets right in line with the analog (which of course it sounds fine live- totally analog experience there, but the difference in recording between analog and digital really throws some people for a loop). I use AVS with the default settings...
So many rock bands today want to mix live symphonic sound with their electronic sound. Typically, they end up destroying the analog sound by converting it too many times (each conversion generates a loss of harmonics in the upper range) until THAT sound becomes dull and flat all because the want to avoid their electronic sound becoming dull. That is not the way to go- you can never get that symphonic sound back (short of recording it again), but you can get the digital back.
It's just the nature of the beast.
That's most untrue, and there is research to prove it (on top of common sense: when's the last time you purchased a record based on how loud it sounded, rather than on whether you liked the music?)...
... BUT Edguy were kind enough to provide us with a more concrete example: their new album Age of the Joker has 11db of dynamic range (as opposed to the current average of 5db which is rapidily becoming 4db), it sounds 1000 times better than 100% modern compressed records, and it's selling like crazy. 25th on the wordlwide Top 50 chart, and it wasn't even out in Canada and the U.S. yet.
The Loudness War does not sell records. Good music does. Artists can't blame their lack of talent on the lack of loudness if they don't sell. Volume knobs aren't just decorative tinsels
EDIT: New Opeth is also dynamic (well, more than average anyway).
I think you got me wrong here. I dont (really) listen to metal and you're all about metal 100% of the time - I was talking about today's music in gerenal / more mainstream stuff. I didnt mean to say: Loudness sells. I really like the sound of most of the 'old' rock records but I really dig the new production techniques and the "full", "clear" but "thick" sound you can create nowadays - when I was talking about stuff being more dynamic again I wasnt just talking about the dynamics themselves.. more about the whole fat sound thats lost.
After being some little grunge kiddy who hated nevermind (of course) I recently listened to it and I gotta say - production- and soundwise its now one of my favourite albums.
Also their ''dirty'' sound on In Utero or most other recordings isnt a product of that so called overcompression
fool.of course analog recording / mastering / mixing is waaayyy better.. but most people who claim that they're always hearing a difference between digital and analog are douches and snobs. Sorry.
<Arcane>
Active Member
Some good examples for analog and digital? I'm a noob in this place. What about Children Of Bodom's HCDR? I don't really like this album but I rarely haven't heard any album with a cleaner sound.
Similar threads
