Why does it have to be SO F'ING LOUD?

Discussion in 'Pro Audio' started by Tocaor, Jun 9, 2005.

  1. Tocaor

    Tocaor Guest

    I picked up the latest Coldplay CD and I am so disgusted with the audio
    quality. There is absolutely no dynamic range and it's painful to listen to
    at even a moderate volume. I know I am beating a dead horse here but have we
    become a nation of deaf retards? Why do labels insist on making every
    release sound like shit now?

    This idiotic practice of pumping up recordings to such ridiculous levels has
    to some back down to earth. Lots of great music is greating destroyed. I
    really don't understand this shit anymore....

    Make it stop....please!!!!
     
    Tocaor, Jun 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tocaor

    JP Gerard Guest

    I hear ya bro...

    Things get messed up from the recording to the mastering through the mixing
    stages...

    I somehow managed to find some clients who actually enjoy dynamic range.

    But I still do get a lot of "is the CD going to be loud enough?".

    JP
     
    JP Gerard, Jun 9, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tocaor

    Dana Guest

    A friend of mine brought his 14yo son over to my small studio the other
    night and we got into that very discussion. He brought in one of his CD's
    (Sum41 or some zilla thing on a green CD maybe?) and we put it on the
    system and it was like pure noise. Every meter in the place just sat there
    solid like a test tone was being sent through the system. I don't get it.
    But then my parents didn't get The Beatles either :)
     
    Dana, Jun 9, 2005
    #3
  4. Tocaor

    stefolof Guest

    It could (hopefully) be a passing trend, just like the boost of treble
    in the 80's. When technology made it possible to add a lot of treble
    people tended to overuse it. Then came a "stabilization" period. There
    are a few mastering engineers who refuses the loudness trend, for
    examle Bill Inglot and Steve Hoffman. Great sounding records IMO.
     
    stefolof, Jun 9, 2005
    #4
  5. Tocaor

    Dana Guest

    You guys must be reading my mind! (Very dangerous!!)
    I was sorting through all my mp3 stuff and found a few of the "Best 500
    Songs of the 80's" type things. So I pop a couple into the audio system in
    the den for a listen because I was in my 20's in the 1980's and even
    though I'm a keyboard player, the 80's IMHO is the decade we can leave out
    of music encyclopedia's. Yea I know the DX7 etc, but going back and
    hearing these things on a really nice system (Bryston/Kef/etc) is very
    revealing.
    Some things I noticed that I never noticed before:

    1. Intros to songs are very long. Most times I'm bored b4 the tune even
    starts.
    2. Song intros take one of 3 types:
    a:) Machine gun drum intro
    b:) Acoustic guitar stuff, very long intro C:) Cyndi Lauper
    circus-synthy stuff, also very long intros.

    3. The sound is horrific on most stuff.
    4. The old timers sound horrid trying to sing 80's type music (Streisand,
    etc). Neil Diamond "September Morn" is laughable and I like his 60's 70;s
    stuff.
    5. No dynamics at all. No doubt due to synths. 6. Songs are mostly
    forgetable. Where is "Men at Work and Flock of Seagulls" these days? Or
    were they 70's? I dunno, they sucked. 7. Sheena Easton borders on sharp,
    badly at times.It makes my teeth hurt. 8. Production on Michael Jackson
    tunes stunning, ie:"She's out of my life" (insert MJ Joke here __________. )

    No wonder Metal bands made a come back!

    BTW I think much of the treble stuff on CD was due to the RIAA curve not
    being compensated for correctly when mastering for CD. IOW tunes used to
    be mixed for vinyl using the RIAA curve which was not needed for CD.

    I have some friends that are 80's fanatics, but for me, music was never
    worse until now...

    There are some stunning recordings being made now but they are few and far
    between,

    Maroon 5 and Jon Mayer are two groups with stellar sound IMHO.
     
    Dana, Jun 9, 2005
    #5

  6. With the 'marketing bits' and sample rates ever on the increase, it
    would appear that high-end extension will be abused indefinitely.

