It's too freaking loud !!!
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Tech Talk
Forum Description: Discuss musical instruments, equipment, hi-fi, speakers, vinyl, gadgets,etc.
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=72718
Printed Date: December 03 2024 at 12:50
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: It's too freaking loud !!!
Posted By: Hawkwise
Subject: It's too freaking loud !!!
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 06:43
|
As someone who doesnt really buy CD's very often (being a vinyl freak ) i have come to notice the last few CD's i have bought have been mastered so freaking loud , Yesterday the new KT Tunstall album droped through the letter box , so i took out the lovley re master of Coltrane's Giant Steps , Popped in the Tunstall didnt touch the Volume control pressed play booooooooooooom holy sh*t man that;s freaking loud !!! The album has next to know real dynamics to the sound which is such a shame as Miss Tunstall does write good songs and i am big fan of her previous albums (specially acoustic extravaganza ) but this to me because the way been mastered is almost UNLISTENABLE . I also found the same with a CD of Zepplins Houses of the Holy , which now has been relegated to the car stereo as i find cant listen to it on my hifi it does my ears in. does this happen to many of the Prog re issues on CD ? also do they do the same to the new prog albums out there ? Why is this being done ? anyone else find this damn annoying ?  ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 06:50
|
Never noticed this, so the CD's I have must be different. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 06:53
|
CD's are mastered louder than vinyl recordings. It was the first thing I noticed about CD's when I bought my first one.
Beyond that I have no problem with CD's generally. Many of the vinyl albums I replaced on CD, I prefer the CD versions. So long as the orignal recordings have not been tampered with to the point where they sound like they have been completely re-recorded and reproduced, I'm generally happy with CD's. Some re-masters I've heard are no good. The one album I actually can not listen to on CD is The Sentinal by Pallas (Jim Garten would say that's no great loss  ) The CD remaster I have of that album is utter rubbish. The drums sound like they've been recorded in a cave. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 07:06
|
^ Oh yes, they are louder, but thats a good thing. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Hawkwise
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 07:32
Why is that a good thing ? i have volume control on my Amp if want to turn it up dont need the record company to do it for me . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm - http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm -------------
|
Snow Dog wrote:Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 08:00
Becuase I think it's a good thing thats why. I admit some Cds are way over the limit...you can tell by the waveform chopped of at the top and bottom. I don't want to get into a vinyl v CD argument though. My LP days are over.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Hawkwise
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 08:31
|
Yea i agree i don't want to get into Vinyl v CD ether i don't think that's really the issue here , the real issue is why are record company's Mastering albums at such high volume ? I had a re mastered copy of Trick of the tail is was terrible so harsh no warmth whats so ever compared to the original mix i have on Vinyl, my brother had a CD of TRICK from the 80s to we compared the two the difference was amazing with both agreed that the re master really was poor compered to the 80s Cd and the Vinyl the dynamics where just not there just sounded so harsh on the ears. I really cant understand the need to Master the CD.'s at such high volume . -------------
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 09:32
I too have both CD versions of Trick, and the vinyl, and agree the 80's CD is much better. The re-master, although far from the worst I've ever heard, sounds a little 'tampered' with to me. Those who re-master albums take the view that the listener wants everything bigger and brighter than on the original, and you'll probably find many people do. They can't please everyone so they go for the approach that they feel will appeal to the majority of listeners. It's a shame really, but at least we still have the vinyl and earlier CD editions to keep us happy. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 10:28
|
This is just one of those little side effects of having someone other than the artist having ultimate control over the final product. I see no problem in having the loud parts be loud, but I love music with contrast. As we get closer to a self-promotion/release based artist foundation in the digital age, which we have arrived at with many artists already, this activity will be limited to those artists who really want that type of sound. There are already those artists that make a point of "unclipping" their product. Nebelnest would be a good example. I remember when CD's first came out and several recordings had warning stickers against having the initial volume to loud and damaging equipment. Nebelnest's Nova Express warns that volume levels would be rather low due to the fact that they did not want the dynamics destroyed in the final production. Like HW says, we all have volume control on our hi-fi's, but few of us have real sound shaping control. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">  https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 11:46
|
I have more of a problem with some CDs being too quiet. I'd like to listen to Larks Tongues In Aspic on my MP3 player on the way to work sometimes but I can't hear anything for the first 3 minutes (yes I know it's supposed to be a quiet build up but the whole album is low in volume compared to some). I hadn't noticed the new KT Tunstall CD being that loud. My copy of HOTH is also on the quiet side. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 12:02
Fair point. Record companies think that is what people want. Or at least they are telling us what we want. Thye only really bad case I have heard is Rush's Vapor Trails though. I believe that pop albums are the worst culprits though being mastered so loud as to be distorted. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 12:32
Agreed. The thing I hate most about listening is to need to stay around the speakers to turn the volume up for the quiet parts and then running back to them to turn the volume down when the music goes up. That's not what I call "dynamics"! |
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: October 29 2010 at 13:13
|
Yeah....this about sums up modern music in general. This includes more modern releases of older albums. Read up on the loudness wars, you'll be pretty unhappy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_wars - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_wars This is still present on your vinyl you're purchasing (if they're recent vinyl), however they're probably slightly less compressed. But really, it's all like that anymore regardless of what format. Case in point, Starless and Bible Black's original vinyl pressing ACTUALLY HAS dynamics, and when Great Deceiver kicks in you're ears don't get assaulted with a brick walled bar of 4 minutes of the exact same volume level. The remasters of the same album....painful....
