What is the least compressed signal?

I suspect the previous post makes some critical errors in logic. First off the bat, attenuation is not the same thing as dynamic range compression. Attenuation actually preserves the dynamic range, just as increasing the gain preserves the dynamic range. Dynamic range is a ratio of levels. Thus when you turn up the volume at home you’re not getting more dynamic range.

Second, the Unofficial Dynamic Range Database is valuable because it works, and is a reasonably accurate reflection of *comparative dynamic ranges* of a great many recordings and formats. It’s a tool, a quick reference. The reason the database works is because you can hear just how shitty an overly compressed CD or LP sounds. And you can also hear how good a relatively uncompressed recording sounds, too. So, the database by and large correlates to reality. It’s demonstrably Correct. That’s the value of the database - it allows you to dodge the bullets flying around out there. If someone believes aggressive dynamic range compression yields greater resolution or anything else positive good luck with that.

Lastly, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that vinyl has excellent dynamic range compared to digital, no matter how you slice it, but especially during the past 20 years, when CDs suffered increasingly severe compression. That’s kind of the whole point. Just...look 👀 ...at...the ...dynamic ...range ...data ...base. Hel-loo!

And furthermore, and this is going to sting a little bit, but when the engineer is very careful to preserve dynamic range on the CD the full dynamic range of that CD can never (rpt never) be realized in actual practice for the reasons I’ve been hounding people about. In fact the actual dynamic range of a well recorded CD with excellent dynamic range cannot be reproduced in the home on digital equipment. It’s not even close! Without even going into room acoustics and vibration isolation and rf, the primary culprits are the stray scattered laser light getting into the photodetector and the vibration, wobbling and fluttering of the disc itself. Both of those problems together I estimate to constrain and limit full dynamic range by at least 3 to 6 dB, probably even more. Just for those two problems. Not even counting all the other factors that contribute to compressing dynamic range in the room. And those losses from scattered light and disc vibration are not (rpt not) recoverable. No matter what you do, how good your equipment is, or what tweaks you employ, that 3-6 dB (at least) is gone forever. As Bob Dylan says at the end of all his songs, “good luck to everyone.”

n80
Are you sure quibbling is exactly the right word?


>>>>I was responding to erik_squires, who quipped he didn’t wish to quibble then proceeded to quibble.

Agree with Geoff on the top two paragraphs. kosst seems to be missing the point. As Geoff says, what the DR database data shows, correlates almost perfectly with the listening experience. It is eminently useful in that practical application regardless of technical minutia. And for the end listener that makes it the most valuable and accurate tool available to assess DR compression prior to purchase.

As for Geoff's last paragraph, it seems "quibbling" remains necessary. The severe and even moderate dynamic range compression on so many CDs is due to a dubious practice, not a limitation of the medium itself.