Are the loudness wars fake so record companies can destroy the music?


Sam here and if the music industry have implimented EBU R 128 for loudness normalisation how come the volume on most digital remastered albums leaving the studio is set to "11" lf the listening volume will be the same across the board for streaming services why bother? l’ll tell you why. By lowering the overall volume after the fact does not repair the damage that has already been done! The goal here is to destroy the sound quality of the music and it makes no difference what side your on because the end result is still the same the album is unlistenable. l remember listening to music before the digital age and you not only heard the music you felt it.Well nothing has changed only now you hear the music and feel pain? Draw your own conclusions friends.
guitarsam
Yes, compression is necessary to 'contain' for lack of a better word the highs and lows within a listenable range. But that is compression that is used both out of necessity and, when done well, artistically. 

I'm still not sure I'm buying into the volume or low power devices theories. As far as volume, as I mentioned, most players and streaming services are normalized. As is radio. So , 'loud enough' to be noticed/heard really isn't the point any more. It can't be. Every device and service has a volume 'knob'. As far as low power devices, every iPhone I've ever had will play ear buds and even typical headphones loud enough to damage your hearing. So, to me anyway, that does not serve as an adequate explanation as to why this problem _persists_.
Really do not know what else I have to offer on this n80 unless you start digging into the conspiracy theory which I am not at that level yet...lol.

I can tell you though that my Motorola droid phone does NOT have enough power to drive my iem to the point of too loud for myself.
I tend to use a Dragonfly Black in between it and the phones to give a healthy boost in both volume and SQ.
I still don’t have an adequate conspiracy theory that works any better than your explanation or anyone else’s so I’m not ready to go down that path either.

I still think that for a number of years it was just the thing to do for reasons you mention and other reasons that were more valid 10-20 years ago and now it is just the de facto procedure. I suspect there is a fear among pop and high volume producers that if their song with minimal compression is played next to most any other songs in a system that is not normalized that their song will be thought to be the one with the problem and not the others and not be willing to risk it.

I also wonder what "normalized" means these days when the norm is loud and compressed.

Likewise, I suspect that the reason the problem is less common on vinyl is the reasonable assumption that people listening to vinyl are more discriminating. I just wish that attitude would carry over to CD (my preferred format). I think the reason it doesn’t carry over to CD is that currently CDs for new music are probably just an afterthought at most.

It seems like most of us audiophiles have 'push button' issues that set us off. It might be cables, it might be power supplies, it might be room treatment, it might be crystals and magnets. For me it is DR compression.  ;-)

Uberwaltz nailed it.

There’s no conspiracy here, music is just not being mastered for Audiophiles anymore, if it ever was. It’s being mastered to sound as good as possible on the devices that 98% of the world listen on. Phones, tablets, laptops and earbuds.

Is it a sad state of affairs for audiophiles who love dynamic range? Definitely. Is it a conspiracy? Not at all.
The problem is that compression doesn't actually make it sound as good as possible on typical devices and normalization often renders even that 'effect' pointless.

So that might be the reason why it is done but it still isn't a very good reason.


Of course many accepted standards don't make sense.