    I wish someone had enough valid data to put forward a proposal
    to AES (who *might* be able to influence results) to set a limit to the
    RMS values. I just had a record that I was really proud of, squashed
    into oblivion by mastering... and what appears to be cheezy mastering
    at that. Apparently nothing was done except massive limiting followed
    by normalization, but the average RMS is between -6 and -8 dbfs on a
    blues trio with vocal. (Essentially a quartet I suppose, due to stacked
    rhythm guitars). Ear fatigue sets in after just a few minutes, and there
    seems to be a buzzsaw running over everything... massive flat-topped
    waves.... but I guess that's just the 'trend', eh?

    --
    David Morgan (MAMS)
    http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
    Morgan Audio Media Service
    Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
    _______________________________________
    http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
     
    David Morgan \(MAMS\), Jun 9, 2005
    #6
  7. Tocaor

    Joe Sensor Guest

    80's all the same? No more than the 70's or any other decade.

    There are some extrodinary albums from the 80's. Songs AND production.
     
    Joe Sensor, Jun 9, 2005
    #7
  8. Tocaor

    Jay Kadis Guest

    80's all the same? No more than the 70's or any other decade.

    There are some extrodinary albums from the 80's. Songs AND production.[/QUOTE]

    Generalization is always bad.

    I do agree that there were some great recordings done in the '80s.

    -Jay
     
    Jay Kadis, Jun 9, 2005
    #8
  9. Tocaor

    Dana Guest

    Yea I know, but OVERALL.... and top 40 pop radio play.
    The Linda Ronstadt /Nelson Riddle albums were technically wonderful
    sounding.

    If you look at the 70;s overall, you will still find the tunes being
    played, being used as music in commercials, being lifted for samples etc.
    I don't hear much of that happening with 80;s tunes.
    They seem to be mostly forgotten.
    Maybe we have to wait another 10 years and the cycle will repeat?
     
    Dana, Jun 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Tocaor

    Tocaor Guest

    Sorry for some of the typos in the original post. No matter how much I read
    what I just typed I still read it for what I meant in my mind and not what's
    on the screen. Silly....

    Anyway, I wish labels would release two versions from their top artist so we
    can have a choice between a CD with reasonable dynamic range/clarity and the
    distorted garbage we are be plagued with now. I bet once people start
    realizing how shity the current trends sound they will want things to back
    the other way.

    I guy can dream can't he?
     
    Tocaor, Jun 9, 2005
    #10
  11. Tocaor

    Randy Yates Guest

    I agree with you in general, but there were a few good ones. Journey (most
    of their stuff was in the 80s) and Night Ranger come to mind. It seems that
    era was a bit more "poppie".
    --
    % Randy Yates % "I met someone who looks alot like you,
    %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % she does the things you do,
    %%% 919-577-9882 % but she is an IBM."
    %%%% <> % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO
    http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
     
    Randy Yates, Jun 10, 2005
    #11
  12. Tocaor

    bjackson1 Guest

    I was sitting down with a few friends of mine (we are all 19) to listen
    to some music on my DIY system, and also to make some ringtones out of
    some of the music (yeah, I know, kids these days...haha), so I was
    loading them into Adobe Audition often, and it was amazing how like
    Green Day, etc, were like 100% compressed, limited, and normalized and
    never changed the entire time.

    There was one song that I can't remember that had one dynamic change in
    it, like it went silent for just a second that my friend was entranced
    with, thought it was the coolest thing in the world.

