... thoughts on Taylor Swift's REPUTATION CD...

Listening now to qualify for your criteria. I don't think I will make it through, so this is all I got.

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Taylor%20Swift

Please explain to me in layman's terms what this tells me, and how this is useful in a discussion regarding sound...
This may sound combative - it is not intended to be - I just want to understand why you are using this 'scale' to quantify sound...

He is referring to the dynamic range of the CD. As I understand it the dynamic range is the range of audible sound or tone from quietest to loudest. (Probably all the wrong terms but you can get what I'm saying). 

The CD you referenced has very poor dynamic range. This is a product, again as I understand it, of pushing up the loudness of the CD which compresses the dynamic range.

This isn't a knock against Taylor Swift or that CD per se because the problem is almost universal these days. It is very hard to find a new CD or downloadable file that doesn't suffer from this production technique.

Search Wikipedia: "loudness wars" if you want to learn a little more.

What I hear in these compressed CDs, compared to older ones, is that first it is loud. Too loud for the corresponding volume setting on your gear. After that to me they sound too bright, too strident and they make my ears tired. They lack 'richness' in my opinion. Some of my favorite new bands have albums with nearly identical DR to the Swift CD you mention. Their DR hovers around 5 or 6. Well recorded CDs like Mark Knopfler's 'Tracker" and Steely Dan's 'Two Against Nature' have DR values in the 12-16 range. And they are fairly recent. They just made the effort.

I'm sure I haven't laid this out exactly or with the most precise terms but the effect is fairly obvious to me sonically.

New vinyl seems to fair better....but still not as good as good old vinyl.

Also, the DR can vary A LOT between different CDs of the same album when it comes to older CDs and "remastered" CDs notoriously have worse DR than the original releases.

I am honestly wondering where all of these oddball posts are being generated. I have been a member for quite a while and I don't recall seeing so many pedantic posts. It is as if there is a "hired staff"  with little knowledge of audio to generate posts, thereby generating interest in Audiogon. Frankly these seem fake and rather pointless, not trying to be offensive here and I am sorry if I am but has anybody noticed this phenomenon ? Even the post headlines are very odd. Something like "HAVE YOU EVER NOTICED..." , or "WHEN I TURNED OFF MY AMP SOMETHING WENT WRONG...." This is just weird and very uninviting. Make a header that says something. Make some sense please!

You wrote a whole paragraph complaining about oddball posts that don't make sense and didn't even remotely make yourself clear. Maybe its contagious.

Thank you n80 for your explaination of acman3 post about the DR site.
For some reason: the acman3 post showed up after my post questioning it (look at the times: acman3 at 2:26 and my post at 3:27).

greg22lz: Confused by your post; not sorry if I seem pedatic to you. My title for the forum is pretty direct and I ask because I'd like to know, not annoy you...

My topic is under the MUSIC FORUM; I am not an audiophile, I am a music lover. Maybe I shouldn't be posting here, maybe this is too sophisticated a site, maybe too high-brow - or maybe you should be blowing your steam off in some other forum, or on some site designed for that purpose...

My thoughts are that...

Taylor Swift's "main" audience is 67%+ female and her general audience is in the 18-24 age range.

Taylor Swift is no George Gobel.

DeKay

@greg22lz , these posts may seem pedantic or oddball but you’ve been here a long time. I think we have a new generation of members, some who are experienced audiophiles and others who love music and want to build a system and join this hobby.

When I see an "oddball" post I check the date the OP joined. There’s a very high number who have joined in the last year...IMO, a great thing.
This OP has another thread in which he asks for recommendations of high quality recordings to test a system. That sounds like somebody who’s pretty new to high-end audio.

Based on the DR scale, the recording in question is as bad as it can possibly get and is high on the unlistenable scale.
The advice the OP should receive is the explanation of the recording process, compression, and the Loudness Wars.

... thank you all for your input... and thank you lowrider57 for the suggested topics for me to investigate and learn from.

BEST WISHES TO ALL, AND ENJOY YOUR MUSIC.

See my thread, it may explain the attacks on Taylor Swift's music.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/why-does-all-music-sound-the-same-an-explanation

Great to see others answered your questions so well.