------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 04:58
|
Loudness is not the ONLY part of it though. Remastering also seems to kill blending of sounds that happened on old recordings. I used to wonder why I felt my CD recordings felt different from tapes and then I found a perfect exhibit to demonstrate the issue: Donald Fagen's IGY off vinyl: Same song off the CD: The original vinyl recording sounds muted and relatively unclear (though this could also be because the uploader seems to be using some sort of console to record it again for us) but is warmer and the sounds blend. There also seems to be a healthy bias towards those sounds that should be heard more prominently and those that should submerge in the background. Digital tends to bring all of them to the fore, or at least that's how it sounds to me. The sound movements sound more artificial and forced in the remaster compared to the vinyl recording. The rhythm section in the original recording has a real throb which feels great to listen to, that's gone missing in the remaster. These may not be important points for all listeners but they do indicate why some people feel new recordings or remaster sound louder but more sterile. |
Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 05:43
If that's how it is meant to be, ie how it was deliberately recorded by the engineer then it should be quiet. I want my music to sound as close to the studio sound as possible not tampered with so it loses all its dynamics and scale. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 06:26
| I don't think there's any sense in producing the music on a low volume level (and now I'm not referring to dynamics, in which it's normal to have highs and lows, according to the development of the music). How does that help? I just have to raise the volume from the speakers to the same volume I listen all my music at - the volume where I can hear what's going on. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 06:30
But if it was produced all the way on a low volume level, you would not have to rush to turn it down because it suddenly got too loud. So that means the recording was intended to be quiet at some places and loud at some others. I love the feeling of getting involuntarily pushed back when the music suddenly touches a thundering crescendo and takes me by surprise.  |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 06:41
No, those are indeed different things. I am not mixing these scenarios: - the one when the music has various sound range dynamics - the one when the music has range dynamics that are unpleasant to my listening habits - the one when all the album is produced at a low volume level Yes, I do have albums which are so well recorded and produced that they have amazing dynamics and variation to the sound and music, at reasonably high levels of volume. It IS possible! |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 06:46
I am just saying that range dynamics that feel unpleasant to you and CDs being too quiet are not the same thing. The latter certainly reads like the third scenario in which case it would simply need to be cranked up. What CDs do you have such a problem with, by the way? I don't remember having to ever turn the volume up while playing a CD. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 07:16
That exactly what I'm saying, too.  An obvious case can emerge when you listen to different albums of the same band; for me such a case is that of Led Zeppelin. When yoy listen to I, II and III in a row, you notice that II is produced at a much lower volume than the others, and the difference is unpleasant to my ears. It's ok when I listen to it by itself and I crank up the volume, but the comparison does not favour it. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 07:18
Oh, I thought you meant dynamics within a song, that is why I was confused. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 31 2010 at 07:20
Clarity is not my forte 
|
Posted By: Big Ears
Date Posted: November 03 2010 at 05:25
| Have you heard the Mind's Eye cd by Stiltskin? It's recorded far too loud and the distortion is massive. If ever there was an argument for remastering an album, this is it. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: November 03 2010 at 05:54
I would recommend you not play CDs with your turntable.  But as someone who grew up with LPs and totally embraced CDs even though many were really crappy at first. Have you tried the volume control? It's really a bit of an odd complaint, but you are on record as hating CDs in the first place, so I applaud you for your consistency. And of course no disrespect intended. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: November 03 2010 at 07:47
|
