ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
Most of the Beoworlders know what this means.
But discussing this every now and then is very important...
...unless we want to change from our excellent (and beloved) BeoLabs to small speakers (in small devices) or to crap earbuts.
The newest initiative (I know of) is from a rather prominent person in the audio/speaker scene - Peter Lyngdorf.
Have a look at this video.
Most of it is in danish, but some slides are also shown - and Mr Mark Knopfler has a few comments on the subjects as well.
http://www.recordere.dk/indhold/templates/design.aspx?articleid=11572&zoneid=3
MM
There is a tv - and there is a BV
Thanks for that. The Google translation was OK for the text and the graphics were OK to follow. Interesting to see the changes over the years. Geoff Martin must be cringing at some of that. Also feeds nicely to another recent post re; vinyl v 'digital via ithingy's'.
Dave.
Dave Farr:....Also feeds nicely to another recent post re; vinyl v 'digital via ithingy's'.
i thought so too.
But the solutions can't be to buy vinyl instead of having cd's/lossless redbook downloads - imo.
Dave Farr:Geoff Martin must be cringing at some of that.
Nah. This is old info. The Loudness War is one of the longer-running conflicts on the planet - but the casualties are minor.
http://dr.loudness-war.info
and
http://dynamicrangeday.co.uk/
have some good stuff about this.
It takes more than this to make me cringe. Like watching my son accidentally poke a freshly-sharpened pencil under his thumbnail on the weekend. THAT made me cringe.
Cheers
-g
Geoff Martin:It takes more than this to make me cringe. Like watching my son accidentally poke a freshly-sharpened pencil under his thumbnail on the weekend. THAT made me cringe.
Thanks for that Geoff - just given me 'the willies' just thinking about it!.
Geoff Martin:Nah. This is old info. The Loudness War is one of the longer-running conflicts on the planet - but the casualties are minor.
Maybe old info to you experts/professionals/audiophiles but is interesting new info to some of us luddites.
Dave Farr: Maybe old info to you experts/professionals/audiophiles but is interesting new info to some of us luddites.
Apart from the fact that I don't see myself as an 'expert/professional/audiophile' - this is exactly the reason why I made this thread.
And it is nice to know that guys like Peter Lyngdorf and Mark Knopfler adresses this once again.
Though I think that someone like Mark Knopfler should be able to do something about this (not just talk about it).
After all it his own work that is getting 'damaged'.
In his position he could - at least in the production chain - demand 'better mastering'.
To me one of the most interesting videos on the dynamicrangeday website is this:
http://dynamicrangeday.co.uk/u2-itunes-radio-and-the-loudness-war/
In less than 10 minutes you may exprience, what the results of using loudness in the music production means for the listener.
And you can learn something about 'normalizing' and how normalizing can be used during playback.
In fact this/normalizing might lead to a change in the production of music - since noone will benefit from making the records 'overloud' anymore, if iTunes/iRadio/Spotify and co use normalizing properly.
The question that remains is: what do we do, if we (still) listen to CD's, or to the files from a NAS/BM5 on a BS5 or on a DLNA-enabled BV?
There was an interesting presentation at one of the more recent AES (Audio Engineering Society) conventions where someone announced that the Loudness War was over. The logic went as follows:
I'm not convinced that all of this is going to hold up under real-world situations, but it's a nice idea.
Jay Leno once said "If we all stop buying tickets to Michael Flatley shows, he won't do them any more..." Maybe the same could go for music with a crest factor of 0 dB.
However, I do know that you should not jab a sharp pencil under your thumbnail. This is worse.
-geoff
Oops - edit. I just saw MM's posting. My guess is that that link and my little synopsis are basically the same. Sorry for the redundancy, and my apologies for repeating the information.
I probably had more spare time today than you 😏
Geoff Martin: Jay Leno once said "If we all stop buying tickets to Michael Flatley shows, he won't do them any more..." Maybe the same could go for music with a crest factor of 0 dB.
Nobody is making money selling CDs/albums any more so it doesn't make any difference. Sad but true!