Regarding if the music on this forum is too high brow, I would hope not. There are very few of us who don’t have recording that touch our hearts, or move our butts that are on the poor side of the loudness wars. Enjoy what you enjoy and post about what you enjoy, and take the criticism for what it is, another mans opinion.

However, It would help you understand what good sound is to listen to recordings that are well recorded, so you will know when a song is recorded well or you just enjoy it.

Remember we audiophiles care about sound and music, so have a little patience with us.

acman3: Thank you for your courtesy...

Agreed. And as a new audiophile you begin to experience this through different formats. I've ALWAYS been a music lover. As in sit down and listen to music and do nothing else for extended periods.

But in the last 10 years or so that has meant iTunes on a low end (but pretty darn good) system.

Hearing good songs that are well produced and uncompressed (from a digital file standpoint) is a revelation in itself. Hearing them on a decent system (who can define that?) is another revelation. The good part is that you get a whole new level of enjoyment.

The downside is that you can become less tolerant of less-than-hi-fi sound.

I still don't mind pop music in my car or wherever I'm in the mood for it even if it is lo-fi.

Also agree not to get bothered by other people's taste in music and how they feel about yours. Those of us who get real serious about our rock music can easily be reminded that even at its best it is relatively low brow compared to Bach, Beethoven and Brahms.

Actually the average dynamic range measure of 10 for that recording is better than average. Regardless, no one measure including dynamic range alone is a reliable indictor of whether a recording will sound good to someone or not. I’ve heard some metal recordings on the very low end of that scale like the CD release of Death Magnetic by Metallica that deliver quite well for The genre but only if the system is up to snuff and can play loud without clipping and adding distortion.

Just in my very brief experience I have found that 9 and up (on the scale used by the dr-loudness wars site) seems pretty good. Some of the albums I've cited hover around 6 or 7 and even to my untrained ears it sounds unpleasant and seems impossible to find that just right volume level.

@mapman , the average DR of 10 is for vinyl and I agree with you that it's better than most digital files which are pressed to vinyl. 
The CD and download (itunes mp4) measures an average of 6. This digital file is what most of this demographic will be listening to. This is the issue that the article addresses; other genres besides pop music get the same treatment and that's the problem.

I also agree with your point about some highly compressed heavy metal sounding acceptable. The difference may be that pop music is a mix of electronic effects layered throughout. Metal is well mic'd musicians recorded and mixed using standard industry techniques.

The whole reason for aggressive compression is to be able boost the level. Those aggregious CDs, downloads or LPs are *already loud*. But they don’t have dynamics.That’s why they call it the Loudness Wars. *Turning up the volume doesn’t help dynamics.* You can’t fool Mother Nature. It still sounds stupid. Hel-loo! As I keep saying, if it doesn’t have dynamics it ain’t music! I refuse to listen to it. But feel free to knock yourself out. 10 is not really acceptable in my book. It’s logarithmic, remember. What you want is up around 14 and above. Those are good numbers. Ten is barely acceptable. And when ten is average that means much of the recording is unacceptable.

Agree with you. However, I don't find too many CDs with average DR above 14 and I usually find 12 and up okay for me.

I would also point out that even a lot of hi-res downloadable files are victims of the loudness wars. They may not be compressed from a data standpoint but they are from a DR standpoint. This is a generalization, of course, but it is not safe to assume that because it is on Tidal or one of the hi-res file purchase sites that it does not have DR compression.

Exactly! That’s the trouble. There aren’t enough CDs with great dynamic range. Hel-loo! Life is too short to listen to modest recordings. The reason so many reissued/remastered CDs show up at yard sales, flea markets is because they suck. I look for average DR of 15 or 16. Remember it’s logarithmic.

What you want is in the limo. What you get is no tomorrow.

The only way to get vinyl or CDs with minimal DR (higher numbers) is to buy the original issues. Something that I have been doing for a while. 
Regarding new music, there's no getting around the high compression.

I think when you look at the perceived decline in the hi-fi/audiophile hobby (if there is a decline, I just hear people talking about it) then I think you would have to add the loudness wars as one of the coffin nails. I like older rock music and like finding old stuff I've never heard but for my interests to stay keen I like an infusion of new stuff too. If the new stuff, even if well written and well performed, is of low SQ....why bother?

