Volume Wars-- Are things improving, getting worse, or status quo?
Last night, my friend Robert brought over an LP of 1939 recordings of the Duke Ellington orchestra that had to be transferred from 78 rpm recordings. Not sure if the new music is pure crap, but the old music is pure joy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb2w2m1JmCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbjzfZSmQMM Frank |
The Loudness Wars are still raging but you can find exceptions. The Steven Wilson Remixes of some of the big prog-rockers (ELP, Yes, King Crimson, Jethro Tull) are considered to be tastefully done with good dynamic range. Steven Wilson is a contemporary prog-rocker and even some of his albums have been squashed: http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Steven+Wilson&album= In an interview, Miles Showell, Mastering Engineer, Abbey Road Studios says that limiting was done on the cd of the White Album but none was used on the Blu-Ray 24/96 version. These are small victories but they offer some hope. https://recordcollectormag.com/reviews/beatles-50th-anniversary-edition What’s the difference in the way you approached the mastering of the vinyl and CDs?I was listening to Ray Davies "Americana" last night and it sounded pretty gentle to me. It and its follow-up, "Our Country" are really good albums, more in the vein of his 70s concept albums. I think they are definitely worth a listen and better if you do sit down and really listen to them. |
The biggest problem is not overall music quality (style preference) nor is it the mastering per se. The BIGGEST problem with current music is it is too "perfect". Every bit of human feel, nuance, etc has been removed via various devices that "correct" for slight pitch variations, time variations (feel if you will) etc. in the pursuit of "perfection". This is one of the primary reasons modern, digital, music sounds the way it does. In terms of mastering, there is a fairly lackluster approach to mastering to have digital music sound ok through a set of 100.00 headphones connected via bluetooth. This is where the $$ is, not us "audiophile" whack-a-doodles. To that, the public that music is primarily marketed to purchases one or two songs, MIGHT listen to the entire song (probably not) and push "next" on the phone. Basically, that's it. Of course, there are exceptions, and there are plenty of artists out there that actually care about the final production of their craft, but most fall into the "this is how we do it here" situation. There is a reason that there is the "Nashville" sound, the "L.A." sound etc.. Artists are pigeonholed into whatever the producer wants... simple really, and we get the garbage that comes from that. |
The Loudness Wars are still raging but you can find exceptions. The Steven Wilson Remixes of some of the big prog-rockers (ELP, Yes, King Crimson, Jethro Tull) are considered to be tastefully done with good dynamic range.Yes these are sadly but a few that didn't get "squashed up" in the re-mix. When there's no or little compression, not only do you get the sense of the massive dynamic swings, but also there seems to be more space between the notes, your brain must be getting a chance to relax and therefore no listeners fatigue seems to set in, compared to compressed relentless wall of sound version of the same album. Cheers George |
I believe compression started off as product of the loudness wars,
I’m not saying this justifies using compression, but these are the pathetic good point of it. It’s better in cars as the road/engine noise won’t drowned out the quieter passages, because everything’s at the same level. Also compressed music is good for the i-phone earbud brigade as they won’t blow up as many earbuds with sudden dynamics, and also probably save the users hearing, if turned up too much to hear the quite passages above the traffic noise while waking around. Cheers George |
