"Loudness War" and the Dynamic Range (DR) Database - some observations

[Chris A]

Status update: I've been replacing my "remastered" discs with original (1980s and early 1990s) discs wherever I could find discs with at least two DR points higher than the ones I that own, plus I've been running down through the high DR rated discs on the database, picking up some discs used on Amazon and Ebay, most at significantly lower prices than original list price, and all are a joy to listen to.

Once you hear the difference, it will explain a lot about the complaints about newer CDs, SACDs, and DVD-As that have suffered badly from dynamic range compression. Judicious use of the DR Database ratings has produced some of the most spectacular discs that I've ever heard, and has brought the fun back to listening to discs.

FYI: I've found that recordings benefiting greatly from my version swap out includes The Alan Parsons Project (many discs here) and Steely Dan (all studio discs up to Gaucho). There seem to be no truly bad discs from the 1980s that I've found yet and almost no discs requiring re-EQing in playback.

Chris

Edited December 30, 2013 by Cask05

[willland]

FYI: Music artists that have benefited greatly from version swap out includes The Alan Parsons Project (many discs here) and Steely Dan (all studio discs up to Gaucho). There seem to be no truly bad discs from the 1980s that I've found yet, and almost no discs requiring re-EQing in playback.

Chris,

Speaking of Steely Dan, I picked up Steely Dan's "Two Against Nature" CD at a local pawn shop for a buck and the recording is phenominal. If it suffers from over compression(it appears not), I could not detect it at all. The transients and dynamics are incredible playing on my Integra DTM-40.4/Integra DPS-10.5/Heresys rig. The imaging is classic Steely Dan with a 3 dimensional soundstage that I am totally blown away by.

Is there a way to tell when you pick up a used older CD if it has squashed dynamics or not? A serial number or code either on the CD itself or the case?

Any clues would be great.

Update

I just found this:

-2 dB – Slight Compression

• Steely Dan – Two Against Nature | -2.2 dB (“Two Against Nature”)

That sure explains why this CD is a gem.

Thanks,

Bill

Edited November 3, 2013 by willland

[Chris A]

Is there a way to tell when you pick up a used older CD if it has squashed dynamics or not? A serial number or code either on the CD itself or the case?

Any clues would be great.

The way that I find the high DR discs is to go to the DR Rating website, type in the name of the disc or artist of interest, then look for the date of release from the list of discs presented, then I open up each record of that disc title for the year of release, looking at the disc number.

It usually takes a few seconds, start to finish, to find the disc that I'm looking at and I can see if there are any other discs with higher DR ratings, which I always go for as long as I don't see a lot of clipping in the tracks listed (if the track names and individual ratings are listed in the comments section.

Chris

Edited November 3, 2013 by Cask05

[willland]

Thanks Chris, big help.

Bill

[Schu]

Is there a way to tell when you pick up a used older CD if it has squashed dynamics or not? A serial number or code either on the CD itself or the case?

Any clues would be great.

The way that I find the high DR discs is to go to the DR Rating website, type in the name of the disc or artist of interest, then look for the date of release from the list of discs presented, then I open up each record of that disc title for the year of release, looking at the disc number.

It usually takes a few seconds, start to finish, to find the disc that I'm looking at and I can see if there are any other discs with higher DR ratings, which I always go for as long as I don't see a lot of clipping in the tracks listed (if the track names and individual ratings are listed in the comments section.

Chris

Interesting. . Thanks for sharing.

[Quiet_Hollow]

Status update: I've been replacing my "remastered" discs with original (1980s and early 1990s) discs wherever I could find discs with at least two DR points higher than the ones I that own, plus I've been running down through the high DR rated discs on the database, picking up some discs used on Amazon and Ebay, most at significantly lower prices than original list price, and all are a joy to listen to.

Once you hear the difference, it will explain a lot about the complaints about newer CDs, SACDs, and DVD-As that have suffered badly from dynamic range compression. Judicious use of the DR Database ratings has produced some of the most spectacular discs that I've ever heard, and has brought the fun back to listening to discs.

Chris, my experience parallels yours, and I do share the same enthusiasm.

I find it very interesting that this period (80's to early 90's) also correlates to what is often heralded as the "awful years" for compact disc sound (in direct defiance of my personal experiences coming from tape).

Likewise historically, it was also the dark years for horns in periodical review, and yet the heady days for the likes of Bose, B&W, Infinity, Polk, and practically anyone else who happened to make a direct-radiating "tower" speaker at the time.

I've read personal accounts of how terrible early CD's sounded. However, just shy of a few albums that were clearly recorded and mixed by the hearing impaired, I have yet to stumble upon this oft retorted gross majority from that era that sounded absolutely appalling over my full digital amp (the Panasonic), and didn't respond exceptionally well to a little bass boost, if so required.

So it has been that my experience with this period of media as of late does't jive with all historical accounts....granted digital amplifier (a form of solid state) and CD optical pick-up / transport technology has fully matured since then. I too have been enjoying some amazing finds.

[Chris A]

On 5/7/2013 at 4:30 AM, Cask05 said:

Will the loudness wars result in quieter CDs?