Most newer "improved" pop/rock remasters on CD are mastered louder than the originals. So which approach in general is better? You would think the answer is obvious. The thing is when people shell out more money for the same stuff, they want to hear a noticeable difference and radical digital remastering in various forms is a means to that end. Beyond just being mixed louder usually, you often just might hear things you may not have heard before.

Whoo hoo someone (Steven Wilson) remastered something recently and apparently got the DR right!
http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/dr/desc?artist=yes&album=fragile

Nice. There were other good versions on the list but always good to see that someone still knows how to do it.

Which makes me wonder if someone could make money re-engineering new music for audiophiles? I can't see that it would cost the artists anything. It might not make them much additional income but it wouldn't hurt. I'm guessing the engineer might not make much either which would be the limiting factor.

But wouldn't it be great if there was an MSFL type organization/company that remastered hot new music to audiophile standards! I'd pay extra in a heart beat.

I don't give much for the DR. A lot of the high DR:s sounds crap. It's just one of several important factors.
The OP asked for our SQ thoughts on Taylor Swifts new CD. I'm sorry she left the country music. She's talented. The CD sounds ok. It's very clean. Her voice is well recorded and in some tracks also very close. It's when some the songs are becoming loud the problems arise with - in my ears- distortion. Probably because of a lot of processing and compression. But really most of it is quite enjoyable - if you like the music and have the right full-range dynamic system for playing this kind of music. I suppose Harbeth won't do very well :-)

Again, I don't see what a full range dynamic system can do to help recordings with a DR of 5.

I'd guess the distortion you're hearing in the Swift CD is from clipping because of the DR compression.

I agree completely that DR isn't everything and a recording with high DR doesn't mean that it has good SQ or is well produced. But it seems that it would be an impressive feat to produce a quality recording with low DR.

I have a sneaking suspicion people are just guessing even they say oh, dynamic range is not the only thing they do to the recording, they also make it more detailed. There is no evidence for that claim at all. In other words, it’s wishful thinking. They compress dynamics to avoid clipping and so more people will buy the product, you know, because it’s louder.

gosta: interesting that we both hear similar elements from this CD.
When I posted this forum, I wasn't looking for validation to my enjoying the CD, and although it took a left-hand turn from the 1st input, it has opened my eyes to serious audiophile considerations...
Truthfully - in making future CD purchases, although I will access the DR file, it WILL NOT BE THE OVERRIDING FACTOR in deciding to hear new music...

I agree. And that has been my m.o. these last few months. If I like the band and like the music I buy it. Just be prepared for disappointment. 

This morning I also listened to som of the tracks on my large systems which are Westlake (used for "Thriller" and "Bad") and ATC 150 (used for most recordings). I actually need the 15 inch woofers of the ATC to reproduce the heavy kicks and the bottoms in the superb "Delicate" to make it sound what you would consider as correct. Most of the tracks are really powerful and very well done. I'm actually reconsidering my thoughts on Swift :-)
They are however not without faults, probably because of heavy digital processing. But I would say in its genre reference quality. And testing this cd loud on a lot of "audiophile" speakers voiced for "smooth" reproducing of music will certainly uncover them....
In my opinion this cd is very dynamic. But because the average level is rather loud it could be that the measurement method behind the DR list doesn't do it justice. In most of the tracks there are nearly silent parts followed by a loud part which I call dynamic, maybe a 25 db change from one moment to another.  

If you like Swift you may also like Dua Lipa. 

I however agree on the DR List ratings of Talking Heads :-)

And i would like to recommend a masterwork in this or similar genre Christian Falk cd "Quel Bordelo" including the, at the time, top range of swedish musicians.

Newbies........
 
Nothing like 'em....

OH ON! Dua Lipa is rated 5 - 4 - 7 on the DR Scale: obviously unlistenable to some (lol) - BUT THAT WON'T STOP ME FROM A LISTEN...

Uh, we call that a flatline. DOA.

gosta: interesting comment about the 15" woofers - maybe my Gershman Avant Garde RX20s are so quick and accurate on the thumping bass distributed throughout the Swift CD (see my origional comments about 'thump'...)

and with the comment from geoffkait - we once again take that left turn...

I'll just stick to my first issue Vinyl collection.

mastercylinder, You have a first issue analog vinyl of the Taylor Swift album the OP is asking about?