The reality is we need to be listening on good systems set up correctly. If you can't hear how poor Michael Jackson, Fleetwood Mac, etc.... all sounds off Spotify then you really need to go back and find some good sounding material and spend some time listening to it. It's a form of education in the same way the first time you heard a good sound system was an education, and made you realise what you're missing out on most other equipment.
As I say, listen back on serious speakers and the difference is vast, or at least it should be on a good system!
One should not mess up the compression, that is made during the mastering in order to get a 'ueberloud' recording to the listener (which causes a reduced dynamic range), and the compression, that is made to make the digital files smaller (to save space on a disc/device and bandwith, when transmittet over the internet).
Both are - in short - 'bad guys' --- if overdone!
But where you are able to choose whether you want to listen to music from a file-compressed (lossy) file or not, you can not avoid the dynamic compression made during the production - unless you find a media with the same content from a different (less DR compressed) mastering.
Some say that vinyl is better (has less compressed masters) - but how can you know, when you are buying the actual piece of music!
No audio system - however good it is - can change a bad/DR compressed piece of music into a good sounding one.
But it may very well reveal the bad quality quicker than a smartphone with a set of budget earplugs or connected to a 'seven-wonders-dockingstation'.
Education will only help, if we have good source material to compare with the 'crappy' material.
Whether you then may hear a difference between a Spotify 320 kHz-version and a lossless version from a CD, is a different (and indeed interesting) discussion.
Sorry yes, should've been clear that I am referring to dynamic compression/limiting.
In my experience, 100% of the vinyl I have been buying of modern releases is not limited or compressed to anywhere near the same degree as the CD. I probably buy anywhere between 3 and 6 new records a month.
The same is also becoming true of older releases as more and more are remastered - the vinyl releases aren't suffering from the same destruction as the digital releases.
In my experience, you can guarantee that when buying a modern CD, it will almost certainly be compressed to hell and back (with exceptions in a few areas of music, particularly classical). When buying the vinyl, you are taking a gamble which more often than not comes out for the better in my experience!
Of course the better the system or speakers (which includes the way it is set up, even with the smartest and most 'room-adapting' speakers as B&O likes to claim!), the more obvious the differences. If your speakers are no good or aren't placed properly in the room (or if the room is particularly bad), then you will never hear the difference!
Well, most LPs are compression limited by the nature of the format, dynamic range is significantly lower than CD. Whether they were mastered or not to compress even further is variable.
The type of music I mostly listen to, classical, jazz, blues, and older pop/rock, mostly are not overly compressed. I am not partial to more modern rock and hip hop, etc. so I haven't encountered the issue as much as some.
Makes you wonder though, back in the days before CD numerous companies sold dynamic range expanders, from Phase Linear to dbx and such, designed to restore dynamic range. Maybe it's time for such things to make a return to market? Of course, they tended to "breathe" if you over used them, but perhaps that wouldn't be as bad today as the noise floors are lower in the original media.
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
Jeff: Well, most LPs are compression limited by the nature of the format, dynamic range is significantly lower than CD. Whether they were mastered or not to compress even further is variable. The type of music I mostly listen to, classical, jazz, blues, and older pop/rock, mostly are not overly compressed. I am not partial to more modern rock and hip hop, etc. so I haven't encountered the issue as much as some. Makes you wonder though, back in the days before CD numerous companies sold dynamic range expanders, from Phase Linear to dbx and such, designed to restore dynamic range. Maybe it's time for such things to make a return to market? Of course, they tended to "breathe" if you over used them, but perhaps that wouldn't be as bad today as the noise floors are lower in the original media.
These were more about increasing the dynamic range of the format, rather than adjusting the production decisions made by the mastering/mix engineer. DBX etc... reduces the noise floor of the medium (whether it's open-reel tape or cassette) by 'compressing' on the way in, and doing the opposite - 'expanding' on the way out.
There is no way of restoring the dynamic range of the material once it's been through a limiter/multiple stages of compression in the production stage. It's actually somewhat of an art to use a limiter (and compressors even more so) to increase dynamic range and there is no right or wrong way of doing it - all the mastering engineers I know who can do it successfully will have a different approach for each song or mix. To try and 'un-do' this in the playback stage would have to involve knowing exactly what equipment was used, how it was set up and adding to the complication, what EQ was applied after the compression (as EQ normally follows compression most of the time).