It varies from album to album. CDs can be mastered louder than vinyls while the quality remains the same, they can be mastered too loud - adding more compression, reducing dynamics - or they can be re-mastered less loud - less loud, increasing the dynamic range. It's up to those who decide how the CD should sound. I don't know much about KT Tungstall, but guessing that it's a mainstreamy alternative band, it wouldn't surprise me if they opted for the overly compressed sound that is common in that genre. Except for a elitary niche of audiophile artists that exists in most genres to varying degrees.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: November 03 2010 at 08:36
|
I don't mind the loudness of some bands which started their work in digital era - The Mars Volta and Muse made an art form of it. However, remastered old recording sometimes can be awful: instead of a big homogenic lump of sound I have a feeling I'm listening to a pile of very thin layers - for example early Bowie albums, or Tull's Aqualung. There's an extra 'oomph', but acoustic guitars are horrible. ------------- |
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: November 08 2010 at 11:53
|
i did an experiment once importing files of songs recorded in different decades from the 70's up to the 00's into a DAW and found when i got to about 1994 a lot of digital clipping started emerging and as you move forward from that point dynamic range disappears more and more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war -------------  
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: November 08 2010 at 12:12
Already posted, and the loudness war is really overrated. It wrecks a few CDs by overzealous bands, yes, but those aren't CDs that I have any interest in listening to, and you probably don't either, so why does it matter? ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: November 08 2010 at 12:31
yes sorry i didn't read the whole post and as a sound engineer it definitely bothers me but to most people it probably wouldn't either way i do think it's interesting and it is ruining music i listen to some modern bands and notice it a lot when i listen on good headphones especially in heavier music -------------
|
Posted By: notesworth
Date Posted: November 08 2010 at 12:43
|
All I know is the loudness war turns me off new music. If I like new music it's in spite of the bad mastering. I want to hear something with more dynamics than my MIDI keyboard. I'm not an audiophile. I'm fine with 128kbps mp3s on my iPod. I put my iPod on shuffle sometimes and I'll hear an older hard rock song with the volume where I want it, then some newer mellow song comes on 10dB louder. This is the first time I've seen anyone defend the loudness war.
|
Posted By: Hawkwise
Date Posted: November 08 2010 at 13:00
 -------------
|
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 01:47
|
I could heavily agree that the loudness war turns me off to new music. Even later King Crimson...I put in on and its just so f'ing compressed that is retains absolutely no dynamics. It certainly helps to go live with bands from this era. ------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 01:55
|
Loudness: Another symptom of post-89 degeneracy. Whereas tape benefited from natural compression and early digital recording exhibited judiciousness when dealing with the increased dynamic range, modern attention whores can't help but turn everything into a loud pile of digitized tosh. Take a gander at a waveform for some current atrocity then compare it to a pre-89 treasure. Not only is the music itself a piss-poor imitation, but the sonic properties reflect the muddied frenzy of this aberrant age. |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 02:07
|
I believe it's the "Loudness War" I assume if I read this thread before I posted this many people have probably brought it up already Yeah, labels keep cranking up the volume (because what's more awesome than being louder!?) and many albums sound like crap thanks to it. Especially remasters of older ones. |
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 02:23
|
Ha. Very recently a friend of mine was for some reason checking out the sonic properties of a Wolfmother album. The song "Woman" was literally a square block of compression. So bad! ------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 07:27
So are you suggesting that the post-89 albums of pre-89 bands are crap? Old bands have adopted new technology. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: TheGazzardian
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 11:29
|
Some bads still have the common sense to master their albums properly :) Also, apparently vinyl is immune to the loudness war because if you cut the grooves too deep then you have a hole in your vinyl. At least that's what my roommate tells me.