Gershman Avant Garde RX20s! Beautiful, would like to hear them sing. From a reviewer: "As I had mentioned previously, the imaging produced by the Avant Gardes is first-rate, particularly for a floorstanding speaker. They are certainly capable of projecting a tight, well-defined image with lots of depth and layering. I found that Joni Mitchell’s "Overture/Cotton Avenue" from Don Juan’s Reckless Daughter [Asylum 701-2] has some marvelous imaging. In fact, there are couple of incredible effects to check for on this track. First, there are some guitar chords that are played with the reverb out of phase, making the image appear to start in the center and explode out to the edges of the soundstage. There’s also a reversal of this, which is to play the chord out of phase with the reverb in phase. This causes the chord to start out at the edges of the soundstage and converge to a point that is dead-center of the speakers. This is a very cool effect when the system is imaging well. The other effect is at the end of the overture section, where there are a number of individual notes played in fairly rapid succession on a bass guitar. Again, if the speakers are imaging well, you will notice that each note shifts image, not just between the speakers, but in depth as well. "Overture/Cotton Avenue" is a must-have demo track in my book, and the Avant Gardes do it justice."
Looks a little like my JBL 250ti. The black one- not the "right" one, but everybody when they see them wants to be close and touch them...

... Would be interesting if mastercylinder does have the 1st issue vinyl - and could/can give us an accessment (and hoping that he will not compare her to George Gobel) of sonics... 

Well, even if he does the source material is probably digital...............

Reputation is state of the art modern pop production.  Complaining about DR and compression in modern pop is like complaining that rock and roll has too much drumming--it comes with the territory and to varying degrees always has.  We love it, particularly through the PMC monitors we use for recording.  Of course, we also love the older Taylor Swift albums too--and those had plenty of compression as well.  The common denominator is that they are all very well done.

... amazingly: ALL the interations of Joni Mitchell's 'DON JUAN'S RECKLESS DAUGHTER' are high on the DR Scale, with the 1st "19" I've seen in my short history of viewing DR evaluations...
WHO KNEW?

@dbwalek

May I ask what PMC monitors you use. I still miss PMC in my collection. Thought of IB2 some day. Any other reference recording?

New cd from Rosanne Cash on Tidal. Seems very promising. Also really recommend The Teskey Brothers. Superb sound. No db limit. Sure, a plagiat of old soul and R&B but great. The singer is terrifying. Lots of nice guitar. Also comes with recorded noice which I suppose all audiophiles will appreciate.

And you don't need to buy the cd. Quality on Tidal HIFI good enough....

Sure.  They're PMC twotwo.6's.  The brand was recommended to me by Glenn Meadows, a well-known mastering engineer in Nashville who mastered my daughter, Merritt Gibson's first album on some enormous PMCs in his studio. (Played me some Steely Dan, of course;  he mastered some of their compilations.)  I first heard the twotwo's at VintageKing in Nashville, where they played me some tracks from Beck's Morning Phase album, and that remains a favorite.  Since the purpose of monitors is essentially to bring everything right up front and let you hear every part of the mix, anything with a lot going on is fun to hear on good monitors.  Since this is a Taylor Swift oriented chain, I'll mention an older track, All Too Well, from her Red album.  In addition to being one of her best songs, it's really fun to listen to the electric guitar on the left channel on the PMC's.  You feel like your standing next to the guitar player in the tracking room.  It sounds like it was recorded in one take, and knowing how good the session players in Nashville are, it probably was.  The twotwo's are pretty pricey for small near field monitors, but PMC has a new model out, the Result 6, I think, that's a a lower price point and has been getting good reviews in the pro audio community (e.g., recent Sound on Sound review).

dbwalek said:

" Complaining about DR and compression in modern pop is like complaining that rock and roll has too much drumming"

Totally disagree. There is nothing inherent in pop that requires, needs or benefits from DR compression. And there is no reason that pop can't be enjoyed for SQ either.

What I would like to understand is why especially voices often seems to fare so bad under modern compression/digital processing. When Taylor Swifts voice is made louder all her natural voice (which is fine) disappear and we are left with something that hurts our ears (at least my right one). It might of course be the voice itself, but I don't really think so. Very apparent on the Red cd, less so on Reputation. Is it because of some "radio-editing"?