In reality it's quite simply impossible to do. It'd be like trying to design a box which takes off all the EQ, compression and reverb added in to a recording during mix-down.
Geoff mentions the volume normaliser in iTunes and Spotify - this is definitely a better option, although one issue is that it will tend to change volume of tracks within an album incorrectly - a mastering engineer might decide to add 0.5 dB to one song, while the next could be 2 dB quieter - this is all important stuff and a computer algorithm effectively making a partially-educated guess as to how to correctly adapt to these changes in level is never going to get it right.
I always think the best option is a format which is not going to be ripped or streamed online - when there is no way of 'shuffling' it, there will be no point in overly-compressing the music.
RE vinyl 'compression' - there is no 'natural compression' in vinyl - there is in tape (and it's very useful in the music making process - I use it all the time to trim peaks back naturally on some kinds of music). Vinyl is most definitely less dynamic than CD as a medium, around 40-50dB in the midrange (less at in the low frequencies!). However when a CD release of an album has 8-10dB less dynamic range than the Vinyl equivalent, you have to wonder why this is...
+1 for Killyp. This is by far the best post I have been reading about recording nowadays.
"Believe nothing you read and only half of what you see, let your ears tell you the truth."
He practically tells us, that we have to buy/use vinyl nowadays (if we are concerned about the quality of the sound).
Killyp: There is no way of restoring the dynamic range of the material once it's been through a limiter/multiple stages of compression in the production stage.
There is no way of restoring the dynamic range of the material once it's been through a limiter/multiple stages of compression in the production stage.
I don't think this is entirely true. I used to have a stand-alone dbx expander/compressor.
Also, Adobe Audio sound processing software as both expander/compressor functions and Clip Restoration process.
I fully agree that sensible compression and limiting should be used and that trying to correct for it after the fact can be difficult.
Related to this "loudness war" situation is a pet peeve of mine. Often in rock music, there will be an single instrument starting the song at, say -3 dB. Then, when the whole band begins playing, the level is still at -3 dB. I have doubts that the original instrumental player would lower the level of his instrument when the whole band enters.
D
Killyp, you're confusing dbx noise reduction with dbx companders. I think for every one consumer noise reduction unit they sold back when they sold thousands of companders. Various models, but two that stick in my mind are the 117 and 119. Crude instruments really, with todays digital processing power it would be possible to do a much better job, a more deft hand so to speak.
A bit off-point.
I’ve already previously told. I now very much regret that I sold the Linn LP12, because of a new promising format arrived ‘The CD’. It all sounds very nostalgic and tiresome in this iTunes-sourced era, but I really miss my tube based HiFi system and the vinyl softer transients.
I always just took it on faith that the cd was doing a transparent job, but now I know it wasn’t, how easily the human brain is fooled. It's all digital snake oil.
In using my sense of hearing and feel, B&O is the only one for me who has the strongest approach to this sound, more musical. This of all nowadays esoteric systems.
Beovision 7 40 mk 5 ,beovision 6x3, beosound 3000, beogram 3300 , 2 x lc2, 2 x beocom 1401, beocom 6000 x 2, 5 x beo4,
, 4 x beolab 4's, form 2, h2, a2,a1 and a beolab 2 😀😀
Jeff: Killyp, you're confusing dbx noise reduction with dbx companders. I think for every one consumer noise reduction unit they sold back when they sold thousands of companders. Various models, but two that stick in my mind are the 117 and 119. Crude instruments really, with todays digital processing power it would be possible to do a much better job, a more deft hand so to speak.
Chris: A bit off-point. I’ve already previously told. I now very much regret that I sold the Linn LP12, because of a new promising format arrived ‘The CD’. It all sounds very nostalgic and tiresome in this iTunes-sourced era, but I really miss my tube based HiFi system and the vinyl softer transients. I always just took it on faith that the cd was doing a transparent job, but now I know it wasn’t, how easily the human brain is fooled. It's all digital snake oil. In using my sense of hearing and feel, B&O is the only one for me who has the strongest approach to this sound, more musical. This of all nowadays esoteric systems.
