Jump to content

The Loudness War and the Future of Music


seti

Recommended Posts

Seti,

Thanks for the link. Great article, though sad, indeed.

The music world has taken it's cue from what television advertising has been doing for decades.

22 years ago, I was a guest of PWK at his home. He told me he hated CD's and referred to ALL commercial recordings as "Dilute Stereo" and that he would NOT listen to them.

For a few hours, he played me some of his own recording of symphonies, with a few jazz guests musicians, but always full orchestra.

That was some of the best sound I ever heard. Lots of depth and realism. He told me he did all his recordings with 2 spaced omni microphones.

Looks like time has proven him more correct than he was back then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

22 years ago, I was a guest of PWK at his home. He told me he hated CD's and referred to ALL commercial recordings as "Dilute Stereo" and that he would NOT listen to them.

For a few hours, he played me some of his own recording of symphonies, with a few jazz guests musicians, but always full orchestra.

That was some of the best sound I ever heard. Lots of depth and realism. He told me he did all his recordings with 2 spaced omni microphones.

Looks like time has proven him more correct than he was back then.

Two points:

1) This is not an analog/digital issue. Geoff Emerick was smashing/compressing Beatles stuff through a Fairchild about 40 years back--and the old fogeys hated it then too. Today musicians are lined up to have Vlado Mellor (at $495/hr), or Sterling Sound, or whoever-- clip their mix through an AD-122, because that is the sound they want. Now....different 'loudness' issues are being conflated here but the really smashed sound so prevelent today is Artist driven -- done by big studios and independants. And lots of engineers are scrambling to catch on the loudness learning curve that bands are demanding.

2) It is a bit unfair to characterize PWK's CD views via a single 22 year old conversation. Despite what he said at that moment in time--he did eventually listen to CDs at home.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 years ago, I was a guest of PWK at his home. He told me he hated CD's and referred to ALL commercial recordings as "Dilute Stereo" and that he would NOT listen to them.

For a few hours, he played me some of his own recording of symphonies, with a few jazz guests musicians, but always full orchestra.

That was some of the best sound I ever heard. Lots of depth and realism. He told me he did all his recordings with 2 spaced omni microphones.

Looks like time has proven him more correct than he was back then.

Two points:

1) This is not an analog/digital issue. Geoff Emerick was smashing/compressing Beatles stuff through a Fairchild about 40 years back--and the old fogeys hated it then too. Today musicians are lined up to have Vlado Mellor (at $495/hr), or Sterling Sound, or whoever-- clip their mix through an AD-122, because that is the sound they want. Now....different 'loudness' issues are being conflated here but the really smashed sound so prevelent today is Artist driven -- done by big studios and independants. And lots of engineers are scrambling to catch on the loudness learning curve that bands are demanding.

2) It is a bit unfair to characterize PWK's CD views via a single 22 year old conversation. Despite what he said at that moment in time--he did eventually listen to CDs at home.

Mark

1) Good point. I didn't mean to make it so. Actually he didn't use the word "hate" he said "didn't like." Like it or not, we are all becoming old fogeys too ;>)

Since the big dollars have always come from teenagers, whose entire income and allowance is disposable, I'm not surprised that dynamic AND data compression for iPods and clones are the order of the day for the biz.

2) Perhaps it is an unfair characterization in a sense, but I didn't get much of a chance to speak with him after that as other priorities in my life took over. I was rather surprised by his response at the time, and my impression was that it would be difficult to change his mind. I actually sent him a reel to reel tape (which was his medium of choice) made from the best Telarc CD's of the time (1985), but I'm not sure it contributed to changing his mind or not, about CD quality or commercial recordings, since the Telarc digitals, as far as I knew then, were made with his preferred miking technique in his own recordings.

Someone posted a snapshot of one of his letters here on the forum quoting Doug Sax of Sheffield Labs and denouncing the "overkill" dynamic range of CD's. Not sure of the date. So his listening to CD's later may have come from the much improved D/A sections of most players over time, along with a reluctant accomodation, evolving away from a fading storage and playback medium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seti,

Thanks for the link. Great article, though sad, indeed.