"One [mastering engineer] once turned to me after I made a request for more dynamics and said, 'I have a reputation to uphold, I can't make it that quiet.'"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/10/digitalmusic

A good fraction of what I've been talking here deals with the culture of some mastering engineers. The reason for posting the quote is to highlight this: culture--not the recording medium/format.

In order for culture to change, I believe that the "Dynamic Range Database" sites are going to be mandatory weapons for the Hi-Fi community that desires a change away from Loudness Wars, by posting this information and showing the buying public that this practice is "bad"--even to the point of further curtailing of CD sales.

I just found this "smoking gun" video (linked below): it's pretty sad. Note that I've never bought into the notion that adding distortion after the musician has performed the music is good. Peak limiting is, IMHO, adding distortion.

Clearly from the video below, all of this is being driven from record industry producers.  I'm glad that I didn't become a recording engineer - I'd've had a hard time looking in the mirror if I had to do this loudness war stuff in increasing amounts since ~1991 for a living:

Bob Katz - Loudness: War & Peace

[Chris A]

Note that the collected data plots and related information found in this thread have been collected into a wiki article found here,

Chris

Edited February 2, 2014 by Cask05

[bracurrie]

Note that the collected data plots and related information found in this thread have been collected into a wiki article found here,

Chris

Chris, It looks like you had a big hand in creating that wiki article. Great piece. Reference material for anyone interested.

[bracurrie]

Took a look at the video from above and then saw and played a Daft Punk CD vs Vinyl video

that I thought was fascinating. Turns out the engineer Ian had the vinyl rip from a friend and he mentioned that his phono preamp was "toppy". So he goes on to talk about EQ adjustments and how they affect our perceptions. All in all I am afraid this is going to stimulate in me a search for phono nirvana and that could get expensive.

[Chris A]

Brad, some observations on this video exercise...

1) one dB of boost or cut is a lot for frequencies well above 80 Hz. Fletcher-Munson curves will tell you how to convert from dB to Phons, at specific playback levels that you use: 3 dB is a great amount of boost, contrary to what he said. This observation doesn't instill confidence for me...

2) the track that he is using clearly has a great deal of compression, but not only for CD. The vinyl track cymbals sound quite "muffled" or somehow damaged to my ears. In other words, he is using a very poor track to make these pronouncements on, IMHO. I would use something that is much better recorded (again, contrary to what he says about this recording).

3) The CD vs. vinyl envelope tracks that he shows backs up what I'm hearing on the point above. Why didn't he pick something that actually had some dynamics?

Bottom line: if Ian is an expert on this subject, I can say now why we have such systemic problems with music recorded nowadays.

YMMV.

Chris

EDIT: I looked up the DR values for these two tracks: the CD track has a DR rating of 6, while the vinyl track has a DR rating of 10. This isn't something to write home about. I would expect a DR rating of 17 or more for this sort of track due to its use of dynamic percussion effects, so my guess is that they have already squashed the dynamics by 8-10 dbC already on the vinyl track.

I also am beginning to believe that the track was mastered using some of the techniques that Bob Katz mentioned above in his linked video; he actually induced large amounts of distortion via various forms of clipping in order to get the musician's producer to accept the tracks. I feel that the vinyl version of this loud track from Daft Punk in the video may have some of those techniques already applied to it. It doesn't sound very good to my ears - like it is "hashed out". This may be from the youtube site - but I was playing it back via HDMI to output using the Jubs at low-to-medium SPL-- probably 70-80 dBC.

Edited February 2, 2014 by Cask05

[bracurrie]

Chris,

Would you or anyone know if the mastering for the vinyl version was different from the CD version for Random Access Memories? Also, I downloaded my copy from HDtracks in 88kHz/24bit and I wonder if its more like the album or the CD.

Brad

[ClaudeJ1]

Most of my audiophile test disks and recordings all sound dull until turned up, then they come to life. Loud recordings sound loud at mid and high volume and "background level" at low loudness levels - like elevator music. Perhaps a better approach is to campaign for more use of signal compressors when playing dynamic music at lower than concert levels, similar to what DrWho was saying in the "Digital vs. analog" thread about hand-held portable music devices being able to compress on the fly.

Chris

Yes, I really wish that a varible compression control could be applied on playback only and that all master recordings used the full 96 db range of the CD medium. The music industry has been run by idiots.

[Chris A]

Chris,

Would you or anyone know if the mastering for the vinyl version was different from the CD version for Random Access Memories? Also, I downloaded my copy from HDtracks in 88kHz/24bit and I wonder if its more like the album or the CD.

I don't know how to find out about the mastering of either track, and note that I may be listening to a poor reproduction of the tracks via youtube, so I'd discount some of my assertions based on that possibility alone.

My experience with HDTracks has been that you will likely get the CD version (i.e., the Louder version), and in this particular case I believe this to be true: http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/details.php?id=39514. Here is an example of the vinyl version, which has much higher DR ratings on average, but curiously, not for the track that Ian showed on the video.

All this is fairly disappointing and doesn't instill confidence in the record industry: they are acting like used car salesmen, or worse.