The 'digital snake oil' doesn't exist unfortunately - the theory really does work. The problem is not the medium - it's the way in which it's being used. A CD is perfectly able to capture every aspect of the audible performance of Vinyl.
I would imagine there's a difference in being able to restore dynamics based on how the track was compressed. Often back in the day the most serious users of companders were classical folks trying to get more dynamic range out of LP orchestral recordings, which didn't suffer from compression in the same way the loudness war tracks do. They were more symmetrical in application of compression, to keep the balance between low volume and high peaks but just reduce the total range, not slam everything up against the top and flatten out the peaks. The latter would be difficult to impossible to restore, the former was amenable to some tweaking.
The real problems came when the rockers and such got companders and jacked them up because it made the peaks louder. If you overused a compander, it raised and lowered the noise floor as it worked to raise and lower the signal level, so since the noise floor was never that far down back then you got a "breathing" sound, which on a noisy recording with too much boost sounded like an asthmatic flute player, hisss...silence...hisss. What was interesting was that the rockers I knew who had these all jammed them to max expansion, when what they probably really would have liked better was to compress the music more and jack the master volume up, as is done in the loudness wars today, but didn't know enough to know what they needed to do to get the sound they wanted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Fb3rWNWDA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
"This 20 minute video takes you from the quiet beginnings of the Compact Disc in 1980 through to Loudness Peace by the year 2020.
It includes demonstrations of the loudest master I have ever had to make and paints a picture of what the art of audio mastering will be like
once the loudness war has been settled.
Bob Katz"
Note: this video was made 2011 - since then a lot more compression has been used, than the poor Bob Katz was 'forced to' in the song he mentions.
But a good walkthrough of what has happened in music production over the last 30-35 years anyway.
Jeff: The real problems came when the rockers and such got companders and jacked them up because it made the peaks louder.
The real problems came when the rockers and such got companders and jacked them up because it made the peaks louder.
+1
Millemissen: It includes demonstrations of the loudest master I have ever had to make and paints a picture of what the art of audio mastering will be like once the loudness war has been settled. Bob Katz"
It's funny how things come around - I remember posting on a very similar thread maybe 7 years ago and recommending the Bob Katz book, " Mastering Audio : The Art and the Science" to young Alex (KillyP) when he was nought but a pup!
To those interested i such things it is a really good read (although maybe a bit techy in places which may not suit some).
Ban boring signatures!
As you might be aware of (from my posts) I've struggling a bit with Killyp's solution for 'winning' the loudness war.
He suggests using vinyl as the 'remedy'.
My point was/is, that I am not willing to such a dramatic change in listening habits - as long as I don't know exactly that the masters for vinyl releases are different (and better).
A while ago I made a comment to one of Geoff Martin's articles: Where great sound starts - http://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/2014/07/31/bo-tech-where-great-sound-starts/#comments
I asked if (and how) different masters 'are made for different purposes (vinyl, ‘radio mixes’, cd/red book standart, highres (or even Blu Ray Audio), iTunes versions….).'
His answer was: 'As to how different masters are made – this is a good question! Many times, there are no differences. Of course, when things are “re-mastered” – it might mean many things (usually more dynamic range compression). This is something that I should think about writing – especially the different requirements when mastering for vinyl vs. digital.'
Maybe Geoff will have some spare time to write about it some time
In the meanwhile I digged up an article from Hydrogen Audio about the Seven Myths on Vinyl:
http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)
Interesting stuff - maybe not just for me?
By the way - 'returning' to' (only) vinyl would mean a goodbye to many of the things that B&O has made in the past years. Goodbye to BeoSound 5, to the MediaPlayer in the new BV's, the Playmaker/Essence and to the coming BS Moment.
I am quite sure, that we must find other solutions, when it comes to demand for better/more dynamic production masters for CD's, downloads and streaming - vinyl (alone) can't be the answer.