The music world has taken it's cue from what television advertising has been doing for decades.

22 years ago, I was a guest of PWK at his home. He told me he hated CD's and referred to ALL commercial recordings as "Dilute Stereo" and that he would NOT listen to them.

For a few hours, he played me some of his own recording of symphonies, with a few jazz guests musicians, but always full orchestra.

That was some of the best sound I ever heard. Lots of depth and realism. He told me he did all his recordings with 2 spaced omni microphones.

Looks like time has proven him more correct than he was back then.

Has there ever been any talk of Klipsch releasing these recordings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like it or not, we are all becoming old fogeys too ;>)

That's me!

Maybe one reason I am less concerned about the heavily limited stuff is I don't ever listen to it--

Around the turn of the 18th century music starts to become a little too John Cage for me :-)

I've seen that PWK letter posted here.

If I recollect correctly--he seemed to think recording had no use for more then 50-60 dB dynamic range.

Those numbers were perhaps SOTA in 1984 but they are *way* out of date now.

Doug Sax re-mastered DSOM for SACD--among many other things......uses Benchmark DAC1's too.....

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My God Riven - that makes you even worse than me.

I quite like Stravinski - and he died in 1973 from memory - so I am quite modern really.

And just to really show off how up to date I am - I really quite like James Blunt (Back to Bedlam) which we listened to quite a lot on Holiday (wife's choice actually).

We are also at the stage where my daughter is listening to modern Greek music. Whilst I cannot say I am an expert I do, at least, now recognise some of the songs - she can sing most of them of course - which is a not too unpleasant experience.

I can say with some confidence that the compression is nothing like the problem that her lovely pink girl's baby boombox is for the sonics. This unit produces quite the worst sound I have ever heard but it has flowers on it and a matching pink micophone - oh the joy!!!

Sadly - despite there being a rather nice JVC all in one system (the one with the wooden saki soaked cones in it) she likes to listen to "music" on her own system and mine does not support a microphone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My God Riven - that makes you even worse than me.

I quite like Stravinski - and he died in 1973 from memory - so I am quite modern really.

And just to really show off how up to date I am - I really quite like James Blunt (Back to Bedlam) which we listened to quite a lot on Holiday (wife's choice actually).

We are also at the stage where my daughter is listening to modern Greek music. Whilst I cannot say I am an expert I do, at least, now recognise some of the songs - she can sing most of them of course - which is a not too unpleasant experience.

I can say with some confidence that the compression is nothing like the problem that her lovely pink girl's baby boombox is for the sonics. This unit produces quite the worst sound I have ever heard but it has flowers on it and a matching pink micophone - oh the joy!!!

Sadly - despite there being a rather nice JVC all in one system (the one with the wooden saki soaked cones in it) she likes to listen to "music" on her own system and mine does not support a microphone.

Like it or not, Max, you have identified the source of the "problem".

The primary market (read money) is NOT the erudite nose in the air audiophiles, as much as so many seem to think that this is a determinate market!

The primary market is indeed radio driven, downloadable singles, more often played either on a boombox or iPod-like device. And it makes little sense to overdrive boomboxes or iPods with excessive dynamics. Neither support extended dynamics, and volume counts.

I guess we could alll debate and whine as to why all why all cars are not Porsche GT3s and why all roads are not designed for Porsche GT3s. And one can ramble ad nausea as to how the world would be a better place if all cars were GT3s...blah, blah, blah. Or you can acknowledge the economic realities that drive the REAL WORLD market.

Various players have attempted to address the high end market, ranging from high quality direct cable and satellite radio

dating back to the 1980s (and no, I am not talking about simple FM feeds), and unfortunately, the market has not been

kind to them.The market reality is that, like high end audio, it is at

best a niche market.

Its nice for some to suggest how others should invest their money, but its another thing to assume the risk with your own investment.

