I can't listen to modern metal productions anymore / Compression and Loudness ...

I get the distinct impression that a lot of modern metal is so heavily smashed because it sounds marginally better when played through a mobile phone.

I mean seriously, why why why the FUCK would you EVER prefer listening to music though a tiny, tinny little speaker? I've known people that would rather have their phones blasting away than use headphones.
 
Tommy Gun said:
Actually, GOOD metal can be incredibly dynamic, and should be treated as such during the mixing and mastering process. That's why I mix music the way I want to hear it. MOST "musicians":Smug: (dudes in bands anyway) don't know shit about the difference between a good mix and a loud mix. So, generally, I don't give a band "what they want" so much as I try and give justice to the music.
Click to expand...

See, I feel we have different definitions (or standards, rather) of dynamics - to me, if you can listen to a whole album, especially with background noise, and not have to change the volume knob once, then the music really has no dynamics; if it's not too loud and has room to breathe, then I'd say it's got headroom and isn't squashed, but the only metal album I've ever heard that I can think of that had perceptible "dynamics" (as I call them) was the above "Ziltoid" (and I hate it for it :lol: )
 
Seems to me that albums are finally getting more dynamic again, as more and more engineers are pushing for this with an almost religious ferocity. It's a good thing.
 
when i think of modern metal album, i think of albums that have a real sense of space, not just hit after hit, if its a band playing, i wanna hear a band, so for me no matter the style, there are subtle dynamics in every performance that will be key to creating this space, examples being hit decays from drum hits or even just the ring out of a guitar.

so when things are just loud they are just more apparent to me and makes it harder to focus in on these details. so compression when used badly can ruin a good performance, but my favorite tool is the compressor, its the time factor that makes it infinity usable, i like to use it as a magnifying glass to focus in on a small snippet of subtlety and make it explode if you know what i mean.

on the other side of things i also like productions that cannot be heard faithfully in mono, i will almost never check anything in mono these days, maybe once for good measure, but i wont make a effort to make it work in mono and stereo.
 
Yep every time i have a great sounding mix I just destroy it trying to get loud. I honestly hate this loudness thing and it is very hard to listen to a whole CD of new stuff thats out. My ears are get tired after about 2 songs.

Yea and that rage album I can put on repeat all day and not get tired of it. Try that with most metal bands from today. Good luck........:puke:

So yea knock off the loudness war people! :saint:
 
broken81 said:
Yep every time i have a great sounding mix I just destroy it trying to get loud. I honestly hate this loudness thing and it is very hard to listen to a whole CD of new stuff thats out. My ears are get tired after about 2 songs.

Yea and that rage album I can put on repeat all day and not get tired of it. Try that with most metal bands from today. Good luck........:puke:

So yea knock off the loudness war people! :saint:
Click to expand...
It's really going to be leading by example. We of course on the small scale can push to have mixes of quality rather than volume - but as long as the major lable releases are getting slammed, it's just going to be a sad fact of life.

As I record more bands though, I think I will share my 2 cents on dynamics. I'll mix it to my standard, and if they still think louder is better, than the quality will only be a representation of their choice.
 
I think there's got to be a happy medium in there somewhere, in between having to ride the volume knob on your stereo all day and also letting transients get through somewhat intact. The point when it really starts getting tragic is when we use clipping to try and artificially poke transients through on a reproduction system. Simply letting go of a dB or two of volume and actually leaving the original transients in tact is quite a happy place for me. I don't think pushing for louder masters need be a really bad thing, as long as people know where to stop and don't keep pushing on, even whilst the mix is falling apart.

I have a kind of love-hate relationship with this, because when I mix I tend to use a lot of slow-attack compression on the drums and the levels invariably sound a little 'out of whack' until a limiter hits the mix and tames them. I suppose it was something I picked up early on to try and get more punch through heavily-limited mixes, but all the same I find really slamming a mix and trying to squeeze every ounce of level out of it forces a person to mix with a good spectral balance. That doesn't mean a good balance is unachievable without it, but it seems a nice aid.

I'm no real advocate of having to ride the volume knob throughout an album. It's simply just tedious, and what if I'm trying to stay at a manageable volume level? Once that shit goes from soft to loud, I'll be pissed. It's for this reason that listening to recorded classical music really tends to shit me. After I've cranked my volume and allowed all the mandatory hiss and other assorted B/S from bad unshielded cables, consumer soundcards and whatnot else make its way in there (and come on, you can't expect all consumers to have audiophile-grade gear... so floor noise of their system does become an issue) I still have to keep riding that volume for the turbulent sections so as not to blow my speakers/ears/neighbors. Those dynamics are amazing when you're in the hall with the orchestra, but home is rarely an ideal acoustic environment where everybody within a 100m2 radius is tuned into the same thing as you. That's why we compromise. We print things louder so that floor noise of the reproduction system is less of an issue, so that outside interference/noise is less of an issue (heavy compression has shown material to pop through traffic noise and whatnot else better) and so that a person doesn't need to ride their volume knob while they're driving the car...
 