Millemissen: By the way - 'returning' to' (only) vinyl would mean a goodbye to many of the things that B&O has made in the past years. Goodbye to BeoSound 5, to the MediaPlayer in the new BV's, the Playmaker/Essence and to the coming BS Moment. I am quite sure, that we must find other solutions, when it comes to demand for better/more dynamic production masters for CD's, downloads and streaming - vinyl (alone) can't be the answer.
Quite right. As I've previously said, I too love my Playmaker, BC2 etc and would in no way advocate a sole medium (vinyl). A good piece of vinyl sounds awful on a poor turntable with a used, cheap cartridge and stylus. A poor piece of vinyl sounds awful on a high quality turntable set-up. There is of course a place for non-vinyl music/media. Sound engineers just need to make a proper job of mastering their products so that we can get the best out of them and listen to the music the way the creator of that music meant it to be heard - be it via CD, Vinyl, streaming or whatever.
Millemissen: As you might be aware of (from my posts) I've struggling a bit with Killyp's solution for 'winning' the loudness war. He suggests using vinyl as the 'remedy'.
I don't think KillyP is recommending a return to vinyl as a "remedy", he is clear that the CD format is capable of superior performance to vinyl. I think his point is that, while the dynamic range of CD releases is being crushed, a vinyl release of the same material is less likely to be so lacking in dynamic range - as I no longer buy vinyl I'm not in a position to dispute it but neither do I disbelieve his findings.
Of course the answer is to return to properly recorded and mastered digital music and while there are mutterings of this needing to happen, it clearly isn't mainstream yet.
When there is well produced digital version of a piece of music I'm sure it will be at least the equal of it's vinyl version and I'm also sure that KillyP would agree. In this case the digital version wins because it adds flexibility, reliability and repeatability to it's unfading quality.
Puncher: Millemissen: As you might be aware of (from my posts) I've struggling a bit with Killyp's solution for 'winning' the loudness war. He suggests using vinyl as the 'remedy'. I don't think KillyP is recommending a return to vinyl as a "remedy", he is clear that the CD format is capable of superior performance to vinyl. I think his point is that, while the dynamic range of CD releases is being crushed, a vinyl release of the same material is less likely to be so lacking in dynamic range - as I no longer buy vinyl I'm not in a position to dispute it but neither do I disbelieve his findings. Of course the answer is to return to properly recorded and mastered digital music and while there are mutterings of this needing to happen, it clearly isn't mainstream yet. When there is well produced digital version of a piece of music I'm sure it will be at least the equal of it's vinyl version and I'm also sure that KillyP would agree. In this case the digital version wins because it adds flexibility, reliability and repeatability to it's unfading quality.
Absolutely, I have many CDs which sound really fantastic. Here are some examples:
John Martyn - Solid Air
I bought a new copy around 3 years ago - 'remastered', traded it with someone who I knew had a 1990s CD of the album, labelled IMCD 85 (842 554-2) - the newer remasters sound crap (sorry if the mastering engineer is reading this - the original was perfect!)
Fleetwood Mac - Rumours
My CD is labelled 7599-27313-2 - Warner Bros records, again incredibly dynamic, the whole album peaks at around -2dB and the tonal balance is great. The modern remasters are absolutely shockingly bad - all treble & bass. No midrange or dynamics. What on earth?! Absolutely unlistenable IMO.
Björk - Debut
TPLP 31 CDX - Don't know if this has been remastered or not, but again, spectacularly great sounding album. Snappy and punchy drum sounds and loads of space in the sound. I've heard remastered singles off this album which sound flat and lifeless in comparison.
Steely Dan - Aja
811 745-2 - Amazing sounding album. I've heard this album sounding better than on this CD but it's still great nonetheless. There is some peak removal going on, but I wouldn't say it's too much (although less would obviously be preferable). Great tonality and overall dynamics. I've heard this sound shockingly bad on Vinyl!
As I say, it's not the Vinyl itself which sounds great - it's actually full of flaws. The point is that the audio going down onto modern LPs tends to be better than the audio going down onto CDs or digital downloads. I'd rather listen to a really well produced & mastered album as a 256kbps MP3 than a mediocre or poor master off Vinyl (or CD!).