Here's a hint for all who find reality so confining. Take advantage of the "astounding opportunity" that so many claim exists and begin a company that caters to the high end market.

I sincerely wish you much success.

I just get tired of the complaining and ignore-ance by some of the realities of the larger marketplace and simply positing how some wish the world should be....The fact is, if the market supported it, I suspect that it would be...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mas,

You haven't quite garnered the scale of the problem in this case. This pink monstrosity (a birthday present from friends I might add) is as far from the quality of an iPod as an iPod is from a Tube driven pair of KHorns in an ideal room playing superb, mint vinyl recordings on a Simon Yorke TT.

Lets put it like this - there is obviously no bass (nothing below about 150 Hz I would guess) and no highs (guess about 6 to 8 KHz cutoff) and the midrange is massively distorted. No imaging, obviously and soundstaging scores negative figures. Even my daughter understands the quality difference but she wants to play on that because it is hers and not mine.

Sadly - I am not sure how big the little girl audiophile market might be - otherwise I would be working on an entire pink and lilac range of speakers. I am told however, that you can order Avantgarde Horns in pink if you so desire - I just don't think Trio's will fit in her bedroom and the Solo jet engine design doesnt seem in keeping with the intended market.

Anyway - to return to some sanity - Mas you are entirely correct. If the CD's she played had anything other than a modicum of dynamic range it would actually sound even worse than it does now and the speakers would blow in minutes. As opposed to merely sounding painful it would evolve into agonizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max, I was going to correct you about the year of Stravinsky's death because one of my cleanest and favorite albums is him conducting his own music on his 80th birthday; but I checked the record and it was 1962 when the thing was done. He died in 1971.

I like the juxtaposition and superposition of different time signatures, different melodic keys, and different instruments. Very complicated counterpoint.

Stravinsky was to music (?) what Picasso was to art (Cubism) what Einstein was to physics (Relativity)... what James Joce was to literature; all happening after the turn of the century.


"Consonance, says the dictionary, is the combination of several tones
into a harmonic unit. Dissonance results from the deranging of this
harmony by the addition of tones foreign to it. One must admit that all
this is not clear. Ever since it appeared in our vocabulary, the word
'dissonance' has carried with it a certain odor of sinfulness. Let us
light our lantern: in textbook language, dissonance is an element of
transition, a complex or interval of tones that is not complete in
itself and that must be resolved to the ear's satisfaction into a
perfect consonance.
" Igor S.

Requiring it take a human listening ear - a perspective (cubism point of view) or frame of reference (relative point of observation) - to resolve and finish out the harmonic structure... that was very profound, ahead of his time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Max, I was going to correct you about the year of Stravinsky's death because one of my cleanest and favorite albums is him conducting his own music on his 80th birthday; but I checked the record and it was 1962 when the thing was done. He died in 1971."

So I was wrong - out by 2 years - so much for my memory:

As for your record - I am guessing:

Stravinski conducts Stravinski, the Firebird Suite on Columbia MS 6328 (or ML5728 for the mono version) "In honor of Igor Stravinsky's 80th Birthday"

"The complete Ballet in the original 1910 Orchestration with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra"

Right?

I have it in front of me now - will probably listen to it this evening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never have heard the Firebird Suite.

This is a Columbia stereo version of a previous monaral release - Stravinsky conducts Stavinsky

Violin Concerto in D Major 1931 Colunbia Symphony Orchestra with Isaac Stern

It is in four movements rather than the traditional three - the two inner movements are both slow and beautiful.

MS 6331 / ML 5731

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Consonance, says the dictionary, is the combination of several tones into a harmonic unit. Dissonance results from the deranging of this harmony by the addition of tones foreign to it. One must admit that all this is not clear. Ever since it appeared in our vocabulary, the word 'dissonance' has carried with it a certain odor of sinfulness. Let us light our lantern: in textbook language, dissonance is an element of transition, a complex or interval of tones that is not complete in itself and that must be resolved to the ear's satisfaction into a perfect consonance." Igor S.