Chris

[ClaudeJ1]

Update I just found this: -2 dB – Slight Compression Steely Dan – Two Against Nature | -2.2 dB (“Two Against Nature”) That sure explains why this CD is a gem. Thanks, Bill

Now I know why it's in my favorite demo disc stack for my all horn system that get from 13 Hz. to 18 Khz. Yeeehhhhhhhhhhah

[cradeldorf]

I bought a Peter frampton best hits cd about 2 years ago It was the first and last CD I'll ever buy. Absolutely horrid sounding compared to the original comes alive album.

I just did a google search and found the dynamic range database website...How cool is this!! I never knew it existed. Thanks so much Chris I think my listening experiences are gonna be much better now.

Edited April 18, 2014 by cradeldorf

[Schu]

funny... I found a copy of FCA at the local goodwill on vinyl, I had been looking for one for some time on eBay... I wasn't to impressed with the sound quality, overly saturated in the HF section of the recording.

[garyrc]

The number one complaint:

"I have to turn it up to listen to the dialog, only to get slammed to the back wall when something loud happens."

That's why HT AVR's have compressors built into them.

What if the filmmakers want to slam us against the back wall, as part of their artistic expression? At our house, we set the main volume to a good, natural dialog level, and let the filmmakers slam away. Many excelent films as far back as the late '50s relied on high dynamics for dramatic purposes, and we are dissappointed if the dynamics are constricted. True, a switchable compressor maintains freedom of choice, but only if the dynamics have not been pre-compressed (compared to theatrical presentation), as they often are with BDs films made between the beginning of the magnetic era and approx. the mid '80s. In my view, the BD people should preserve full dynamics, and put a warning lable on the boxes, the way BIS used to on their CD cases.

[Chris A]

I recently found a DSD recording, a.k.a. DIrect Stream Digital, SACD format, or "one bit format", with a very high DR rating of 22. I'm not sure that this DR rating for this recording is actually is true...and it looks as if an edit was performed on the DR log file before uploading, but this led to a couple of other revelations as I dug deeper.

This is from the article DSD in 7 Minutes:

The first [of thoughts on DSD as a format] is the complete lack of production tools that are available to work natively in the format. DSD was originally developed by Sony and Phillips as an archiving format. They never intended DSD, in any multiple, to be used by recording engineers to do new productions.

Once the SACD format was launched, the engineering teams realized that DSD as a native 1-bit system was incapable of being used like the DAW (Digital Audio Workstations) for any post-production work. You couldn’t mix, you couldn’t edit, and you couldn’t modify the timbre or dynamics of a 1-bit stream...

Well...now I get it: the SACD format (actually DSD) itself doesn't have editing tools available to squash the dynamics of the original recording...assuming that the original recording was in DSD format...

Listening to the DR-22-rated recording, mentioned and linked above, originally made in the 1970s by Philips as an analog recording later transcribed to DSD by Pentatone Classics, was very interesting as was the DR rating comparisons of its DSD and PCM (i.e., "Redbook CD") tracks, you will see between 4-6 dBFS of compression on the CD tracks ON THE SAME DISC...wow. You will also see the typical "rubber-banding" of the CD tracks toward full scale (FS) or zero dB level.

Also note that the SACD format is really not able to be copied onto hard drives without the use of special equipment - such as a first-generation PS3 without Sony-induced operating system "upgrades" that later prevented the PS3 from being used in this capacity (ripping SACDs) again. Nice, eh? Sony isn't my favorite corporation. You can also copy SACDs using very high dollar licensed equipment selling for ~$10K+ ( as quoted elsewhere). Nice again, eh?

This led me to pay more attention, since I wasn't hearing the advantages of the above referenced SACD when it came in this week from Amazon Marketplace: it sounded very loud to my ears. I started to poke around and found that my relatively new Oppo BDP-103 wasn't sending the native DSD tracks to my AVP, rather it was first converting them to PCM format ("CD") then sending. I then found the following:

Does the player output SACD DSD?

...DSD output is only available over the HDMI2 port. This is a hardware restriction: the HDMI transmitter in the Qdeo video processor that drives the HDMI1 port does not support DSD audio.

Once I switched the HDMI connection to the HDMI2 port on the rear of the unit, and making sure that the settings for DSD output were set to "automatic", voila! I was listening to native DSD coming out of my AVP's DACs. I have to tell you that I've never heard better sound quality coming out of my system. So I started going through my SACD discs, listening again for the first time to the DSD files. This was an very pleasurable experience indeed.

In some instances, the differences were almost unbelievable.

Wow...

Chris

Edited May 4, 2014 by Chris A

[Marvel]

Once the SACD format was launched, the engineering teams realized that DSD as a native 1-bit system was incapable of being used like the DAW (Digital Audio Workstations) for any post-production work. You couldn’t mix, you couldn’t edit, and you couldn’t modify the timbre or dynamics of a 1-bit stream...

Very interesting.

Have a look at the link I've posted below. A DAW with up to 32 tracks of DSD.

http://www.superaudiocenter.com/Products.htm

Don't look at the pricing page. but look at the pdf (click on the graphic to download)

Bruce

Edited May 5, 2014 by Marvel