    Then I pulled out some Chesky Records, and Ella Fitzgerald, etc, to
    show them what a real song looks like, and it was a huge difference.
    Adobe showed large peaks and valleys, and nothing went over the -3 line
    that I remember and most was much softer, as to give actual dynamic
    range. To say the least, they were amazed :)

    I don't even listen to popular music with my speakers at all, they are
    too revealing, and I can't stand how this compressed shit sounds on
    them. So loud and so much treble, bleck. Now in my car audio setup,
    it sounds great on, because I think the drivers are built for it. Not
    very revealing, tweeters with low extension...etc. Not saying that car
    audio has to be bad, just saying most of it is lack luster.
     
    bjackson1, Jun 10, 2005
    #12
  13. Tocaor

    Mike Rivers Guest

    The AES has no influence on this. SPARS might, but their business is
    seeing that recording engineers, producers, and mastering engineers
    keep profitably busy. Among the thousand home made CDs that get
    mastered every week, most request that their disk be made as loud as
    commercial CDs, and the mastering engineer complies and takes their
    $500. The others who want dynamic range don't really worry about
    whether their CDs get played on the radio, and hope that the people
    who buy them will turn up the volume if they want it louder.

    The commercial projects spend a lot more in the recording studio and
    the mastering lab and can turn out spectacular product if that's what
    the producer wants. But most of the time, the producer wants it to
    sound like the competition because that's what it will be up against.


    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers ()
    However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
    lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
    you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
    and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
     
    Mike Rivers, Jun 10, 2005
    #13
  14. I don't know about deaf, but clearly we've been a nation of retards for
    quite awhile.
     
    Roger Christie, Jun 10, 2005
    #14
  15. Tocaor

    SSJVCmag Guest

    Did you take tehr record back and demand your money refunded and state
    Loudly and Clearly thst it SOUNDED BROKEN?

    Money attched to clear and concise messages from pissed-off consumers is all
    that will talk here
     
    SSJVCmag, Jun 10, 2005
    #15
  16. Tocaor

    SSJVCmag Guest

    It exists, it's the film mixing standards. Couple that with (somebody help
    me on this next part) a mastering protocol form ?? Sony ?? HDCD ?? Some
    standard that, the more you pushed the hypercompression, the more it
    restricted the overall level to an equal-loudness compensation by way of
    ballancing against the remaining crest-factor ...?

    Then there's Bob Katz' Holy Grail of the K-meter system
     
    SSJVCmag, Jun 10, 2005
    #16
  17. Tocaor

    SSJVCmag Guest

    Good grief... Somebody PLEASE second me here with TOTO...??!

    Ignoring the later re-re-release best-of's that were agressively
    re-mastered, the original albums and the PAST TO PRESENT (or whatever the
    first best-of-cum-extras was called) are still my benchmarks for what
    rockpop arranging, playing and production is all about.... Not counting
    impossible-to-achieve wonders like Steely Dan or Electric Ladyland.
     
    SSJVCmag, Jun 10, 2005
    #17
  18. Tocaor

    Ben Bradley Guest

    What band was it (U2?) that got its panties in a wad maybe a year
    ago when their songs showed up on P2P BEFORE they released the album?
    (the rumor was they did it themselves so the could generate some press
    and be "oh so offended" about the whole thing) Were these
    "unauthorized" releases pre-mastered mixes? How did they sound
    compared to the final product on CD?
     
    Ben Bradley, Jun 10, 2005
    #18
  19. Tocaor

    Ben Bradley Guest

    I recall in high school a lot of guys would turn up their car
    stereos way past the point of clipping. I couldn't imagine doing that
    myself (I just wanted an amp and speakers that would go to that volume
    and still sound CLEAN), but I imagine people actually liked it that
    way. So now they make CD's that sound that way without having to turn
    the volume all the way up, and I suspect some people like it.
    You may be right, but I'm cynical enough about most consumers that
    I don't see a significant amount of this happening.
     
    Ben Bradley, Jun 10, 2005
    #19
  20. Tocaor

    Brian Guest

    When kids listen to a lot of the so called music, that the labels are
    putting out these days, they think, that it sounds great, because they
    don't know any better.
    If the people funding the garbage can pay some mastering guy to make it
    sound like what is selling, and they think, that it could mean more
    money in CD sales, that is what they're going to do.

    Like or not, IT'S CALLED CAPITALISM! It isn't about art. It's about
    making money.
     
    Brian, Jun 10, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.