Requiring it take a human listening ear - a perspective (cubism point of view) or frame of reference (relative point of observation) - to resolve and finish out the harmonic structure... that was very profound, ahead of his time.

Good quote, and a nice, precise definition by IS. I do agree that the human ear must be the ultimate "decider" on satisfactory resolution, although basic acoustical physics may be at the root of human perception. But, being ahead of his time seems relative -- in the 16th century, the interval of a fourth (a very consonant-sounding interval today!) was regarded as a dissonance that had to be resolved! This probably evolved to the 4-3 suspension-resolution that was so pervasive in later 17th, 18th, and 19th century music.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dissonance

Tolerance and appreciation for dissonance has grown over the years. Leonard Bernstein, in The Joy of Music (p195 of my paperback version) reproduced comments of a music critic during Chopin's lifetime, regarding one of his mazurkas:

"Ear-rending dissonances!"

Bernstein lists other examples.

Resolution

I haven't rented the movie to confirm this, but I read that Bernard Herrmann left the final moment of the score of Hitchcock's Psycho unresolved.

Stravinsky's Firebird

a) Try the Riccardo Muti & Philadelphia Orchestra version EMI CD; ADD c1979, but with magnificent audio and a great performance!

B) Stravinsky's (or someone's) dynamics:

When I saw it in IMAX in 2000, the version of the Firebird Suite that closes Disney's Fantasia 2000 (Levine) was overwhelmingly dynamic -- I don't know if the projectionist was riding the volume control (other projectionists have told me they are occasionally requested to do so by the studios/distributers*), i.e., in this case, turning it up gradually but monstrously at the end. The IMAX system, for all their bragging, wasn't quite up to it -- almost, though. I bought the CD and DVD, and both are dynamically compressed, compared to what I heard in the theater, but, with the DVD (the better transfer) I found that I could do a bit of volume control riding myself, and the ending brings tears to the eyes of guests. The visual content, while the animation is superb, will leave people as divided as both Fantasias do.

*An early example was in a chart the projectionists (the Union required two projectionists in San Francisco for 70mm releases) were given that accompanied the Super Panavision-70 version of Paint Your Wagon. They said the instructions were a studio strategy to get the volume turned up -- for the sake of the music -- without producing complaints from the audience. The volume was to be at a certain (pretty loud) level for the opening titles, then, early in the film, when a wagon noisily rolls down a hill, killing the driver, and the audience expects high volume, the SPL would be sneaked up. When gold is discovered in the poor wagon driver's open grave a few moments later, and the male chorus sings "Gold," they are doing so at a very high volume. It worked well, and may have made the sequence funnier, IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loudness war,mostly the popular garbage is greatly affected. Since I do not listen or buy popular trash can music I could care less.

Compression ruins recorded music,but when you have noise made by talentless jokes...who needs quality?

Quality music is being made/recorded as we speak and is not affected by this nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't sugar coat it EAR, share what you really think. [:P]

I would tend to agree with you; most of the mass music of today sounds depressingly void of talent, inspiration, and creativity. Sadly, those making this music think they are on the cutting edges of all that. The current formula sets for popular hooky tunes have been absolutely done to death and yet continue to remain strictly adherent to these formulae and totally predictable (especially for us musicians). The masses are clearly tone deaf and eagerly love anything infantile pushed at them. I blame this on the sales market for music progressively catering to younger and younger kids who have increasingly more money to spend, no impulse control, huge peer pressure, and an undeveloped sense of quality. The result is schlocky music that will just get worse. Same for movies, TV, and other entertainment conduits.

I can't speak to the compression issue because except for classical I quit buying music 20 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhhh, I remember well when this LP first came out!!! (1965) I was in 7th grade and they were setting up a PA system in our gym for an upcoming dance. The music they were testing it with was the very Herb Alpert album. They played pretty much the complete LP !!! I had to own it shortly after that, and liked pretty much everything he recorded ever since. `What Now My Love' was another great hit for him!

......Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...