What do you guys think the RMS sweet spot is for songs that are heavy the whole way through? I personally think its around -11 or -12dbs where some CDs today have sections at-8dbs. It sounds good at that instant second, but it quickly gets old. One of my favorite albums in terms of loudness is the Deftones "Around the Fur". Its loud enough to be competitive, but its very easy to listen to, at least in my opinion. I think the heavy passages in that song are somewhere around -11 or -12dbs.
 
I'm a little torn at this point. I used to be fanatic about dynamics until it started costing me clients!! Sometimes it's a tradeoff about what's good for the record vs. what's good for business.
 
Metaltastic said:
See, I feel we have different definitions (or standards, rather) of dynamics - to me, if you can listen to a whole album, especially with background noise, and not have to change the volume knob once, then the music really has no dynamics; if it's not too loud and has room to breathe, then I'd say it's got headroom and isn't squashed, but the only metal album I've ever heard that I can think of that had perceptible "dynamics" (as I call them) was the above "Ziltoid" (and I hate it for it :lol: )
Click to expand...

No, dude... Dynamics is in the music, NOT the recording. It's what Opeth gives you, or the song "True Believer" from Testament - "The Gathering"... Dynamics is Edge Of Sanity - "Crimson", etc. Dynamics is written into the music, and should never be squashed into oblivion, so that the listener loses the chance to experience those musical movements.
 
I've been watching this thread for a few days, and there's valid points on both sides: Yes, stuff needs to be really really squashed to come through on the radio. However, it's a lot more pleasant to hear a recording that is non-squashed and has some dynamic to it (yes, the dynamics should come from songwriting as well, but too much compression can even ruin that).

My question: What's to stop a record label from mastering the album at a lower volume and with less compression, and selling that to the public...but then sending the super-loud, super-squashed versions of the singles to radio stations and whatnot? Just a thought.
 
Andy Sneap said:
no it doesnt need to be squashed for radio, quite the opposite as they limit the piss out of it anyway.
Click to expand...

Yep. Everytime a song from the 80s comes on on "Your FAAAAVORITE station playing the BEST from the 80s, 90s and today's TOOOOP HITS!" it sounds TONS better than the new stuff. Usually modern songs are just a mush of bass and vocals with some guitars and barely any drums.

Also, I am not talking about radio tracks. NO modern metal ever gets played on the radio. And it's not that the underground/college/fan-stations that do play metal really have to care about maximizing their radius of reception.

The question is: why do people talk about being "competitive" in the loudness department? I mean why?? It's an artificial issue created by I-don't-know-who.

People buy CDs based on the music, not the level of the music. And they surely won't return their CD for a refund if they like it but it only is -14db RMS. Ask any non-audio person you know if they ever heard of the loudness wars and they'll say "no" ...

The discussion about relative levels is a different one. You can have relatively similar levels while driving in a car by not limiting the audio to death, but simply riding/mixing it accordingly.

Then again, I really don't want to think about people who listen to my stuff in the car when I make an "artistic mix decision".

It surely never hurt Led Zeppelin or Van Halen to have hellishly soft records by our standards today ... and people still blast it in their cars :)

mts1979 said:
My question: What's to stop a record label from mastering the album at a lower volume and with less compression, and selling that to the public...but then sending the super-loud, super-squashed versions of the singles to radio stations and whatnot? Just a thought.
Click to expand...

I have wondered about that, too, actually ...
 
Because there's no real benefit to sending a super-squashed mix to a radio station. With all the extra comp/limiting/exciting/arse-brutalizing they do, it will just come out sounding the worse for wear than if you'd sent in a slightly quieter one.
 
agreed to pretty much everything everyone has said!!!
with most cds after about track four your like " fuck i cant handle this anymore" and turn it off.

To be honest all i listen to these days is mogwai, sigur ros, explosions in the sky, this will destroy you, and other post rock mince, i think im getting old
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Matt Smith
Radio Compression
Replies
6
Views
665
Andy Sneap
SPLASTiK
S
Igor Samurovic
Loudness war or presence war?
Replies
21
Views
4K
Andy Sneap
Skaldir
S
Seizure.
Productions nowadays...
Replies
10
Views
686
Andy Sneap
everybody's x
E
Jevil
Bass, EQ and Compression
Replies
21
Views
3K
Andy Sneap
greyskull
G
S
The use of limiters in modern metal....
Replies
49
Views
3K
Andy Sneap
GeertSamuel
G
Top Bottom
Back