Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile

Posted by RBP (P) on May 20, 2003 at 17:16:05

In Reply to: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile posted by CELT on May 20, 2003 at 15:28:09:

The so called "loudness wars" have been going on over 6 years now and it is getting to critical mass now.

Mainly, the digital domain allows for a dynamic range of over 135dB which is hardly necessary for high quality reproduction but as mastering engineers are "asked/prodded/threatened" to use more dynamic compression and peak limiting, then the dynamic range will suffer. Their are examples (especially in rock, hard rock and metal music) of works having a signal to signal level of only 3dB, meaning that the softest sounds are only 3dB under the louder ones. This practice is rediculous at best.

When rendering a file (music), the best fidelity comes in with RMS levels around the -18dB level for pop music and peaks of 0.5dB. Radio stations have compressors as well so this "double compression", serves no purpose other than to please the bean counters because the CD "stands above others" in sheer signal quantity/loudness/irritation.

All mastering engineers I know would like to use common sense in mastering but then you have the clients to please. IF a paying client wants their work to hit the limit and then some, the mastering engineer has 3 choices:

1. Use the L2a limiter and stuff all the dynamics up to the peg.
2. Attempt to educate the client that the radio stations' compressors will actually work better if their is some breathing room, the product will sound better and perhaps others will follow this lead and the loudness wars will be put to an end.
3. Decline and dismiss involvement in the project and forfiet the pay.

Do a WWW search for "Loudness wars". Hundreds of pages and volumes of information, all over the web.

One of the problems that exsist is the improper calibration of the digital domain. In its infancy, -17dBFs was the practical "0VU"

IF the manufactures would look toward re-establishing a calibration that makes some sense, then it would not make sense to have the mastering pushed into clipping and the dynamic range squashed all to hell. Unfortunantly, the genie is out of the bottle and all those horrible mastering jobs would not playback without total overload, meaning their would be many returns. I proposed an absolute limit for RMS level to be at -10dB but it fell on deaf ears. -17 would be more like it but depending on the works, this is variable, depenmding on how long the loud passages are VS the softer ones. A universal figure of -10dB would make even the loudest of CD's at least listenable.

I have a machine that has separate internal volume controls for the Six channels (4zones, front, rear, center, lows) of Multichannel SACD. One disc in particular defaluts them to full tilt (front), and it clips (70%) with this disc. I must manually recalibrate the controls to get any decent sound at all.

It is the abomination of the arts in a nutshell.

Nobody has the answers yet. The new Metallica is supposed to be less than 3dB signal to signal and is deemed the loudest CD ever made. I don't think it has hit the shelves yet.
Audio AsylumÂ® Signature line: Hearing is believing.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - CELT 15:28:09 05/20/03 (18)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - John Atkinson 04:13:33 05/23/03 (0)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - ducati 13:06:13 05/21/03 (0)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - EKG 08:32:38 05/21/03 (0)

Come back home to Mordor, we miss you. (nt) - Sauron 06:36:10 05/21/03 (0)

Do you get Paid for these Inane Postings Re This Fishwrap?? - Bare 18:59:17 05/20/03 (2)

A real man has balls! - Muzikmike 04:29:37 05/21/03 (1)

Some real men only have one - eric the red 10:28:47 05/21/03 (0)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - RBP 17:16:05 05/20/03 (5)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - Bruce from DC 08:16:52 05/21/03 (1)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - RBP 09:51:45 05/21/03 (0)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - Dan Banquer 07:15:39 05/21/03 (2)

And what might that vested interest be... - Ubiquitous Skittercat ;,,,~ 10:03:41 05/21/03 (1)

Re: And what might that vested interest be... - Dan Banquer 10:23:12 05/21/03 (0)

Here's the problem - PabloP 16:16:02 05/20/03 (4)

Re: Here's the problem - CELT 16:38:11 05/20/03 (3)

Travesty of incompetent engineers - Scooter 17:22:17 05/20/03 (2)

Re: Travesty of incompetent engineers - CELT 19:04:39 05/20/03 (1)

Sorry... - Scooter 06:00:09 05/21/03 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - RBP 17:16:05 05/20/03 (5)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - Bruce from DC 08:16:52 05/21/03 (1)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - RBP 09:51:45 05/21/03 (0)

Re: J.A.'s As We See It in June Stereophile - Dan Banquer 07:15:39 05/21/03 (2)

And what might that vested interest be... - Ubiquitous Skittercat ;,,,~ 10:03:41 05/21/03 (1)

Re: And what might that vested interest be... - Dan Banquer 10:23:12 05/21/03 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.