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 12:08
|
1) A lot of times vinyl records these days are pressed from CD masters because vinyl is a good way to get unwitting people to spend a lot of money to feel superior. Sometimes if the band really cares and they have the money, it will be a separate master. 2) The loudness war is mostly a result of radio airplay. Human perceive something that is louder as being better, at least if it's slightly louder and the things being compared are similar. So slowly the song waveform became a block. But things don't have to have cavernous gaps in the waveform to be good ( http://soundcloud.com/warp-records/brian-eno-2-forms-of-anger-small-craft-on-a-milk-sea" rel="nofollow - http://soundcloud.com/warp-records/brian-eno-2-forms-of-anger-small-craft-on-a-milk-sea ) Example of good modern mastering. But you have to figure there's a lot of variety in the instrumentation here. Too much really loud distorted guitatrs will just be a wall of piss, to me. (re: Modern Heavy Rock/Post-grunge) 3) Remasters are often louder than the originals, but it is equally about getting a good stereo mix down, too. These days in 5.1 or maybe 7.1. Case in point: Nine Inch Nails's Pretty Hate Machine remaster. Granted, if you like the really 80s sounds-so-distant-it's-from-another-room goth production, you might not care for the remaster. But the mixing is so much more interesting. The songs actually have presence now. Seems to me like some people long for the days of mono and weak recordings. Why? ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 13:38
|
What people call "loudness" here is how much of the sonic space is filled up. Some modern artists have all the space filled up all the time and can do it well by varying what occupies that space. The other thing that compression does is make you feel like you're physically closer to the band or the instrument being compressed. And some music sounds like crap when it feels like you're in a closet with all the instruments. It's also a nice contrast if a track seems very close and personal while another is more open and at a healthier distance.
OTOH, many of us listen on small stereos at work or in the car for alot of our listening time. Wide dynamic range sucks in those situations. A little headroom is good, but parts that are almost inaudible are just annoying. If you're in a concert hall or in front of a good stereo system with nothing else interfering with the sound space, dynamics are great.
Anyway, carry on. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: December 22 2010 at 14:19
Great post Stoney, and the first phrase is pricesless |
Posted By: Bonnek
Date Posted: December 23 2010 at 02:44
|
I'm not into vinyl, but CD/mp3 loudness is a plague. (By loudness I mean the compression thing, not the volume, there are volume knobs and buttons to tune that) Here is a nicely mastered classic:  And here's the typical thing you get these days. I can't listen to that for 40 minutes, it's deafening.  The first one to guess which tracks are represented here gets a crate of Belgian beer! You may choose between compressed and non-compressed beers. |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: December 23 2010 at 03:14
|
Agree, not to mention, that you have to reset volume dramaticly on your system, everytime you move from older recording to those 21 century CD's.
When im not alone, guests or Wify in the room, i tend to go random, on the PC, then its just impossible to find a good overall volume.
Im not even mentioning vinyl here. ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: ProgBob
Date Posted: December 23 2010 at 05:48
|
Great post, Bonnek. This illustrates how this is not something that can be resolved simply by turning down the volume knob - information is actually being thrown away in the remaster. ------------- Bob |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: December 23 2010 at 06:58
More like illustrates how you can make an illustration show whatever you want these days. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: December 23 2010 at 07:06
 , Power to the People !------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: Nakatira
Date Posted: December 23 2010 at 14:14
That last one look like something from Muse's last record. This vid explains a bit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ ------------- http://daccord-music.com/home.cfm |
Posted By: Bonnek
Date Posted: December 24 2010 at 09:18
|
^ Great link! And no it ain't Muse, it's the opening track of Mastodon's Crack the Sky, a loundess fest of sorts |
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: December 24 2010 at 12:10
|
I was laughing so hard when watching this video making fun of the loudness war. I'd definitely recommend watching it even if you're not a Metallica fan. (I'm sure as hell not) ------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: December 25 2010 at 03:47
I want the Rush - Aural Sodomy Edition!
------------- 
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: December 25 2010 at 03:55
|
Heres a cute clip regarding all this
WARNING TURN DOWN YOUR SPEAKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-------------
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: December 27 2010 at 16:00
|
In some cases I have experienced the opposite......some CD's I have also on vinyl I have noticed the recordings are lower. Some weird compression going on, the one that comes to mind is Rush - Moving Pictures. Not only does the vinyl sound and play better but it is louder than the CD version I have.
There are a few others where I have noticed this. But in general most of my CDs do sound louder than what they should be but more dynamically loud than volume loud. -------------   
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: December 27 2010 at 16:32
There's this thing called a volume control. Maybe one day you will find it. 
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: December 27 2010 at 16:40
I've looked for it...how do you spell VOLUME? I'll print this page out and compare to my receiver knobs
 -------------
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: December 27 2010 at 16:45
|
I'd have spelled it wright it's too freakin' loud.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: December 27 2010 at 17:03
|
What...i can't hear u? -------------
|