Loudness war continuies even when it is not needed anymore.Many of the remasterings that they release on spotify and similar places have even less dynamic range then the "old" CD releases, that in many cause have less dynamic range then the orginal vinyl releases.They want the old material to compete on the new "radiostation" spotify, så they pump up the level again -more.Good example is the new rematerings of Pink Floyd, they are just dead. The modern methods of sound mastering of music - kills music, that my opinion
My re-capped M75 are my precious diamonds.
Might be a bit 'off topic', but important in terms of what 'music quality'/'great sound' is.
In addition to the article from Geoff (where great sound starts), that I posted a link to above, it might be interesting to read the blog that Mark Waldrep/Dr.Aix posted yesterday:
http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=3570
---
Slowly beginng to think that the only real music experience, you can have, is if you are going to an (acoustic/not amplified) concert, where you can see the musicians that play
Or should I simply accept that recording of music today - and the product that the user gets as physical media or as download - is an industrial/artificial product, where everything (every trick to fool you) is allowed?
Maybe I am worrying to much
Millemissen: Or should I simply accept that recording of music today - and the product that the user gets as physical media or as download - is an industrial/artificial product, where everything (every trick to fool you) is allowed? Maybe I am worrying to much
That's been true ever since Edison recorded the first cylinder...recorded music is an artificial abstraction of a real life event, with varying degrees of success in recreating the experience of listening to music. How well depends on the skill of the engineer and the quality of the system for playback, but it never will be the same. Not to say that it's bad, or even inferior (you can often hear different things, and some things and subtleties better in a recording than a live venue). Remember that keyboard master Glenn Gould stopped performing live, and only released recordings. In his opinion, it allowed a truer, more direct artist to listener, experience than a live concert with its limitations. He was radical in this concept, but having read some of what he said about it I'm inclined to see at least some value in his approach.
So yeah, too much worry! Sit back, have a nice adult beverage, and enjoy the music for what it is!
Jeff:Remember that keyboard master Glenn Gould stopped performing live, and only released recordings. In his opinion, it allowed a truer, more direct artist to listener, experience than a live concert with its limitations. He was radical in this concept, but having read some of what he said about it I'm inclined to see at least some value in his approach.
--mika
Millemissen: Might be a bit 'off topic', but important in terms of what 'music quality'/'great sound' is. In addition to the article from Geoff (where great sound starts), that I posted a link to above, it might be interesting to read the blog that Mark Waldrep/Dr.Aix posted yesterday: http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=3570 --- Slowly beginng to think that the only real music experience, you can have, is if you are going to an (acoustic/not amplified) concert, where you can see the musicians that play Or should I simply accept that recording of music today - and the product that the user gets as physical media or as download - is an industrial/artificial product, where everything (every trick to fool you) is allowed? Maybe I am worrying to much MM
On Wednesday I am seeing the completion of an EP I've been working on for a while with some other musicians.
No autotune. No quantising of out-of-time-playing (and there is some, like any good album). No 'cheating' - all musicians playing live, as a band, in one take (plus a few overdubs).
I'm keeping the mixes as dynamic and 'big' as I can. I'm attending the mastering to make sure the recordings aren't going to be trashed at the final stage.
Previews here: https://soundcloud.com/snowpoet
Pleased to hear that.
Nice to know that Mark Waldrep is not the only guy, who takes sound serious - not just by talking, but by doing!
Maybe a thread for collecting 'links' to trustworthy audio would be an idea.
In order to have excellent stuff for excellent BeoLab speakers.
Jeff: So yeah, too much worry! Sit back, have a nice adult beverage, and enjoy the music for what it is!
Thanks Jeff!
Apart from the fact that it is too early here for the 'adult beverage', it's a good idea.
One album - one beer 🍺
Well, I had a friend who always said "The sun's got to be over the yardarm somewhere!"
Millemissen:Apart from the fact that it is too early here for the 'adult beverage', it's a good idea.One album - one beer 🍺MM
Beosound Stage, Beovision 8-40, Beolit 20, Beosound Explore.
Yep - at least one hour earlier than UK-time.
That's too early for me - not for you???
Jeff:Well, I had a friend who always said "The sun's got to be over the yardarm somewhere!"